0
Journal of Computing and Information Science in Engineering | Volume 6 | Issue 1 | TECHNICAL PAPERS
TECHNICAL PAPERS

Automation of Process Planning for Boring of Turned Components With Arbitrary Internal Geometry From a Semi-Finished Stock

[+] Author and Article Information
V. V. Satish K Motipalli

Department of Mechanical and Nuclear Engineering, Kansas State University, Manhattan, Kansas 66502satish@ksu.edu

Prakash Krishnaswami

Department of Mechanical and Nuclear Engineering, Kansas State University, Manhattan, Kansas 66502prakash@ksu.edu

J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng 6(1), 49-59 (May 31, 2005) (11 pages) doi:10.1115/1.2173670 History: Revised May 31, 2005; Received December 19, 2005
Article
References
Figures
Tables
Citing Articles

This paper describes a novel method for automated process planning for boring of turned components with arbitrary internal geometry from a semi-finished stock. Earlier work has been reported on process planning for boring of components with monotonic internal geometry made from bar stock. This paper addresses the more general problem of process planning of parts with nonmonotonic internal geometry from arbitrary given the initial geometry, i.e., from a casting or from a semi-finished stock. With the algorithms developed, we are able to achieve full automation of all aspects of the process plan, including operations sequencing, parameter selection, numerical control (NC) code generation, etc. Thus, it becomes possible to go from design to NC code in a fully automated fashion. In the present work we focus on a tightly defined part family, which results in very simple but robust automation algorithms. This is in contrast to much of the reported work on automated process planning, which generally targets broad part families, leading to complex algorithms that fall short of complete design-to-NC automation.
FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2006 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

