JP2004272820A - Method and system for reverse-engineering and re-engineering part - Google Patents

Abstract

<P>PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED: To provide a method for re-engineering a part by generating a parametric master model for the part from an editable geometry for the part. <P>SOLUTION: By the method, a tooling master model (134) is generated from a manufacturing context model. The tooling master model includes a tooling geometry (62) for the part. A system for re-engineering the part (100) includes: a part design master model module (110) configured to generate the parametric master model from the editable geometry; and the tooling master model module (130) configured to receive the parametric master model, to generate the manufacturing context model from the parametric master model, and also to generate the tooling master model from the manufacturing context model. <P>COPYRIGHT: (C)2004,JPO&NCIPI

Description

[0001]
TECHNICAL FIELD OF THE INVENTION
The present invention relates to methods and systems for reverse engineering and re-engineering existing components, such as turbine blades, and to methods for manufacturing components. In particular, the present invention employs methods and systems for reverse-engineering and re-engineering existing parts, as well as parametric master models and tooling master models, by developing parametric master models for part design and tooling master models for tooling geometry. It relates to a manufacturing method.
[0002]
[Prior art]
Machines that are exposed to harsh operating conditions have a variety of components that need to be replaced over the life of the machine. For example, in the case of a turbine engine, turbine blades and vanes operating under extreme thermal operating conditions must be periodically repaired or replaced. Due to the long life of the machine, poor records and archives have led to the loss of drawings related to component design or tooling for many of the components currently in operation. Moreover, the development and manufacture of components has only recently entered the era of three-dimensional (3D) models and other electronic engineering systems. Therefore, with respect to the old parts, even if the drawings remain, only two-dimensional (2D) drawings can be used in connection with the part design and, in some cases, the tooling.
[0003]
Under these circumstances, when replacing a worn part, it is usually required to reverse engineer the part from available physical samples to attempt to produce an exact duplicate of the part. However, in many cases, the technology has advanced since the part was designed. Accordingly, it is often beneficial to re-engineer a part by redesign, incorporating new materials and / or improving manufacturing to improve the performance, life and / or reliability of the part. However, due to the lack of 3D part design drawings and 3D tooling drawings associated with legacy parts, such parts must be re-engineered starting with the available physical samples.
[0004]
The current reverse engineering and re-engineering processes are time consuming and laborious. For example, a complex machine such as a landing gear typically requires 18 to 24 months to make a casting, and is reverse engineered or reengineered after machining, shot peening and painting. Two to three years of cycle time is required to get the landing gear. Furthermore, current reverse engineering processes for parts with complexity require a significant amount of engineering knowledge and judgment specific to similar parts. Therefore, the engineer performing the reverse engineering must be proficient in reverse engineering the same type of part. This condition results in a shortage of engineers with experience specific to such homogeneous parts, resulting in longer cycle times and lower throughput.
[0005]
The current reverse engineering and re-engineering processes (herein the two collectively referred to as "re-engineering") do not include appropriate measures that can facilitate the engineering process as a whole. Tools marketed as reverse engineering tools typically apply local geometry reconstruction to some classes of parts. However, commercially available tools are typically only applicable to less than about 5% of the reverse engineering cycle. As a result, the traditional re-engineering process remains focused on experienced engineers. In addition, design rules that may prove to be crucial in the function of the part are readily available, as they only rely on experienced engineers when applying part and tooling design rules. Will be overlooked.
[0006]
[Problems to be solved by the invention]
Therefore, it would be desirable to develop methods and systems for obtaining equivalent or better parts and functions when only physical part design information or incomplete design information is available. . Further, a method and system for applying knowledge gained through experience in part design and tooling design would be desirable to reduce the burden of experienced engineers on reverse engineering and re-engineering complex parts. In addition, a method and system for integrating information across design systems and databases would be desirable to ensure the consistency of application models used to develop and evaluate part design and tooling geometries. .
[0007]
[Means for Solving the Problems]
Briefly, according to one embodiment of the present invention, a method for re-engineering a part includes generating a parametric master model of the part from editable geometry for the part and generating a manufacturing context model from the design master model. Including. The design master model includes a parametric master model, and the manufacturing context model includes a plurality of tooling features. The method further includes creating a tooling master model from the manufacturing context model. The tooling master model contains the tooling geometry for the part.
[0008]
According to another embodiment of the invention, a system for re-engineering a part includes a part design master model module configured to generate a parametric master model from the editable geometry. The system further includes a tooling master model module configured to receive the parametric master model, generate a manufacturing context model from the parametric master model, and create a tooling master model from the manufacturing context model.
[0009]
The above features, aspects, and advantages of the present invention, as well as other features, aspects, and advantages, will be better understood by reading the following detailed description with reference to the accompanying drawings. In the drawings, the same reference numerals denote the same parts.
[0010]
BEST MODE FOR CARRYING OUT THE INVENTION
An outline of an embodiment of the method of the present invention will be described with reference to the flowchart shown in FIG. A method of re-engineering part 10 includes generating a parametric master model 114 of part 10 from editable geometry 112 for part 10. As used herein, the phrase "re-engineering a part" acquires a functional equivalent of an existing part 10 (often called "reverse engineering") or more. (Often called "re-engineering"). A functionally equivalent to the existing part 10 is a part having a structure (shape, material properties) similar to the existing part and having similar performance and life characteristics, and exceeds the existing part 10. A component is a component that has improved performance or life characteristics and may be dissimilar in structure. Further, the term "existing part" means either a real physical part or a part for which there is a legacy design, for example, a 2D drawing related to the part design. Accordingly, the parametric master model 114 includes the design of the part 10 obtained by re-engineering the part 10 to have similar or improved performance characteristics. As indicated in FIG. 3, a parametric master model 114 is generated from the editable geometry 112 in a computer-aided design (CAD) system (or program) 40. One example of an editable geometry 112 is an editable non-parametric CAD model (also designated by reference numeral 112) generated using the CAD system 40. Examples of commercially available CAD software include Unigraphics, sold by Unigraphics Solutions, ProEngineer, sold by Parametric Technologies, CATIA, which is sold by IBM / Dassault Systems, and ADAIA, SD-AUC, and ADEA-SDRC, sold by IBM / Dassault Systems. There is. However, the invention is not at all limited to any particular CAD software, but includes the use of any CAD software.
