0
Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering | Volume 130 | Issue 4 | Research Paper
Research Papers

Tool Feasibility Analysis for Fixture Assembly Planning

[+] Author and Article Information
Xiumei Kang

Department of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering, University of Manitoba, 15 Gillson Street, Winnipeg, MB, R3T 5V6, Canadaumkangx@cc.umanitoba.ca

Qingjin Peng1

Department of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering, University of Manitoba, 15 Gillson Street, Winnipeg, MB, R3T 5V6, Canadapengq@cc.umanitoba.ca

1

Corresponding author.

J. Manuf. Sci. Eng 130(4), 041010 (Jul 15, 2008) (9 pages) doi:10.1115/1.2952819 History: Received May 25, 2007; Revised January 21, 2008; Published July 15, 2008
Article
References
Figures
Citing Articles

Tool feasibility is a critical issue for generating a complete fixture assembly plan to reduce production setup time. Previous fixture design systems rarely consider the assembly tool feasibility. Current methods of assembly tool feasibility analysis mainly depend on simulation-based or user-interactive approaches, which rely on users’ judgment. This paper presents a new approach to tool feasibility analysis for fixture assembly planning. The fixture workspace around a tool is represented by a newly defined global accessibility sphere with depth of a truncated half-line. The assembly tools are modeled as five articulated parts to fully describe the tool characteristics. Tool feasibility analysis is executed to verify assembly tools’ feasibility applied on a fastener. In particular, both tool motion and tool placement constraints during tool applications are integrated into the tool geometric reasoning. The example demonstrates the fast computing speed and intuitive simulation of several assembly tools applied in fixture assembly.
FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2008 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

1
Hazen, F., and Wright, P., 1990, “Workholding Automation, Innovations in Analysis, Design and Planning,” Manuf. Rev., 3 (4), pp. 224–237.
2
Asada, H., 1985, “Kinematic Analysis of Workpart Fixturing for Flexible Assembly With Automatically Reconfigurable Fixtures,” IEEE J. Rob. Autom., RA-1 (2), pp. 86–94.
3
Jang, H. Y., Moradi, H., Lee, S., and Han, J. H., 2005, “A Visibility-Based Accessibility Analysis of the Grasp Points for Real-Time Manipulation,” 2005 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS 2005) , pp. 3111–3116.
4
Li, J., Ma, W., and Rong, Y., 1999, “Fixturing Surface Accessibility Analysis for Automated Fixture Design,” Int. J. Prod. Res.  [CrossRef], 37 (13), pp. 2997–3016.
5
Ilushin, O., Elber, G., Halperin, D., Wein, R., and Kim, M. S., 2005, “Precise Global Collision Detection in Multi-Axis NC-Machining,” Comput.-Aided Des., 37 (9), pp. 909–920.
6
Hu, W., and Rong, Y., 2000, “A Fast Interference Checking Algorithm for Automated Fixture Design Verification,” Int. J. Prod. Res., 16 , pp. 571–581.
7
Dai, J. R., Nee, A. Y. C., Fuh, J. Y. H., and Kumar, A. S., 1997, “Approach to Automating Modular Fixture Design and Assembly,” Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., Part B, 211 , pp. 509–521.
8
Wilson, R. H., 1998, “Geometric Reasoning About Assembly Tools,” Artif. Intell., 98 (1–2), pp. 237–279.
9
Gupta, S., Paredis, C., and Brown, P. F., 1998, “Micro Planning for Mechanical Assembly Operations,” Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation , Vol. 1 , pp. 239–246.
10
Lazzerini, B., and Marcelloni, F., 2000, “A Genetic Algorithm for Generating Optimal Assembly Plans,” Artif. Intell. Eng.  [CrossRef], 14 , pp. 319–329.
11
Spyridi, A. J., and Requicha, A. A. G., 1990, “Accessibility Analysis for the Automatic Inspection of Mechanical Parts by Coordinate Measuring Machines,” Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation , pp. 1284–1289.
12
Spitz, S. N., Spyridi, A. J., and Requicha, A. A. G., 1999, “Accessibility Analysis for Planning of Dimensional Inspection With Coordinate Measuring Machines,” IEEE Trans. Rob. Autom.  [CrossRef], 15 (4), pp. 714–727.
13
Spitz, S. N., and Requicha, A. A. G., 2000, “Accessibility Analysis Using Computer Graphics Hardware,” IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph.  [CrossRef], 6 (3), pp. 208–219.
14
Jackman, J., and Park, D. K., 1998, “Probe Orientation for Coordinate Measuring Machine Systems Using Design Models,” Rob. Comput.-Integr. Manufact., 14 , pp. 229–236.
15
Lim, C. P., and Menq, C. H., 1994, “CMM Feature Accessibility and Path Generation,” Rob. Comput.-Integr. Manufact., 32 (3), pp. 597–618.
16
Limaiem, A., and ElMaraghy, H. A., 1997, “A General Method for Analyzing the Accessibility of Features Using Concentric Spherical Shells,” Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., 13 , pp. 101–108.
17
Chung, C., and Peng, Q., 2006, “A Novel Approach to the Geometric Feasibility Analysis for Fast Assembly Tool Reasoning,” Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., 31 , pp. 125–134.
18
Peng, Q., and Chung, C., 2007, “Analysis of Part Accessibility in Product Disassembly,” Comput.-Aided Des., 4  (1–6), pp. 695–704.
19
Boothroyd, G., Dewhurst, P., and Knight, W., 1994, "Product Design for Manufacture and Assembly", Dekker, New York.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
+The architecture of fixture assembly planning
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
The architecture of fixture assembly planning
Figure 1