1
Kals, H. J. J., 1986, “Strategy in Generative Planning of Turning Processes,” CIRP Ann.35 , pp. 331–335.
2
Zhang, H. C., and Alting,L., 1988, “XPLAN-R: An Expert Process Planning System for Rotational Components,” "IIE Integrated Systems Conference Proceedings", pp. 54–65.
3
Zhang, S., and Gao, W. D., 1984, “TOJICAP—A System of Computer Aided Process Planning of Rotational Parts,” CIRP Ann.33 , pp. 299–301.
4
Pande, S. S., and Desai, V. S., 1995, “Expert CAPP System for Single Spindle Automats,” Int. J. Prod. Res.33 , pp. 819–833.
5
Alting, L., and Zhang, H., 1989, “Computer Aided Process Planning: The State-of-the-Art Survey,” Int. J. Prod. Res.27 , pp. 553–585.
6
Tseng, Y. J., and Joshi, S. B., 1998, “Recognition of Interacting Rotational and Prismatic Machining Features from 3-D Mill-turn Parts,” Int. J. Prod. Res.  [CrossRef]36 , pp. 3147–3165.
7
Chep, A., and Tricarico, L., 1999, “Object-Oriented Analysis and Design of a Manufacturing Feature Representation,” Int. J. Prod. Res.  [CrossRef]37 , pp. 2349–2376.
8
Reddy, S. V. B., Shunmugam, M. S., and Narendran, T. T., 1999, “Operation Sequencing in CAPP Using Genetic Algorithms,” Int. J. Prod. Res.  [CrossRef]34 , pp. 1063–1074.
9
Case, K., and Wanharun, W. A., 2000, “Feature-Based Representation for Manufacturing Planning,” Int. J. Prod. Res.  [CrossRef]38 , pp. 4285–4300.
10
Li, W. D., Ong, S. K., and Nee, A. Y. C., 2002, “Recognizing Manufacturing Features from a Design-by-Feature Model,” Comput.-Aided Des.  [CrossRef]34 , pp. 849–868.
11
Zhao, Y., Ridgway, K., and Al-Ahmari, A. M. A., 2002, “Integration of CAD and a Cutting Tool Selection System,” Comput. Ind. Eng.  [CrossRef]42 , pp. 17–34.
12
Vittal, V. N., Jain, V. K., and Shankar, K., 1990, “A Computer-Aided Process Planning System for Rotational Parts (CAPP - RP) for an FMS Environment,” Int. J. Comput. Appl. Technol.3 , pp. 61–69.
13
Imam, S. K., Chadda, Y. S., and Qureshi, N., 1992, “Micro-Based Expert Computer Aided Process Planning System (MICRO-CAPP) for Turning Parts,” "Proceedings of the 7th IFAC/IFIP/IFORS/IMACS/ISPE Symposium on Information Control Problems in Manufacturing Technology", pp. 325–328.
14
Mognol, P., and Anselmetti, B., 1994, “Automatic Process Planning in Turning: Generation by Progressive Evaluation,” J. Des. Manuf.4 , pp. 87–93.
15
Wang, M.-Tz., Waldron, M. B., and Miller, A. R., 1990, “A Prototype Integrated Feature-Based Design and Expert Process Planning System for Rotational Parts,” "ASME International Computers in Engineering Conference and Exposition", pp. 33–40.
16
Abou-Zeid, M. R., Houman, M. A. S., and Amaitik, S. M., 1998, “Computer-Aided Interactive Process Planning for Turning (CAIPP),” Alexandria Eng. J.37 , pp. A1–A15.
17
Jayaraman, V., 2000, “CAD/CAPP System for Mill-Turn Components, An Object-Oriented Design,” M.S. thesis, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS. Relevant material ⟨http://www-personal.ksu.edu/~satish/JCISE88/vishwanath.pdf⟩
18
Shunmugam, K., 1998, “An Object-Oriented Automated Production Environment for Mill-Turn Parts,” M.S. thesis, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS. Relevant material ⟨http://www-personal.ksu.edu/~satish/JCISE88/shunmugam.pdf⟩
19
Date, N., 2000, “Feature-Based Design and Manufacture of Mill-Turn Components,” M.S. thesis, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS. Relevant material ⟨http://www-personal.ksu.edu/~satish/JCISE88/date.pdf⟩
20
Metcut Research Associates., 1972, "Machining data handbook", Machinability Data Center, Cincinnati.
21
Motipalli, V. V. S., 2002, “Automation of Internal Process Planning for Mill-Turn Components,” M.S. thesis, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS. Relevant material ⟨http://www-personal.ksu.edu/~satish/JCISE88/Satish.pdf⟩.
22
Lazcano, J., 1992, “An Intelligent Feature-Based CAD/CAPP System for Rotational Parts,” M.S. thesis, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS.
23
Shah, J. J., and Zhang, B. C., 1992, “Attributed Graph Model for Geometric Tolerancing,” Adv. Design Automat.2 , pp. 133–140.
24
Shah, J. J., Yan, Y., and Zhang, B. C., 1998, “Dimension and Tolerance Modeling and Transformations in Feature-Based Design and Manufacturing,” J. Intell. Manuf.  [CrossRef]9 , pp. 475–488.
25
Huang, S. H., and Xu, N., 2003, “Automatic Setup Planning for Metal Cutting: An Integrated Methodology,” Int. J. Prod. Res.  [CrossRef]41 , pp. 4339–4356.
26
Huang, S. H., 1998, “Automated Setup Planning for Lathe Machining,” J. Manuf. Syst.17 , pp. 196–208.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
+Interaction between algorithms developed for internal process planning for a semi-finished stock
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Interaction between algorithms developed for internal process planning for a semi-finished stock
Figure 14

Interaction between algorithms developed for internal process planning for a semi-finished stock

Grahic Jump Location
+Initial part super-imposed on the final part with HLOs highlighted
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Initial part super-imposed on the final part with HLOs highlighted
Figure 10

Initial part super-imposed on the final part with HLOs highlighted

Grahic Jump Location
+Faceting
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Faceting
Figure 11

Faceting

Grahic Jump Location
+Holding length selection
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Holding length selection
Figure 12

Holding length selection

Grahic Jump Location
+Holding length selection
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Holding length selection
Figure 13

Holding length selection

Grahic Jump Location
+(a) Approximation of concave profile by cords; and (b) approximation of convex profile by tangents
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
(a) Approximation of concave profile by cords; and (b) approximation of convex profile by tangents
Figure 1

(a) Approximation of concave profile by cords; and (b) approximation of convex profile by tangents

