形状复杂性评估新方法:早期设计阶段从机械加工到快速成型制造的阈值

IF 2.3 3区 工程技术 Q3 ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL Research in Engineering Design Pub Date : 2024-01-08 DOI:10.1007/s00163-023-00429-z
Mouna Ben Slama, Sami Chatti, Borhen Louhichi
{"title":"形状复杂性评估新方法:早期设计阶段从机械加工到快速成型制造的阈值","authors":"Mouna Ben Slama, Sami Chatti, Borhen Louhichi","doi":"10.1007/s00163-023-00429-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Increasing product diversity, rising performance and reliability demands, and industry competitiveness are some of the many reasons that increase the need of more complex product designs in almost all sectors. The complexity of parts increases with their geometrical features to be designed and manufactured. Researchers agreed that it can be qualitatively evaluated and expressed with terms like low, medium, high, and very high. However, it might be evaluated differently, depending on the designer’s considerations, domain and experience. Quantitative evaluation of a design complexity is, therefore, indispensable and expedites the decision-making about the selection of the manufacturing process. However, having a well-defined and unambiguous metric for quantitative evaluation is challenging. Most of existing metrics are not objective and are only valid for their specific applications. This paper presents a novel, unambiguous, and generalized approach for shape complexity evaluation. The developed metric enables determining if the selected part should be produced by conventional methods such as machining, or by non-conventional methods such as additive manufacturing. In order to ensure its objectivity, only geometrical features have been considered. The metric was tested through 25 different part designs of varying complexity. The investigations showed an accordance between the qualitatively evaluated shape and the calculated complexity factor. Also, the comparison of the results with other metrics showed the weakness of the latter and the efficiency and reliability of our metric. The results have been also validated by 50 experts from 23 countries. Based on these results, a threshold between machining and additive manufacturing is fixed allowing an easier decision-making.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Graphical abstract</h3>","PeriodicalId":49629,"journal":{"name":"Research in Engineering Design","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Novel method for shape complexity evaluation: a threshold from machining to additive manufacturing in the early design phase\",\"authors\":\"Mouna Ben Slama, Sami Chatti, Borhen Louhichi\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00163-023-00429-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Increasing product diversity, rising performance and reliability demands, and industry competitiveness are some of the many reasons that increase the need of more complex product designs in almost all sectors. The complexity of parts increases with their geometrical features to be designed and manufactured. Researchers agreed that it can be qualitatively evaluated and expressed with terms like low, medium, high, and very high. However, it might be evaluated differently, depending on the designer’s considerations, domain and experience. Quantitative evaluation of a design complexity is, therefore, indispensable and expedites the decision-making about the selection of the manufacturing process. However, having a well-defined and unambiguous metric for quantitative evaluation is challenging. Most of existing metrics are not objective and are only valid for their specific applications. This paper presents a novel, unambiguous, and generalized approach for shape complexity evaluation. The developed metric enables determining if the selected part should be produced by conventional methods such as machining, or by non-conventional methods such as additive manufacturing. In order to ensure its objectivity, only geometrical features have been considered. The metric was tested through 25 different part designs of varying complexity. The investigations showed an accordance between the qualitatively evaluated shape and the calculated complexity factor. Also, the comparison of the results with other metrics showed the weakness of the latter and the efficiency and reliability of our metric. The results have been also validated by 50 experts from 23 countries. Based on these results, a threshold between machining and additive manufacturing is fixed allowing an easier decision-making.</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Graphical abstract</h3>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49629,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Research in Engineering Design\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Research in Engineering Design\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-023-00429-z\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research in Engineering Design","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-023-00429-z","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

产品日益多样化、对性能和可靠性的要求不断提高以及行业竞争力的增强,这些都是几乎所有行业都需要更加复杂的产品设计的原因。零件的复杂性随着需要设计和制造的几何特征而增加。研究人员一致认为,可以用 "低"、"中"、"高 "和 "非常高 "等术语对其进行定性评估和表述。不过,根据设计者的考虑因素、领域和经验,可能会有不同的评价。因此,对设计复杂性进行定量评估是必不可少的,它可以加快选择制造工艺的决策过程。然而,为定量评估制定一个定义明确、毫不含糊的衡量标准是一项挑战。现有的大多数指标都不客观,而且只适用于特定的应用领域。本文提出了一种新颖、明确和通用的形状复杂性评估方法。所开发的度量方法可以确定所选零件是应该通过机械加工等传统方法生产,还是应该通过增材制造等非常规方法生产。为了确保其客观性,只考虑了几何特征。该指标通过 25 种不同复杂程度的零件设计进行了测试。调查显示,定性评估的形状与计算出的复杂度系数一致。此外,将结果与其他指标进行比较后发现,后者存在缺陷,而我们的指标则高效可靠。来自 23 个国家的 50 位专家也对结果进行了验证。在这些结果的基础上,确定了机械加工和快速成型制造之间的临界值,使决策更加容易。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Novel method for shape complexity evaluation: a threshold from machining to additive manufacturing in the early design phase

Increasing product diversity, rising performance and reliability demands, and industry competitiveness are some of the many reasons that increase the need of more complex product designs in almost all sectors. The complexity of parts increases with their geometrical features to be designed and manufactured. Researchers agreed that it can be qualitatively evaluated and expressed with terms like low, medium, high, and very high. However, it might be evaluated differently, depending on the designer’s considerations, domain and experience. Quantitative evaluation of a design complexity is, therefore, indispensable and expedites the decision-making about the selection of the manufacturing process. However, having a well-defined and unambiguous metric for quantitative evaluation is challenging. Most of existing metrics are not objective and are only valid for their specific applications. This paper presents a novel, unambiguous, and generalized approach for shape complexity evaluation. The developed metric enables determining if the selected part should be produced by conventional methods such as machining, or by non-conventional methods such as additive manufacturing. In order to ensure its objectivity, only geometrical features have been considered. The metric was tested through 25 different part designs of varying complexity. The investigations showed an accordance between the qualitatively evaluated shape and the calculated complexity factor. Also, the comparison of the results with other metrics showed the weakness of the latter and the efficiency and reliability of our metric. The results have been also validated by 50 experts from 23 countries. Based on these results, a threshold between machining and additive manufacturing is fixed allowing an easier decision-making.

Graphical abstract

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Research in Engineering Design
Research in Engineering Design 工程技术-工程:工业
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
12.50%
发文量
23
审稿时长
18 months
期刊介绍: Research in Engineering Design is an international journal that publishes research papers on design theory and methodology in all fields of engineering, focussing on mechanical, civil, architectural, and manufacturing engineering. The journal is designed for professionals in academia, industry and government interested in research issues relevant to design practice. Papers emphasize underlying principles of engineering design and discipline-oriented research where results are of interest or extendible to other engineering domains. General areas of interest include theories of design, foundations of design environments, representations and languages, models of design processes, and integration of design and manufacturing. Representative topics include functional representation, feature-based design, shape grammars, process design, redesign, product data base models, and empirical studies. The journal also publishes state-of-the-art review articles.
期刊最新文献
The effect of targeting both quantitative and qualitative objectives in generative design tools on the design outcomes M-ARM: An automated systematic approach for generating new variant design options from an existing product family A proposal for an operational methodology to assist the ranking-aggregation problem in manufacturing The impacts of non-perceptual cognition (NPC) on design process and ideation A new method to prioritize the QFDs’ engineering characteristics inspired by the Law of  Comparative Judgment
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1