[0011]
“Editable” means that the unique form of the geometry 112 can be changed, for example, using CAD software. However, the term "non-parametric" as used herein means that the geometry 112 is not scaled by a set of parameters and must be edited in pieces. In contrast, “parametric” models, such as the parametric master model 114, allow component geometries from holes, lines, curves, chamfered surfaces, blends, radii, well-defined shapes, user-defined shapes, and shape libraries. A representation of the part 10 as described by features such as retrieved shapes, and parameters associated with those features and related parameters between those features, eg, a computer model that can be used within CAD software. . At a given point in time, the parameters have particular numerical values or relationships between the parameters. Such a parametric representation of the part 10 is desirably flexible in the sense that the part 10 is described by a set of parameters that are all modifiable, such as length, width and height. Therefore, the parametric master model 114 can be changed all at once by changing the value of one or more parameters. Furthermore, since the model is parametric, the method applies to all parts in the same family. Parts belonging to a certain type differ only in the value of the parameters describing them or in small topological changes, for example in the difference in the size or position of the holes corresponding to the different machining steps.
[0012]
The method further includes generating a manufacturing context model 136 from the design master model 120. A manufacturing process typically includes one or more manufacturing steps. The desired end result of a particular step in the manufacturing process is the "shape" of the part to be manufactured. Manufacturing context model 136 defines the end result (ie, “shape”) of each manufacturing process. In other words, the goal of each manufacturing process is to create a part that looks similar to the manufacturing context model 136 for that manufacturing process. As used herein, the term "context model" is used to describe the basic parametric model such that when one parameter value changes in the basic parametric model, the context model is automatically updated to reflect this change. It means a model having an associative relationship.
[0013]
Manufacturing context model 136 includes a number of tooling features 132. Tooling features 132 provide tooling geometry for part features. Examples of tooling features for blade 10 include, for example, an airfoil tooling geometry (not shown) for forming airfoil 11, a cavity tooling geometry for forming dovetail 13, as shown in FIG. There is a platform tooling geometry for forming the platform 12, and the like. Tooling features 132 may include tooling sub-features (also indicated by reference numeral 132 in the figure, also commonly referred to as "tooling features" 132). For example, the airfoil tooling geometry includes a pressure side tooling portion feature to form the pressure side 160 and a suction side 161 of the airfoil 11 and a suction side tooling portion feature.
[0014]
As shown in FIG. 1, the design master model 120 includes a parametric master model 114. According to one example, design master model 120 includes a set of geometric dimensions and tolerances (GD & T), a plurality of CAD drawings 122 of part 10, and a series of inspection data. An example of a CAD drawing of the component 10 is a CAD drawing of the re-engineered component 10. The inspection data specifies, for example, what should be inspected for a manufactured part in order to inspect the quality of the manufactured part, and what is expected to be input to the inspection system.
[0015]
The tooling master model 134 is created from the manufacturing context model 136. The tooling master model includes the tooling geometry 62 of the part 10 and is a parametric model. Tooling geometry 62 is obtained from tooling features 132, for example, by applying tooling design rules that impose continuity or other matching conditions to combine tooling features 132. According to a particular embodiment, the tooling master model 134 further includes process parameters for each manufacturing step and tool paths. Toolpaths are included for manufacturing processes that include one or more machining or material addition steps. Examples of tool paths include cutters, lasers and drills, and paths involving solid freeform manufacturing (eg, laser cladding) and rapid prototyping (eg, stereolithography and LOM). After adding the tolerances (described in more detail below in connection with FIG. 8), a hard tooling is generated using the tooling master model 134 to manufacture the part 10 according to reengineering. Hard tooling 400 is a physical tooling used to form a re-engineered part. Hard tooling may be made from hard materials (eg, metals such as hardened tool steel), soft materials (eg, resins, low melting point alloys, waxes, wood and aluminum), and combinations thereof.
[0016]
To re-engineer part 10, the method according to one embodiment further includes obtaining data characterizing part 10 and generating editable geometry 112 of part 10 from the data. In a second embodiment, editable geometry 112 is obtained from legacy design information. Data collection is performed by measuring part 10 or using an existing data set that characterizes part 10. Alternatively, the editable geometry 112 can be obtained using legacy CAD input. The data includes the geometric data of part 10 to generate editable geometry 112. It is useful that the data further includes attribute data of the component 10. In general, attributes are non-geometric properties such as, for example, surface finish, type of material, presence or absence of coating on part 10, and density. Distinguishing attribute data from geometric data is useful in the sense that geometric data can be suppressed during various analyzes where specific geometric features are not required. For example, bolt holes are usually present during stress analysis, but are omitted during computational fluid dynamics analysis.
[0017]
Before measuring the component 10, it is desirable to determine and implement at least one equipment setting of the component 10, as indicated in FIG. When two or more measurement techniques are employed, equipment setting is repeated for each measurement technique.
[0018]
Digital radiography and optical scanning are useful techniques for measuring part 10. One example of digital radiography is computed tomography (CT), where the component 10 is scanned using, for example, an industrial CT system. Examples of optical scanning techniques include, for example, a non-contact 3D measurement system (not shown), such as a scanner that utilizes points, lines or areas, and, by way of example, a light gauge system in combination with rotating positioning components and stationary components (as well as There is a non-contact optical three-dimensional (3D) scan performed using such as (not shown). Other measurement techniques include, for example, the use of infrared radiometry and coordinate measurement machines (CMMs). Further, data collection is not limited to a single measurement technique. In one embodiment, the part 10 is scanned using computer tomography after installation. In this embodiment, the part 10 is also scanned by a scanner using points, lines or areas. Editable geometry 112 is generated using data collected from both CT scans and point, line or area based scans. The advantage of using multiple measurement techniques is that additional information about the part 10 is provided.