The architecture of fixture assembly planning

Grahic Jump Location
+Two kinds of assembly tools: (a) FAT and (b) TAT
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Two kinds of assembly tools: (a) FAT and (b) TAT
Figure 2

Two kinds of assembly tools: (a) FAT and (b) TAT

Grahic Jump Location
+Assembly tool modeling (a) tool abstract model. (b) xy-plane view. (c) xz-plane view.
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Assembly tool modeling (a) tool abstract model. (b) xy-plane view. (c) xz-plane view.
Figure 3

Assembly tool modeling (a) tool abstract model. (b) xy-plane view. (c) xz-plane view.

Grahic Jump Location
+Formation of the GAC(R)d: (a) the coordinate system of GAC(R)d centered at a tool joint, (b) Object A and part of B, which are inside the R sphere, are included in the construction of GAC(R)d, and (c) 2D accessibility map of GAC(R)d
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Formation of the GAC(R)d: (a) the coordinate system of GAC(R)d centered at a tool joint, (b) Object A and part of B, which are inside the R sphere, are included in the construction of GAC(R)d, and (c) 2D accessibility map of GAC(R)d
Figure 4

Formation of the GAC(R)d: (a) the coordinate system of GAC(R)d centered at a tool joint, (b) Object A and part of B, which are inside the R sphere, are included in the construction of GAC(R)d, and (c) 2D accessibility map of GAC(R)d

Grahic Jump Location
+Pseudocode for computing GAC(R)d
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Pseudocode for computing GAC(R)d
Figure 5

Pseudocode for computing GAC(R)d

Grahic Jump Location
+Feasibility analysis of the tool handle
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Feasibility analysis of the tool handle
Figure 6

Feasibility analysis of the tool handle

Grahic Jump Location
+Illustration of the tool handle’s calculation
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Illustration of the tool handle’s calculation
Figure 7

Illustration of the tool handle’s calculation

Grahic Jump Location
+Feasibility analysis of the tool end
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Feasibility analysis of the tool end
Figure 8

Feasibility analysis of the tool end

Grahic Jump Location
+Feasibility analysis of the tool body
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Feasibility analysis of the tool body
Figure 9

Feasibility analysis of the tool body

Grahic Jump Location
+Feasibility analysis of the tool head
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Feasibility analysis of the tool head
Figure 10

Feasibility analysis of the tool head

Grahic Jump Location
+Feasibility analysis of the tool extension
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Feasibility analysis of the tool extension
Figure 11

Feasibility analysis of the tool extension

Grahic Jump Location
+Overall process of the tool feasibility analysis
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Overall process of the tool feasibility analysis
Figure 12

Overall process of the tool feasibility analysis

Grahic Jump Location
+Assembly tool feasibility test window: (a) tool feasibility test window and (b) tool parameters and 2D accessibility map of GAC(R)d
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Assembly tool feasibility test window: (a) tool feasibility test window and (b) tool parameters and 2D accessibility map of GAC(R)d
Figure 13

Assembly tool feasibility test window: (a) tool feasibility test window and (b) tool parameters and 2D accessibility map of GAC(R)d

Grahic Jump Location
+Tool feasibility test results of several assembly tools: (a) a wrench with a socket, (b) a power wrench, (c) an open-end wrench, and (d) a speeder with an extension and a deep socket
View Large  |  Save Figure  |  Download Slide (.ppt)
Tool feasibility test results of several assembly tools: (a) a wrench with a socket, (b) a power wrench, (c) an open-end wrench, and (d) a speeder with an extension and a deep socket
Figure 14

Tool feasibility test results of several assembly tools: (a) a wrench with a socket, (b) a power wrench, (c) an open-end wrench, and (d) a speeder with an extension and a deep socket

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
Methods, Planning, and Work Measurement
Manufacturing Engineering: Principles for Optimization, Third Edition> Chapter 7
Study on Predicting Returns of White Goods Based on Markov
International Conference on Information Technology and Computer Science, 3rd (ITCS 2011)
Tolerancing Mating Parts in a Floating Fastener Assembly
Geometric Dimensioning and Tolerancing Handbook: Applications, Analysis & Measurement> Chapter 14
Direct vs. Indirect Relationships
Geometric Dimensioning and Tolerancing Handbook: Applications, Analysis & Measurement> Chapter 15
Data Tabulations
Structural Shear Joints> Chapter 12
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