Page 187 - Modular design for machine tools

Application of Machine Tool Description to Engineering Design 147

lw
Blank part
Finished part

z' (C')
d w max
n w
v x (depth) v z (approach)
r 1
PKt.1 v
v 1fres x (approach)
v 1fx v z (depth)
v 1fz x (A)

v z (return)
x' (A')
z' (C)
Figure 4-15 Advanced functional description with leading dimen-
sions (courtesy of Saljé).

through the comparison between the form-generating scheme extracted
from the machining requirement and the machine tool configurations
permissible, to the matching procedure based on linguistic theory. In
addition, the structural configuration can be generated from the com-
bination of the tool and workpiece subpatterns, and as can be readily
seen, the flow for the configuration and selection of the structural pat-
tern is similar to that of Saito and Ito. A marked feature is considered
as a use of the syntactic structure of language for describing the machine
tool so as to simplify the matching process between a set of machining
requirements and the feasible processing machine tools of various
configurations.
In the basic layout design, at burning issue is a choice of the prefer-
able or optimum structural configuration; however, there have been
fewer research work in this area. In this context, Herrmann has pro-
posed a decision methodology using the morphological method in the
biology sphere. Consequently, an optimum structural configuration can
be determined from the possible number of basic layout drawings, i.e.,
the solution field (das Lösungsfeld). In the proposed method, first a
solution field L ei (ei: solution entities, i 1 to m) is given. Then
f
in full consideration of the object-oriented evaluation attributes with
weighing factor to each solution drawing, a preferable or an optimum
structure can be determined. In fact, Herrmann applied this method to