[0019]
Since the part 10 can be damaged or worn, it is desirable that the CAD model of the part 10 be editable to change certain properties, such as edges, or to augment the CAD model from data. Further, it would be desirable to evaluate and adjust the surface quality, especially between adjacent features. Surface quality includes surface smoothness, geometric continuity at surface joints, and interior structure. The process shown in block 1 of FIG. 1, that is, the generation of the editable geometry 112 of the part 10 from the measurement data 15, is shown in block form in FIG. According to one embodiment, a non-parametric computer aided design CAD model 212 of the part 10 is generated from the geometric data. Next, the non-parametric CAD model 212 is reconstructed to obtain the editable geometry 112, which consists of performing inverse CAD modeling. One example of an inverse CAD modeling process is to extract a set of constant {u, v} curves from the surface 18 and then reloft the surface 18 using the constant {u, v} curves, eg, Acquiring an editable non-parametric CAD model (also indicated by reference numeral 112) using one of the commercially available CAD systems described above.
[0020]
According to a more specific embodiment, the non-parametric CAD model 212 is generated as follows. First, as shown in FIG. 2, the data is reduced to obtain a subset 16 of the data. An example of data reduction is removing redundant data points to reduce data to a manageable subset 16. Next, the subset is divided to obtain a plurality of feature subsets 17 of the data. Each feature subset corresponds to one feature of part 10. An example of a feature is a geometric feature. In the case of the turbine blade 10 shown in FIG. 9, the features are, for example, an airfoil 11, a platform 12, and a dovetail 13. Next, geometric feature extraction is performed to obtain a set 18 of curves and surfaces from the feature subset 17. The curves and surfaces characterize the features of part 10. To obtain a non-parametric CAD model 212, the curves and surfaces 18 are imported into computer aided design (CAD) geometry. Alternatively, the curves and surfaces 18 can be generated using a CAD system.
[0021]
Segmentation and geometric feature extraction are well known processes and can be performed using commercially available software. For example, EDS Corp. The partitioning can be performed using commercially available software, such as Surfer ™ supplied by Sigma. In the case of a turbine blade 10, an example of a partition obtains a feature subset 17 of data corresponding to the airfoil 11, platform 12 and dovetail 13. In this example, one example of geometric feature extraction extracts curves and surfaces based on a feature subset characterizing airfoil 11, platform 12, and dovetail 13. This geometric feature extraction can be performed using commercially available software such as Surfer ™.
[0022]
According to a more specific embodiment, the partitioning comprises performing a function space decomposition. That is, the function division of the 3D Euclidean space around one data point and the assignment of one bit code to it facilitates decision making on adjacency and connectivity issues. Measuring part 10 and generating editable geometry 112 from the measured data allows for computer modeling of existing parts that do not have a CCAD design due to part aging or poor data storage It is convenient.
[0023]
For example, it is possible to change the editable geometry using CAD software, but the editing is performed in pieces. For example, to obtain a flexible representation of the part 10 described by a set of parameters, such as length, width, and height, all of which are variable, a parametric master from the editable geometry 112, as described above. A model 114 is generated. According to one particular embodiment, generating the parametric master model 114 includes identifying a plurality of critical parameters 113 from the editable geometry 112 and extracting them. Examples of critical parameters 113 include the dimensions and curvature of part 10, which are identified, for example, by a user. The identification is performed, for example, as a preliminary step in the method, prior to collecting the measurement data 15 and generating the editable geometry 112. Alternatively, the identification is performed when inspecting the editable geometry 112 using a CAD system. As used herein, the phrase "extracting critical parameters 113" refers to using editable geometry 112 to determine existing or desired values for critical parameters 113. For example, when using the method of the present invention to reverse engineer part 10, the extraction involves determining existing values for those parameters. However, extraction of existing values may involve, for example, extrapolation of values obtained from editable geometry, as the component 10 may be damaged or worn. In contrast, when using the method of the present invention to re-engineer part 10, the extraction determines the existing value of critical parameter 113 (the value obtained from the editable geometry for worn or damaged part 10). And the application of engineering knowledge to improve existing values obtained from editable geometry 112.
[0024]
According to a more specific embodiment, critical parameters 113 are extracted as shown in FIG. A set of knowledge-based engineering (KBE) part design generation rules 116 are applied to the editable geometry 112 stored in the CAD program 40 to obtain a parametric master model 114. The KBE part design generation rule 116 includes engineering know-how for constructing parametric geometry regarding the part 10, for example, using the Knowledge Fusion of the EDS which is a knowledge-based engineering module related to the Unigraphics environment, or by using Heidi Corp. Implemented in the knowledge base environment 118 using an Intent Knowledge Station provided by Although the knowledge base environment 118 is shown in FIG. 3 as being outside the CAD program 40, the knowledge base environment may be internal or external to the CAD program, and the present invention It includes both an internal knowledge base environment 118 and an external knowledge base environment 118.
[0025]
The KBE part design generation rule 116 specifies, for example, the relationship between the critical parameter 113 and other attributes of the editable geometry 112. Further, the part design generation rules 116 include, for example, geometric engineering rules and non-geometric engineering rules. For example, the geometric rule is a desired length to width ratio of the airfoil 11. One example of a non-geometric rule is the estimated number of airfoils per blade row based on experimental data and thrust, flow and efficiency requirements. Another example of a non-geometric rule is to consider the material's thermal stress limits related to the material's weight and strength. The code underlying the KBE part design generation rules 116 may be executed, for example, in a spreadsheet or using simulation code. The value can be determined by searching a database, for example, a material database. According to one particular embodiment, the KBE part design generation rules 116 are validated based on the measured real part 10. As described above, the knowledge base environment 118 controls the creation of the parametric geometry in the CAD program 40 regarding the component 10 by calling the function of the CAD program 40. The KBE part design generation rules 116 retain the engineering know-how of engineers who have considerable experience with the same family of parts, thereby reducing the burden on the reverse and re-engineering processes for those skilled engineers. It is convenient to reduce.
[0026]
A set of KBE part design inspection rules 117 are applied to the parametric master model 114 to ensure that the parametric master model 114 meets some functional and manufacturability requirements. In the case of the blade 10, examples of functional and manufacturability conditions include a calculated stress below the maximum stress criterion and a selected fillet radius greater than the minimum fillet radius required during manufacture. However, functional conditions and manufacturability conditions will vary based on the part 10 to be reengineered. Specifically, the KBE part design inspection rule 117 is implemented in the knowledge base environment 118 as shown in FIG. The inspection rules include, for example, performing an analysis 121 to evaluate the parametric master model 114. A database 50 that stores operating conditions and other data required to perform the analysis 121 is accessed via a Linked Model Environment (LME) 30, as indicated in FIG.
