0
Research Papers: Design Theory and Methodology

Comparing Strategies for Topologic and Parametric Rule Application in Automated Computational Design Synthesis1

[+] Author and Article Information
Corinna Königseder

Mem. ASME
Engineering Design and Computing Laboratory,
Department for Mechanical and Process Engineering,
ETH Zurich,
Zurich 8092, Switzerland
e-mail: ck@ethz.ch

Kristina Shea

Mem. ASME
Engineering Design and Computing Laboratory,
Department for Mechanical and Process Engineering,
ETH Zurich,
Zurich 8092, Switzerland
e-mail: kshea@ethz.ch

Contributed by the Design Theory and Methodology Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF MECHANICAL DESIGN. Manuscript received March 19, 2015; final manuscript received September 3, 2015; published online November 4, 2015. Assoc. Editor: Andy Dong.

J. Mech. Des 138(1), 011102 (Nov 04, 2015) (12 pages) Paper No: MD-15-1234; doi: 10.1115/1.4031714 History: Received March 19, 2015; Revised September 03, 2015

Graph grammars are used for computational design synthesis (CDS) in which engineering knowledge is formalized using graphs to represent designs and rules that describe their transformation. Most engineering tasks require both topologic and parametric rules to generate designs. The research presented in this paper compares different strategies for rule application to combine topologic and parametric rules during automated design synthesis driven by a search process. The presented strategies are compared considering quantity and quality of the generated designs. The effect of the strategies, the selected search algorithm, and the initial design, from which the synthesis is started, are analyzed for two case studies: gearbox synthesis and bicycle frame synthesis. Results show that the effect of the strategy is dependent on the design task. Recommendations are given on which strategies to use for which design task.

