Top

International Journal of Technology and Design Education

Published in:

06-06-2018

On the effects of the fix geometric constraint in 2D profiles on the reusability of parametric 3D CAD models

Authors: Carmen González-Lluch, Pedro Company, Manuel Contero, David Pérez-López, Jorge D. Camba

Published in: International Journal of Technology and Design Education | Issue 4/2019

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config

AI-assisted search

Off

Abstract

In order to be reusable, history-based feature-based parametric CAD models must reliably allow for modifications while maintaining their original design intent. In this paper, we demonstrate that relations that fix the location of geometric entities relative to the reference system produce inflexible profiles that reduce model reusability. We present the results of an experiment where novice students and expert CAD users performed a series of modifications in different versions of the same 2D profile, each defined with an increasingly higher number of fix geometric constraints. Results show that the amount of fix constraints in a 2D profile correlates with the time required to complete reusability tasks, i.e., the higher the number of fix constraints in a 2D profile, the less flexible and adaptable the profile becomes to changes. In addition, a pilot software tool to automatically track this type of constraints was developed and tested. Results suggest that the detection of fix constraint overuse may result in a new metric to assess poor quality models with low reusability. The tool provides immediate feedback for preventing high semantic level quality errors, and assistance to CAD users. Finally, suggestions are introduced on how to convert fix constraints in 2D profiles into a negative metric of 3D model quality.

previous article Empirical study on the impact of knowledge in international patent classification on design inspiration of undergraduate students

next article Interdisciplinary: challenges and opportunities for design education

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Ait-Aoudia, S., & Foufou, S. (2010). A 2D geometric constraint solver using a graph reduction method. Advances in Engineering Software, 41(10), 1187–1194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advengsoft.2010.07.008.CrossRef

Ault, H. K. (1999). Using geometric constraints to capture design intent. Journal for Geometry and Graphics, 3(1), 39–45.

Ault, H. K. (2004). Over-constrained, under-constrained or just right? Goldilocks evaluates DOF of sketched profiles. Paper presented at American Society for Engineering Education, 59th annual midyear meeting past, present and future? Williamsburg, November 21–23.

Ault, H. K., Bu, L., & Liu, K. (2014). Solid modeling strategies-analyzing student choices. Paper presented at proceedings of the 121st ASEE annual conference and exposition, Indianapolis, June 15–18.

Ault, H. K., & Fraser, A. (2013). A comparison of manual vs. online grading for solid models. Paper presented at 120th ASEE annual conference and exposition, Atlanta, GA, June 23–26, 2013, Paper ID #7233.

Barbero, B. R., Pedrosa, C. M., & Samperio, R. Z. (2016). Learning CAD at university through summaries of the rules of design intent. International Journal of Technology and Design Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-016-9358-z.

Bodein, Y., Bertrand, R., & Caillaud, E. (2014). Explicit reference modeling methodology in parametric CAD system. Computers in Industry, 65(1), 136–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2013.08.004.CrossRef

Bouma, W., Fudos, I., Hoffmann, C., Cai, J., & Paige, R. (1995). Geometric constraint solver. Computer-Aided Design, 27(6), 487–501. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-4485(94)00013-4.CrossRef

Briggs, J. C., Hepworth, A. I., Stone, B. R., Cobum, J. Q., Jensen, C. G., & Red, E. (2015). Integrated, synchronous multi-user design and analysis. Journal of Computing and Information Science in Engineering, 15(3), 031002. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4029801.CrossRef

Buckley, J., Seery, N., & Canty, D. (2017). Heuristics and CAD modelling: An examination of student behaviour during problem solving episodes within CAD modelling activities. International Journal of Technology and Design Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-017-9423-2.

Camba, J. D., & Contero, M. (2015). Assessing the impact of geometric design intent annotations on parametric model alteration activities. Computers in Industry, 71, 35–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2015.03.006.CrossRef

Camba, J. D., Contero, M., & Company, P. (2016). Parametric CAD modeling: An analysis of strategies for design reusability. Computer-Aided Design, 74, 18–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cad.2016.01.003.CrossRef

Camba, J. D., Contero, M., & Company, P. (2017). CAD reusability and the role of modeling information in the MBE context. Model-based enterprise summit 2017. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), Gaithersburg, MD, April 3–7. MBE17-020. https://www.nist.gov/file/361581.

Cheng, Z., & Ma, Y. (2017). A functional feature modeling method. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 33, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2017.04.003.CrossRef

Cheng, Z., Xie, Y., & Ma, Y. (2018). Graph centrality analysis of feature dependencies to unveil modeling intents. Computer-Aided Design and Applications. https://doi.org/10.1080/16864360.2018.1441236.

Chester, I. (2007). Teaching for CAD expertise. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 17, 23–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-006-9015-z.CrossRef

Company, P., Contero, M., Otey, J., & Plumed, R. (2015). Approach for developing coordinated rubrics to convey quality criteria in CAD training. Computer-Aided Design, 63, 101–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cad.2014.10.00.CrossRef

Company, P., & González-Lluch, C. (2013). CAD 3D con SolidWorks ^® Tomo I: Diseño básico. Publicacions de la Universitat Jaume I. (Colección Sapientia, Núm. 86). http://cad3dconsolidworks.uji.es.