[0027]
FIG. 4 shows an example of application of the KBE component design generation rule 116 and the KBE component design inspection rule 117. In the case of the blade 10, an example of the KBE component design generation rule 116 is that the angle at the front end 21 and the rear end 22 of the airfoil 11 generates a profile of the airfoil 11 for each streamline. In the case of the blade 10, one example of a KBE part design inspection rule 117 is that one region of the part 10, for example, the front end 21, must withstand certain stresses when loaded. Applying the KBE part design inspection rule 117 initiates the stress analysis 121 via the LME 30. Performing the stress analysis 121 involves meshing the parametric geometry 114, applying boundary conditions, executing the stress analysis code, and determining whether the peak stress at the front end 21 satisfies the KBE part design inspection rule 117. And determining whether or not it is not. If not, some corrective actions can be taken. For example, make a design change or modify the parametric geometry. According to one embodiment, the parametric master model 114 is revised and the stress analysis 121 is repeated one or more times until the results of the stress analysis 121 are satisfactory. Alternatively, the revision of the parametric master model 114 and the repetition of the stress analysis 121 are repeated a predetermined number of times, and the time that provides the most satisfactory stress analysis result is selected.
[0028]
As in the case of designing a new component, it is useful to execute one or more engineering analyzes (also indicated by reference numeral 121 in the drawing) when re-engineering the component 10. Examples of engineering analysis include stress analysis, heat transfer analysis, fluid dynamics analysis, and combustion analysis. According to one particular embodiment, the method further includes creating at least one design analysis context model 150 to perform the engineering analysis 121. As shown in FIG. 5, the design analysis context model 150 is created in the linked model environment 30. Since the design analysis context model is created by the LME 30, when the parametric master model 114 is changed, the design analysis context model is automatically updated, which is advantageous. By way of background, the Linked Model Environment (LME) is a methodology that involves using commercially available or proprietary code to be seamless to end users. Specifically, a typical LME links geometry stored in a CAD program to external analysis code. One example of a typical LME employs a Unigraphics context model for finite element analysis, runs the context model via ICEM, creates a meshed ANSYS input file, then runs ANSYS and Is a C program that generates. Examples of LMEs are interfaces, scripts, programs, and collections of programs.
[0029]
As shown in FIG. 5, the design analysis context model 150 includes an associative copy 115 retrieved from the parametric master model 114. Associative copy 115 is configured to perform engineering analysis 121. As used herein, the term "association" means that a master-slave relationship exists between the parametric master model 114 and the associative copy 115. In other words, the parametric master model 114 is abstracted to the level of detail required to perform an engineering analysis (eg, the required details may include only one particular portion of the part 10). is there). For example, when modeling blade 10, if a specific portion of blade 10 (eg, airfoil 11 or front end 21) is required for engineering analysis, it may be abstracted from parametric master model 114 to associative copy 115. Be transformed into The associative copy 115 is synchronized to the parametric master model 114 because of the master-slave relationship. For example, a change in the parametric master model 114 is reflected in the associative copy 115. According to a more specific embodiment, the context model 150 is linked to the parametric master model 114 via an assembly file.
[0030]
In order to perform an engineering analysis, the context model 150 must be compatible with the engineering analysis program 121. Typical engineering analysis programs provide algorithms to solve, for example, mechanical stress, heat transfer, modal analysis, buckling, and computational fluid dynamics problems, examples of which include ANSYS, ABAQUS and Star-CD. (Trademark), but is not limited thereto. To adapt the context model 150 to the engineering analysis program 121, according to a more specific embodiment, a context model 150 is created as shown in FIG. As shown in FIG. 5, several analytic code guidelines are used to orient and remove the associative copy 115 to obtain the feature removal design model 216. For example, the engineering analysis 121 may request that the associative copy 115 be rotated 90 degrees as shown in FIG. The feature removal is performed to obtain a subset of the associative copy 115 necessary for performing the engineering analysis 121, while removing a portion of the associative copy 115 that is not necessary for performing the engineering analysis 121.
[0031]
To simplify the meshing for engineering analysis 121, the feature removal design model 216 is chunked using analysis code guidelines to obtain a chunked design model 217. "Meshing" as used herein refers to subdividing a parametric shape into pieces small enough to approximate the amount of field of interest, for example, by using a polynomial. As used herein, the term “meshing” includes both “meshing” as used in finite element analysis (FEA) programs and “gridding” as used in computational fluid dynamics (CFD) programs. Another term used in the art to describe meshing is "discretization."
[0032]
As used herein, the term “chunking” refers to subdividing the feature removal design model 216 into a collection of simple shapes (eg, six-sided volumes), and the Boolean sum of those simple shapes is the original. And each shape contains all the information of the parent geometry. Those skilled in the art will appreciate that the spatial relationship between the geometry of the parametric master model 114 and the simple shape of the chunked design model 217 is preserved by using the method of assembly functionality. Assembly functionality refers to the ability of a CAD system to handle spatial relationships between parts. A system that provides such functionality is, for example, Unigraphics ™, sold by Unigraphics Solutions.
[0033]
Perform surface and boundary extraction on chunked design model 217 using analysis code guidelines to obtain design analysis geometry 218 for performing engineering analysis 121. Design analysis geometry 218 is tagged to obtain design analysis context model 150. Tagging is performed to correspond to a typical engineering analysis program that requires a unique identifier (“tag”) of a topological entity (eg, solid, face, side, etc.). Tags are usually name or name-value pairs, where the name and value have some meaning to the engineering analysis program. For example, a name given the name "Airfoil_UIP" may be used to tag chunked portions of airfoil solids where engineering analysis code must apply different mesh seeds. The name value pair may be, for example, “temp = 1000” applied to the area where the engineering analysis code needs to apply a temperature boundary condition having a value of 1000.
[0034]
More specifically, as shown in FIG. 5, orientation, feature removal, chunking, face and boundary extraction, and tagging are performed inside the LME 30.