Copyright © 2016 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Cagan, J. , Campbell, M. I. , Finger, S. , and Tomiyama, T. , 2005, “ A Framework for Computational Design Synthesis: Model and Applications,” ASME J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng., 5(3), pp. 171–181. [CrossRef]
Chakrabarti, A. , Shea, K. , Stone, R. , Cagan, J. , Campbell, M. , Hernandez, N. V. , and Wood, K. L. , 2011, “ Computer-Based Design Synthesis Research: An Overview,” ASME J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng., 11(2), p. 021003. [CrossRef]
Gips, J. , and Stiny, G. , 1980, “ Production Systems and Grammars-A Uniform Characterization,” Environ. Plann. B: Plann. Des., 7(4), pp. 399–408. [CrossRef]
Schmidt, L. C. , Shetty, H. , and Chase, S. C. , 2000, “ A Graph Grammar Approach for Structure Synthesis of Mechanisms,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 122(4), pp. 371–376. [CrossRef]
Lin, Y. S. , Shea, K. , Johnson, A. , Coultate, J. , and Pears, J. , 2010, “ A Method and Software Tool for Automated Gearbox Synthesis,” ASME Paper No. DETC2009-86935.
Patel, J. , and Campbell, M. I. , 2010, “ An Approach to Automate and Optimize Concept Generation of Sheet Metal Parts by Topological and Parametric Decoupling,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 132(5), p. 051001. [CrossRef]
Helms, B. , Shea, K. , and Hoisl, F. , 2009, “ A Framework for Computational Design Synthesis Based on Graph-Grammars and Function-Behavior-Structure,” ASME Paper No. DETC2009-86851.
Kurtoglu, T. , and Campbell, M. I. , 2006, “ A Graph Grammar Based Framework for Automated Concept Generation,” International Design Conference (DESIGN), Dubrovnik, Croatia, pp. 61–68.
Königseder, C. , and Shea, K. , 2014, “ Systematic Rule Analysis of Generative Design Grammars,” Artif. Intell. Eng. Des., Anal. Manuf., 28(3), pp. 227–238. [CrossRef]
Königseder, C. , and Shea, K. , 2015, “ Methods for Visualizing the Relations Between Grammar Rules, Performance Objectives and Search Space Exploration in Grammar-Based Computational Design Synthesis,” International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference (ASME IDETC), Boston, MA, pp. 1–12.
Swantner, A. , and Campbell, M. I. , 2012, “ Topological and Parametric Optimization of Gear Trains,” Eng. Optim., 44(11), pp. 1351–1368. [CrossRef]
Landry, L. H. , and Cagan, J. , 2011, “ Protocol-Based Multi-Agent Systems: Examining the Effect of Diversity, Dynamism, and Cooperation in Heuristic Optimization Approaches,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 133(2), p. 021001. [CrossRef]
Shea, K. , 1997, “ Essays of Discrete Structures: Purposeful Design of Grammatical Structures by Directed Stochastic Search,” Ph.D. dissertation, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA.
Vale, C. A. W. , and Shea, K. , 2003, “ A Machine Learning-Based Approach to Accelerating Computational Design Synthesis,” International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED), Stockholm, Sweden, pp. 1–10.
Campbell, M. I. , Rai, R. , and Kurtoglu, T. , 2009, “ A Stochastic Graph Grammar Algorithm for Interactive Search,” ASME Paper No. DETC2009-86804.
Vale, C. A. W. , 2002, “ Multiobjective Dynamic Synthesis Via Machine Learning,” M. Phil thesis, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Bolognini, F. , Shea, K. , Vale, C. A. W. , and Seshia, A. A. , 2006, “ A Multicriteria System-Based Method for Simulation-Driven Design Synthesis,” ASME Paper No. DETC2006-99354.
Bolognini, F. , 2008, “ An Integrated Simulation-Based Generative Design Method for Microelectromechanical Systems,” Ph.D. dissertation, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Bolognini, F. , Seshia, A. A. , and Shea, K. , 2007, “ Exploring the Application of a Multi-Domain Simulation-Based Computational Synthesis Method in MEMS Designs,” 16th International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED 07), Design Society, Glasgow, Scotland, pp. 1–13.
Mattson, C. A. , Mullur, A. A. , and Messac, A. , 2004, “ Smart Pareto Filter: Obtaining a Minimal Representation of Multiobjective Design Space,” Eng. Optim., 36(6), pp. 721–740. [CrossRef]
Zitzler, E. , Deb, K. , and Thiele, L. , 2000, “ Comparison of Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithms: Empirical Results,” Evol. Comput., 8(2), pp. 173–195. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Li, X. , and Schmidt, L. , 2004, “ Grammar-Based Designer Assistance Tool for Epicyclic Gear Trains,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 126(5), pp. 895–902. [CrossRef]
Starling, A. C. , and Shea, K. , 2005, “ A Parallel Grammar for Simulation-Driven Mechanical Design Synthesis,” ASME Paper No. DETC2005-85414.
Starling, A. C. , 2004, “ Performance-Based Computational Synthesis of Parametric Mechanical Systems,” Ph.D. dissertation, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Pomrehn, L. P. , and Papalambros, P. Y. , 1995, “ Discrete Optimal Design Formulations With-Application to Gear Train Design,” ASME J. Mech. Des., 117(3), pp. 419–424. [CrossRef]
Geiß, R. , Batz, G. , Grund, D. , Hack, S. , and Szalkowski, A. , 2006, “ GrGen: A Fast SPO-Based Graph Rewriting Tool,” Graph Transformations, A. Corradini , H. Ehrig , U. Montanari , L. Ribeiro , and G. Rozenberg , eds., Springer, Berlin, pp. 383–397.
Königseder, C. , and Shea, K. , 2014, “ Strategies for Topologic and Parametric Rule Application in Automated Design Synthesis Using Graph Grammars,” ASME Paper No. DETC2014-34691.
Covill, D. , Begg, S. , Elton, E. , Milne, M. , Morris, R. , and Katz, T. , 2014, “ Parametric Finite Element Analysis of Bicycle Frame Geometries,” Procedia Eng., 72, pp. 441–446. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Overview of the method

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Overview of the Burst algorithm

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Schematic representation of the covered archive area (a) and archive progression (a)–(c)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Schematic representation of the rule set

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Convergence of the Pareto sets using the simple Burst algorithm (10,000 iterations)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Convergence of the Pareto sets using the advanced Burst algorithm (10,000 iterations)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Visualizing dominant strategies in pairwise comparison. (Color version available online.)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Schematic representation of the bicycle frame synthesis rule set

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Initial designs for bicycle frame synthesis case study

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Convergence of the Pareto archive for the simple Burst algorithm (initial design: diamond frame)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Convergence of the Pareto archive for the advanced Burst algorithm (initial design: diamond frame)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Pairwise comparison of the strategies (initial design: diamond frame)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Convergence of the Pareto archive for the simple Burst algorithm (initial design: void frame)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Convergence of the Pareto archive for the advanced Burst algorithm (initial design: void frame)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Pairwise comparison of the strategies (initial design: void frame)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Pairwise comparison of designs generated when the synthesis is started from the diamond frame (shaded portion of the pie chart) and the void frame (white portion of the pie chart)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Example bicycle frames generated when the synthesis process is started from the diamond frame (left) and the void frame (right)

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In