Contero, M., Company, P., Vila, C., & Aleixos, N. (2002). Product data quality and collaborative engineering. IEEE Computer Graphics Applications, 22(3), 32–42. https://doi.org/10.1109/MCG.2002.999786.CrossRef

Dixon, B. M., & Dannenhoffer, J. F., III. (2014). Geometric sketch constraint solving with user feedback. Journal of Aerospace Information Systems, 11(5), 316–325. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.I010110.CrossRef

Fudos, I., & Hoffmann, C. M. (1997). A graph-constructive approach to solving systems of geometric constraints. ACM Transactions on Graphics, 16(2), 179–216. https://doi.org/10.1145/248210.248223.CrossRef

Ge, J. X., Chou, S. C., & Gao, X. S. (1999). Geometric constraint satisfaction using optimization methods. Computer-Aided Design, 31(14), 867–879. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-4485(99)00074-3.CrossRef

González-Lluch, C., Company, P., Contero, M., Camba, J. D., & Colom, J. (2017a). A case study on the use of model quality testing tools for the assessment of MCAD models and drawings. International Journal of Engineering Education, 33(5), 1643–1653.

González-Lluch, C., Company, P., Contero, M., Camba, J. D., & Plumed, R. (2017b). A survey on 3D CAD model quality assurance and testing tools. Computer-Aided Design, 83, 64–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cad.2016.10.003.CrossRef

Hamade, R. F. (2009). Profiling the desirable CAD trainee: Technical background, personality attributes, and learning preferences. Journal of Mechanical Design, 131(12), 121009–121019. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4000455.CrossRef

Hekman, K. A., & Gordon, M. T. (2013). Automated grading of first year student CAD work. Paper presented at the 120th ASEE annual conference and exposition 2013, Atlanta, GA, June 23–26. Paper ID #6379.

Hepworth, A., Tew, K., Trent, M., Ricks, R., Jensen, C. G., & Red, E. R. (2014). Model consistency and conflict resolution with data preservation in multi-user computer aided design. Journal of Computing and Information Science in Engineering, 14(2), 021008. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4026553.CrossRef

Jackson, C., & Buxton, M. (2007). The design reuse benchmark report: Seizing the opportunity to shorten product development. Boston: Aberdeen Group.

Joan-Arinyo, R., Soto-Riera, A., Vila-Marta, S., & Vilaplana-Pastó, J. (2003). Transforming an under-constrained geometric constraint problem into a well-constrained one. Paper presented at proceedings of ACM SM03, Seatle, June 16–20.

Kirstukas, S. J. (2016). Development and evaluation of a computer program to assess student CAD models. Paper presented at ASEE annual conference and exposition, New Orleans, June 26.

Kramer, G. (1991). Using degrees of freedom analysis to solve geometric constraint systems. Paper presented at proceedings of the first ACM symposium on solid modeling foundations and CAD/CAM applications 1991, Austin, June 05–07.

Kwon, S., Kim, B. C., Mun, D., & Han, S. (2015). Graph-based simplification of feature-based three-dimensional computer-aided design models for preserving connectivity. Journal of Computing and Information Science in Engineering, 15(3), 031010. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4030748.CrossRef

Leea, J. Y., & Kimb, K. (1998). A 2-D geometric constraint solver using DOF-based graph reduction. Computer-Aided Design, 30(11), 883–896. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-4485(98)00045-1.CrossRef

Mata Burgarolas, N. (1997). Solving incidence and tangency constraints in 2D. Technical report LSI-97-3R, Departament LiSI, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya.

Petrina, S. (2003). Two cultures of technical courses and discourses: The case of computer aided design. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 13, 47–73.CrossRef

Race, P. (2001). The lecturers toolkit—A practical guide to learning, teaching and assessment. Great Britain: Glasgow.

Red, E., French, D., Jensen, G., Walker, S. S., & Madsen, P. (2013). Emerging design methods and tools in collaborative product development. Journal of Computing and Information Science in Engineering, 13(3), 031001. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4023917.CrossRef

Robertson, B. F., Walther, J., & Radcliffe, D. (2007). Creativity and the use of CAD tools: Lessons for engineering design education from industry. Journal of Mechanical Design, 129(7), 753–760. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.2722329.CrossRef

Stone, B., Salmon, J., Eves, K., Killian, M., Wright, L., Oldroyd, J., et al. (2017). A multi-user computer-aided design competition: Experimental findings and analysis of team-member dynamics. Journal of Computing and Information Science in Engineering, 17(3), 031003. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4035674.CrossRef

Summers, J. D., & Shah, J. J. (2010). Mechanical engineering design complexity metrics: Size, coupling, and solvability. Journal of Mechanical Design, 132(2), 21004–21015. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4000759.CrossRef

Szewczyk, J. (2003). Difficulties with the novices’ comprehension of the computer-aided design (CAD) interface: Understanding visual representations of CAD tools. Journal of Engineering Design, 14(2), 169–185. https://doi.org/10.1080/0954482031000091491.CrossRef

Title: On the effects of the fix geometric constraint in 2D profiles on the reusability of parametric 3D CAD models
Authors: Carmen González-Lluch
Pedro Company
Manuel Contero
David Pérez-López
Jorge D. Camba
Publication date: 06-06-2018
Publisher: Springer Netherlands
Published in: International Journal of Technology and Design Education / Issue 4/2019
Print ISSN: 0957-7572
Electronic ISSN: 1573-1804
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-018-9458-z

Springer Professional

Abstract

Please log in to get access to your license.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Other articles of this Issue 4/2019

Integrating learners into the assessment process using adaptive comparative judgement with an ipsative approach to identifying competence based gains relative to student ability levels

Problematizing spatial literacy within the school curriculum

Surveying preschool teachers’ use of digital tablets: general and technology education related findings

Interdisciplinary: challenges and opportunities for design education

How Korean middle school students see inventors: the images of the inventor

Understanding design literacy in middle-school education: assessing students’ stances towards inquiry

Premium Partner