[0035]
The method of the present invention according to one particular embodiment further includes preparing the design analysis context model 150 to perform an engineering analysis as follows. As shown in FIG. 5, a design analysis context model 150 is meshed using analysis code guidelines to obtain a meshed design model 221. The analysis code guidelines provide the user with mesh seed recommendations based on the resolution of the model, taking into account features such as holes, fillets and other features that may cause problems with meshing, for example. The example parsing code guidelines also provide the user with suggested modifications to previous chunking and feature removal based on previous analysis. Specifically, the translation script of an engineering analysis program such as ANSYS, ABAQUS, and STAR-CD (trademark) executes meshing. That is, they inform the engineering analysis program how to mesh the model and how to apply the boundary conditions and loads.
[0036]
As background, scripts can be run by an operating system (eg, HP-UX or Windows 2000) to automate the sequence of events that will be executed repeatedly, or by specific programs (Unigraphics, ANSYS, etc.). Is a collection of commands as an ASCII (or text) file interpreted by. For example, an example ANSYS script opens a meshed model from ICEM (the name given by the user can be set for each run of the script) and creates a specific tagged region of the meshed model (generated by KBE rules). (Provided in an ASCII file), apply boundary conditions, perform analysis, and return a predetermined set of results in a particular format to an output file.
[0037]
As shown in FIG. 5, some boundary conditions are mapped onto the meshed design model 221 using the analysis code guidelines to obtain the design analysis model 222. For example, a translation script performs the mapping. Examples of boundary conditions are obtained from operating conditions such as, for example, blade 10 pressure, temperature, and load. Specifically, depending on the number of node points and the fidelity of the operating data, operating conditions such as pressure and temperature must be averaged, interpolated, or extrapolated to obtain boundary conditions. There will be. In addition, the boundary conditions may include, for example, operating data such as RPM, which is an input to a generation rule relating to the disk size of the compressor disk and the turbine disk. Another example of boundary conditions is obtained from the material type and microstructure of the part 10. Yet another example of a boundary condition includes analysis results, for example, the results of a previously performed engineering analysis. Boundary conditions such as the material of the part 10 are stored in a product data management (PDM) system 20, such as Unigraphics' iMAN and eMatrix. According to one embodiment, the boundary conditions are mapped by linking the PDM system 20 via a Linked Model Environment (LME) 30, such as an LME methodology, available via Unigraphics Wave. Further, the preparation may include identification of standard shapes and loads for which the closed form engineering solution is known (eg, using a translation script).
[0038]
The method of the present invention according to a more specific embodiment further includes performing an engineering analysis on the design analysis model 222 to obtain the engineering analysis data 223. Specifically, the engineering analysis code is executed using the design analysis model 222 and some convergence criteria. The convergence criterion determines whether the equation solver is heading for a solution for all of the user specified constraints. Examples of the engineering analysis are a thermal analysis and a stress analysis, which are performed by generating a data file by applying a finite element method or a finite difference method, for example. Typical data file contents include stress, displacement, pressure, temperature or velocity values. For example, the engineering analysis code is stored in a simulation engine that is a server that provides the engineering analysis via a generalized interface defined by wrapping the engineering analysis code.
[0039]
Engineering analysis data 223 is preferably used to revise the underlying design to improve the performance of parametric master model 114. For example, if the engineering analysis data is evaluated and deemed unsatisfactory, the design of the part 10 and thus the design of the parametric master model 114 using a set of redesign goals as indicated in FIG. To correct. Redesign goals vary based on implementation. However, examples of redesign goals for blade 10 include cooling efficiency, weight savings, and reduced peak stress. On the other hand, if the evaluation result turns out to be satisfactory, the parametric master model 114 is not changed, as shown in FIG. The evaluation of the engineering analysis data 223 is performed by an automated computer program (for example, iSIGHT (trademark by Engineer Software) or ModelCenter (trademark) by Phoenix Integration) or by an operator. If performance is deemed unsatisfactory, the automated computer program or operator revise the design of the part 10 by modifying the geometric parameters that characterize the part 10. Thereby, the parametric master model 114 is updated. Furthermore, since the design analysis context model 150 includes the associative copy 115 of the parametric master model 114, the design analysis context model 150 is also updated. Thus, as indicated in FIG. 5, if the changes made to the design are on a small parametric scale, the orientation, chunking, face and boundary extraction, and tagging must be performed for all subsequent iterations. No need to repeat. However, for topological or large parametric scale design changes, where the application of the same chunking via tagging would have unsatisfactory results, consider changing the meshing strategy. It is desirable that the script be revised to include it. The method involves two possibilities.
[0040]
After updating the parametric master model 114 (and, by association, the design analysis context model 150), it is useful to repeat the engineering analysis 121 to determine whether the performance has improved. The repetition of the engineering analysis 121 includes, for example, meshing and mapping of boundary conditions to obtain the design analysis model 222, as described above with respect to the original performance of the engineering analysis 121. Next, as described above, engineering analysis code is executed to obtain a new set of engineering analysis data. It will be appreciated that "repeat" of engineering analysis 121 for small parametric scale design changes involves the execution of existing scripts created during the meshing, mapping and execution steps described above. These scripts do not need to be repeated in subsequent iterations, as they rely on the tagged geometry originally developed when creating the design analysis context model 150. In contrast, in the case of topological design changes or large parametric scale design changes, "repeat" of engineering analysis 121 involves revising the script to take into account changes in the meshing strategy.
[0041]
In one embodiment, the parametric master model 114 is revised and the engineering analysis 121 is repeated until satisfactory results are obtained. In another embodiment, the parametric master model 114 is revised and the engineering analysis 121 is repeated a predetermined number of times, eg, five, to accommodate time or computational constraints. In the case of this embodiment, the best results are selected from these iterations, for example by an automated computer program or operator, for a predetermined set of criteria. More generally, depending on the implementation, the predetermined number of iterations will be one or more.
[0042]
According to a more specific embodiment, at least one additional context model (not shown) is generated and additional engineering analysis is performed to further evaluate the performance of the design. For example, after the thermal analysis has been successfully completed, a stress analysis is performed. Additional context models are generated and additional engineering analysis is performed as described above with respect to the context model 150 and shown in FIG. In this embodiment, to obtain a satisfactory design (and corresponding parametric master model 114), parametric master model 114 is revised and additional engineering analysis is repeated, as described above with respect to engineering analysis 121. A satisfactory design for the blade 10 meets, for example, any heat, stress and displacement constraints imposed on the blade. In another embodiment, the parametric master model 114 is revised and the additional engineering analysis is repeated a predetermined number of times, from which the optimal design of the part 10 is selected.