Grahic Jump Location
+(a) Part with final internal features; (b) initial semi-finished stock; (c) equivalent external features from the final part; (d) equivalent external features from the initial part; (e) complementary final part; and (f) complementary initial part
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
(a) Part with final internal features; (b) initial semi-finished stock; (c) equivalent external features from the final part; (d) equivalent external features from the initial part; (e) complementary final part; and (f) complementary initial part
Figure 2

(a) Part with final internal features; (b) initial semi-finished stock; (c) equivalent external features from the final part; (d) equivalent external features from the initial part; (e) complementary final part; and (f) complementary initial part

Grahic Jump Location
+(a) General boring tool with cutting point in lead; and (b) equivalent right hand turning tool
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
(a) General boring tool with cutting point in lead; and (b) equivalent right hand turning tool
Figure 3

(a) General boring tool with cutting point in lead; and (b) equivalent right hand turning tool

Grahic Jump Location
+(a) Final desired part; (b) initial part; (c) initial machining polygons from bar stock; (d) machining polygons superposed on initial part; and (e) HLOs identified
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
(a) Final desired part; (b) initial part; (c) initial machining polygons from bar stock; (d) machining polygons superposed on initial part; and (e) HLOs identified
Figure 4

(a) Final desired part; (b) initial part; (c) initial machining polygons from bar stock; (d) machining polygons superposed on initial part; and (e) HLOs identified

Grahic Jump Location
+(a) Trapezoid selected for interference checks; (b) boring tool placed at four corners of the trapezoid; (c) boring tool with points defining the geometry; and (d) boring tool with its tool line segments defining the geometry
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
(a) Trapezoid selected for interference checks; (b) boring tool placed at four corners of the trapezoid; (c) boring tool with points defining the geometry; and (d) boring tool with its tool line segments defining the geometry
Figure 5

(a) Trapezoid selected for interference checks; (b) boring tool placed at four corners of the trapezoid; (c) boring tool with points defining the geometry; and (d) boring tool with its tool line segments defining the geometry

Grahic Jump Location
+(a) Part with initial super imposed on final; (b) first trapezoid identified; (c) updated part after removal of first trapezoid; (d) second trapezoid identified; (e) updated part after removal of second trapezoid; (f) third and fourth trapezoids identified; and (g) final part
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
(a) Part with initial super imposed on final; (b) first trapezoid identified; (c) updated part after removal of first trapezoid; (d) second trapezoid identified; (e) updated part after removal of second trapezoid; (f) third and fourth trapezoids identified; and (g) final part
Figure 6

(a) Part with initial super imposed on final; (b) first trapezoid identified; (c) updated part after removal of first trapezoid; (d) second trapezoid identified; (e) updated part after removal of second trapezoid; (f) third and fourth trapezoids identified; and (g) final part

Grahic Jump Location
+(a) Specification drawing of final part; and (b) specification drawing of initial part
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
(a) Specification drawing of final part; and (b) specification drawing of initial part
Figure 7

(a) Specification drawing of final part; and (b) specification drawing of initial part

Grahic Jump Location
+Initial part super-imposed on the final and the HLOs highlighted
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Initial part super-imposed on the final and the HLOs highlighted
Figure 8

Initial part super-imposed on the final and the HLOs highlighted

Grahic Jump Location
+(a) Specification drawing for final part; and (b) specification drawing for initial part
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
(a) Specification drawing for final part; and (b) specification drawing for initial part
Figure 9

(a) Specification drawing for final part; and (b) specification drawing for initial part

Tables

Errata

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
A Production Operation Decision Model in MTO Production Mode
International Conference on Information Technology and Management Engineering (ITME 2011)
Mobile Terminal Location with an Efficient Geometry-Constrained Based on PSO Algorithm in NLOS Environment
International Conference on Computer Technology and Development, 3rd (ICCTD 2011)
Model and Algorithm Based on Goal Programming of Mid Term Production Planning for Steel Plant
International Conference on Advanced Computer Theory and Engineering, 4th (ICACTE 2011)
Introduction
Mechanical Blood Trauma in Circulatory-Assist Devices
Concluding remarks
Mechanical Blood Trauma in Circulatory-Assist Devices
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
This site uses cookies. By continuing to use our website, you are agreeing to our privacy policy. | Accept
Sign In