[0043]
As mentioned above, the parametric master model 114 preferably provides a part design for all parts in the same family as part 10. Thus, changing the value of the parameter provides a design of various different parts of the same family without repeating the re-engineering process.
[0044]
After the parametric master model 114 is finished, it is desirable to add geometric dimensions and tolerances (GD & T or “geometric tolerances”) to the parametric master model 114 in preparation for manufacturing. GD & T specifies the maximum allowable deviation from the nominal size and nominal shape specified by the part design underlying parametric master model 114. In one embodiment, the method of the present invention includes processing the parametric master model 114 with productivity data from the productivity database 240 to add GD & T to the parametric master model 114, as shown in FIG. In addition. For example, parametric master model 114 is linked to productivity database 240 through wrapper 241. A wrapper is an application interface code that wraps around an analysis program, an example of which is a Federated Intelligent Product Environment (FIPER) wrapper. Examples of productivity data include, for example, process capability limits that represent the surface flatness of a casting operation. For this example, design master model 120 includes parametric master model 114 with geometric dimensions and tolerances.
[0045]
After the design master model 120 is created, a manufacturing context model 136 is created. As mentioned above, the manufacturing context model 136 defines the end result (ie, “shape”) of the part at each manufacturing step and includes tooling features 132. Manufacturing processes include all types of manufacturing processes, such as molding, material addition (eg, vapor deposition), material removal (eg, machining, EDM and ECM), rapid prototyping (eg, stereolithography) and finishing. (For example, shot peening or laser peening). An example of a machining process is toolpath generation. Tooling features are parametric geometries that represent part features. Tooling features for the blade 10 include, for example, an airfoil tooling geometry (not shown) for forming the airfoil 11, a cavity tooling geometry for forming the dovetail 13, and a platform tooling for forming the platform 12. Geometry. An example of an airfoil tooling geometry includes a pressure side tooling feature and a suction side tooling feature (not shown) for forming the pressure side 160 and the suction side 161 of the airfoil 11. Specifically, according to one particular embodiment, the manufacturing context model 136 is generated as indicated in FIG. As shown in FIG. 7, a parametric master model 114 with geometric dimensions and tolerances is oriented to obtain an oriented GD & T model 133. The term "orientation" as used herein means spatial orientation. In the case of the embodiment shown in FIG. 7, the orientation is executed by the CAD program 42. The CAD programs 40, 42 are identified by different reference numerals to indicate that they are used to generate the parametric master model 114 and the tooling master model 134, respectively. However, it is also possible to use the same CAD program to generate the parametric master model 114 and the tooling master model 134. Therefore, it should be understood that the use of the two numbers in the figures is not to require two CAD programs, but to indicate that different processes are being performed.
[0046]
Several manufacturing design rules 242 are applied to the oriented GD & T model 133 to obtain the manufacturing context model 136. Manufacturing design rules 242 include tooling design rules for the forming process and tool path generation rules for the machining process, and represent the tooling designer's experience with the part 10, and more generally with the same family of parts. Tooling design rules 242 include, for example, formulas and other relationships between parameter values. More complex tooling design rules 242 include execution of tooling geometry code 60. As shown in FIG. 7, execution of the tooling geometry code 60 is performed via a tooling linked model environment (LME) 244. Specifically, the manufacturing design rule 242 is implemented in the tooling knowledge base environment 243. Manufacturing design rules 242 are beneficial because they incorporate the tooling design know-how of a skilled engineer, thereby reducing the tooling design process requirements imposed on such engineers. In the case of the embodiment shown in FIG. 7, the manufacturing context model 136 is generated by the CAD program 42. Although the tooling knowledge base environment 243 is shown in FIG. 7 as being separate from the CAD program 42, the knowledge base environment may be either inside or outside the CAD program. It includes a tooling knowledge base environment 243 inside or outside the program 42. For example, the Knowledge Station is an external knowledge-based environment, while Knowledge Fusion is an internal knowledge-based engineering module of the Unigraphics CAD program.
[0047]
If only one manufacturing step is used, such as a simple part (e.g., an injection molded plastic screw), the manufacturing context model 136 is thus generated. However, for more complex parts, such as blade 10, for example, forming airfoil 11, platform 12, and dovetail 13, and machining holes such as radial cooling holes (not shown) in airfoil 11. To do so, several manufacturing steps will be performed. For illustrative purposes only, FIG. 10 illustrates the generation of a manufacturing context model 136 for a hypothetical part 10. The manufacture of this part involves two forming steps and two machining steps. If more than one manufacturing process is employed, generating the manufacturing context model 136 further includes orienting the manufacturing context model to obtain an orienting GD & T model 133, as shown in FIGS. As shown in FIG. 10, the manufacturing design rule 242 of the additional manufacturing process is applied to the directing GD & T model 133 to generate the manufacturing context model 136 including the additional manufacturing process. This process is repeated for each additional manufacturing step to generate a manufacturing context model 136 that includes additional manufacturing steps. As indicated in FIG. 10, the manufacturing context model 136 defines the shape of the part to be manufactured and specifies tooling features 132 for each manufacturing step performed during the manufacturing process.
[0048]
In addition to forming steps such as forging, the manufacture of the component 10 may include one or more machining steps, such as, for example, forming a plurality of holes in the component 10 with a laser. Thus, in another embodiment of the method according to the present invention, the generation of the manufacturing context model 134 involves directing the manufacturing context model 136 to obtain an orientation GD & T model, as shown in FIG. And applying the tool path generation rules 242 of the machining process to generate the manufacturing context model 136 including. This process is repeated for each machining step to generate a manufacturing context model 136 that includes the machining steps. The tooling master model 134 for this embodiment further includes toolpaths and process parameters for performing the machining steps, which are retrieved from the manufacturing context model 136.
[0049]
As noted above, the manufacturing context model 136 includes tooling features 132 that provide tooling geometry that represents part features. However, to create a tooling (eg, dice), a tooling geometry 62 is required. Tooling geometry 62 is a model of tooling for one or more manufacturing processes. For a manufacturing process that includes two forming steps, for example, the tooling geometry 62 includes models associated with the first tooling and the second tooling, and each model is extracted from the tooling features 132 of the respective forming step. Specifically, a tooling master model 134 including the tooling geometry 62 is generated by applying tooling design rules 242 to the manufacturing context model 136 to retrieve the tooling geometry 62 from the tooling features 132. In the embodiment shown in FIG. 7, the tooling master model 134 is generated in the CAD program 42 by applying the tooling design rules 242 using the tooling knowledge base environment 243. Tooling design rules 242 impose continuity or other matching conditions, for example, for combining tooling features 132 to form tooling geometry 62 of part 10.
[0050]
In addition to the tooling geometry 62, the tooling master model 134 according to one particular embodiment further includes process parameters for each manufacturing process and tool paths. Specifically, in one embodiment, the process parameters are included as attributes in the tooling master model 134, and in another embodiment, are stored in a linked attribute file of the tooling PDM system 320. As described above, a toolpath is included for a manufacturing process that includes one or more manufacturing steps. For example, if the manufacturing process is forging, examples of tooling geometry 62 include die geometry (taken from manufacturing context model 136) and examples of tooling master model 134 further include process parameters such as press speed, temperature, and load. . If the manufacturing process is a machining operation, tooling master model 134 includes toolpaths (geometry) and process parameters such as cutter speed, cutter type and feed rate.
[0051]
To evaluate the tooling master model 134, it is useful to perform one or more manufacturing process analyzes, such as forging process simulations for forged parts such as engine disks or compressor blades. Manufacturing process analysis is used to evaluate tooling geometry 62 to verify that the manufacturing process performs as expected. According to one particular embodiment, the method further comprises creating at least one tooling context model 141. The tooling context model 141 includes an associative copy 142 of the tooling master model 134. Associative copy 142 is configured to perform manufacturing process analysis 321. As described above, the term "association" refers to the fact that a master-slave relationship exists between the touring master model 134 and its associative copy 142 such that changes to the touring master model 134 are reflected in the associative copy 142. Means that.
[0052]
An example of creation of the tooling context model 141 is shown in FIG. This is similar to the creation of the design analysis context model 150 described above. As shown in FIG. 6, the tooling context model 141 is created in a tooling linked model environment (tooling LME) 300. Since the tooling context model 141 is created using the LME methodology, when a change to the tooling master model 134 is made, the tooling context model is automatically updated, which is advantageous. To obtain the feature removal tooling model 143, the associative copy 142 is oriented and feature removed using a set of analytic code guidelines. To simplify the meshing for performing manufacturing process analysis 321, feature removal tooling model 143 is chunked using analysis code guidelines to obtain chunked tooling model 144. Surface and boundary extraction is performed on the chunked tooling model 144 using analysis code guidelines to obtain a tooling analysis geometry 145 for performing a manufacturing process analysis 321. The tooling analysis geometry 145 is tagged to correspond to a typical engineering analysis program that requires a unique identifier (“tag”) of a topological entity (eg, solid, face, side, etc.), thereby tooling. A context model 141 is generated.
[0053]
According to one particular embodiment, the method further includes preparing the tooling context model 141 to perform a manufacturing process analysis as follows. To obtain the meshing tooling model 146, the tooling context model 141 is meshed using the analysis code guidelines. As shown in FIG. 6, in order to obtain a tooling analysis model 147, some boundary conditions such as, for example, contact conditions between members of a die for forging are used to obtain a meshing tooling model. 146. The boundary conditions are stored in a tooling product data management (PDM) system 320, for example, as indicated in FIG. Tooling PDM system 320 may be PDM system 20 or an independent PDM system. According to one embodiment, the boundary conditions are mapped by linking the tooling PDM system 320 via the tooling LME 300.
[0054]
After the tooling analysis model 147 has been obtained, a manufacturing process analysis 321 is performed on the tooling analysis model to obtain tooling analysis data 323, as shown in FIG. Specifically, the manufacturing process analysis code is executed using the tooling analysis model 147 and some convergence criteria and process parameters. Examples of process parameters include clamping force, press speed and temperature, which are stored, for example, in the tooling PDM system 320. Manufacturing process analysis 321 may be performed using, for example, a finite element methodology to simulate the manufacturing process to generate stress, change, temperature, and strain rate data for the parts and tooling to be manufactured, for example, dies. Including.
[0055]
According to one particular embodiment, tooling analysis data 323 is then used to evaluate tooling geometry 62 of tooling master model 134. Specifically, for example, the tooling analysis data 323 is evaluated by an automated computer program or an operator. If the tooling analysis data 323 is deemed unsatisfactory, the tooling geometry 62, and thus the tooling master model 134, may be used using a set of manufacturing goals and taking into account tooling design tradeoffs, as indicated in FIG. Is corrected. Manufacturing goals and tooling design trade-offs will vary based on implementation. Examples of typical tooling goals for blade 10 include life and materials used for tooling, and examples of tooling design trade-offs include cost, time required to perform tooling and setup time in manufacturing. There is. On the other hand, if the evaluation result turns out to be satisfactory, the tooling master model 134 is not changed as shown in FIG.
[0056]
More specifically, if the tooling analysis data 323 is deemed unsatisfactory, the automated computer program or operator revises the tooling geometry 62 by modifying the geometric parameters characterizing the component tooling features. . As a result, the tooling master model 134 is updated, and an associative relationship exists between the tooling master model 134 and the tooling context model 141. As a result of this update, the tooling context model 141 is automatically updated. Thus, as shown in FIG. 6, for small parametric scale tooling modifications, it is not necessary to repeat the orientation through the tagging process.
[0057]
After updating the tooling master model 134 (and the tooling context model 141 by association), it is useful to repeat the manufacturing process analysis 321 to determine whether performance has improved. The repetition of the manufacturing process analysis 321 is instructed in FIG. 6, and is executed in the same manner as the repetition of the engineering analysis 121 as described above.
[0058]
In one embodiment, tooling master model 134 is revised and manufacturing process analysis 321 is repeated until satisfactory tooling geometry 62 (and corresponding tooling master model 134) is achieved. Alternatively, the revision of the tooling master model 134 and the subsequent repetition of the manufacturing process analysis 321 are repeated a predetermined number of times (one or more times, for example, five times). In this embodiment, for example, an automated computer program or operator selects the optimal tooling geometry of the part 10 from the iterations based on manufacturing goals and tooling design trade-offs. If no additional manufacturing process analysis should be performed, tooling master model 134 corresponds to optimal tooling geometry.
[0059]
According to a more specific embodiment, at least one additional tooling context model (not shown) is generated and an additional manufacturing process analysis is performed to further evaluate the performance of tooling geometry 62. As described above with respect to tooling context model 141 and shown in FIG. 6, an additional tooling context model is generated and an additional manufacturing process analysis is performed. In this embodiment, to obtain a satisfactory tooling geometry 62 (and corresponding tooling master model 134), the tooling master model 134 is revised and additional manufacturing process analysis is performed as described above with respect to manufacturing process analysis 321. Is repeated. In another embodiment, the tooling master model 134 is revised a predetermined number of times, and additional manufacturing process analysis is repeated to select the optimal tooling geometry 62 from those iterations.
[0060]
Tooling master model 134 is a parametric model, which is beneficial because it provides tooling geometry for all parts in the same family. Thus, changing the value of the parameter automatically provides tooling parameters for various parts of the same series.
[0061]
After creation of the tooling master model 134, in preparation for hard tooling (ie, making dies, molds, etc. to manufacture the re-engineered part 10), the tooling master model 134 has geometric dimensions and tolerances (GD & T). Or "geometric tolerances"). In one embodiment, GD & T is added to tooling master model 134 using CAD system 42 as shown in FIG. In this embodiment, tooling master model 134 further includes several CAD drawings of hard tooling 400 and a set of inspection data. Examples of inspection data include geometry inspection data related to the hard tooling 400 for verifying that the created hard tooling is designed. The hard tooling 400 is then generated using the tooling master model 134 and using conventional hard tooling manufacturing techniques that vary based on the implementation.
[0062]
To evaluate the hard tooling 400, it is useful to manufacture and test one or more test components 410 using the hard tooling 400, as shown in FIG. Prior to manufacturing the test part 410, equipment setup and setup (or pre-processing operations) are performed as indicated in FIG. According to the embodiment shown in FIG. 8, the method of the present invention further includes manufacturing at least one test part 410 using the hard tooling 400 and using the process parameters. The process parameters are operating conditions set when manufacturing a part, for example, mechanical parameters such as a cutter speed, a feed speed, and a press load, or general parameters such as a temperature. The test part 410 may be a non-contact 3D measurement performed using a non-contact 3D measurement system such as, for example, digital radiography (e.g., computed tomography), optical scanning (e.g., a scanner utilizing points, lines or areas). Inspection is performed using one or more of inspection techniques, such as scanning (e.g., scanning), using infrared radiometry and a coordinate measuring machine (CMM). The measurement data 420 obtained from this inspection is evaluated by an engineer or an automated computer program to determine whether the tooling master model 134 produces an acceptable test part 410 based on the engineering criteria of the part 10. . If the test part 410 is acceptable, the part 10 is manufactured using the tooling master model 134 and the hard tooling 400. However, if the test component 410 does not meet the engineering criteria, the tooling master model 134 is revised and re-evaluated one or more times until the test component 410 meets the engineering criteria of the component 10.
[0063]
Depending on the purpose of the re-engineering method, it is desirable to produce a part having the same functionality or improved functionality as the original part 10 using the tooling master model 134. To this end, an embodiment of the manufacturing method is disclosed. The method of manufacturing may include generating a parametric master model 114 from the editable geometry 112, as described generally with respect to FIG. 1 above, and more particularly with respect to FIGS. From the manufacturing context model 136, and creating the tooling master model 134 from the manufacturing context model 136. The manufacturing method further includes creating a hard tooling 400 using the tooling master model 134 and manufacturing at least one component using the hard tooling 400 and process parameters, for example, as shown in FIG. Including doing. As mentioned above, the process parameters include, for example, clamping force, press speed and temperature.
[0064]
In one embodiment, editable geometry 112 is generated from data characterizing part 10, for example, measurement data. In another embodiment, editable geometry 112 is generated from a legacy part design.
[0065]
In one particular embodiment, parametric master model 114 is generated using KBE part design generation rules 116 and KBE part inspection rules 117, as described above with respect to FIGS. In this embodiment, at least one design analysis context model 150 is created in the LME 30, for example, to evaluate the parametric master model 114.
[0066]
To add geometric dimensions and tolerances GD & T, the parametric master model 114 is processed with manufacturability data from the manufacturability database 240 as described above with respect to FIG. The GD & T addition is performed in either the CAD system 40 or the tooling CAD system 42, which may be the same CAD system or different CAD systems. In this embodiment, the manufacturing context model 136 is generated as described above with respect to FIG. Specifically, a manufacturing context model 136 is generated for several manufacturing steps.
[0067]
Next, according to a more specific embodiment, a tooling master model 134 is created by applying tooling design rules 242 to the manufacturing context model 136. To further evaluate the tooling master model 134, the method more specifically comprises creating at least one tooling context model 141.
[0068]
One embodiment of the system 100 will be described with reference to FIGS. 1, 3, 4, and 7. FIG. As shown in FIG. 1, the system 100 for engineering a part 10 includes a part design master model module 110 configured to generate a parametric master model 114 from the editable geometry 112. The system 100 further includes a tooling master model module 130 configured to receive the parametric master model 114, generate a manufacturing context model 136 from the parametric master model, and create a tooling master model 134 from the manufacturing context model 136. . As used herein, the phrase "configured to" will be understood by those skilled in the art, but the part design master model module 110 and the tooling master model module 130 perform their tasks of the present invention. Means that a combination of hardware and software is provided. For example, the part design master model module 110 and the tooling master model module 130 each include a computer having software for performing a corresponding task. The invention is not limited to any particular computer for performing the processing tasks of the invention. The term "computer" refers to performing the computations necessary to perform the tasks of the present invention, e.g., by accepting structured inputs and processing the inputs according to prescribed rules to produce certain outputs. Direct any machine where possible.
[0069]
As shown in FIG. 4, a part design master model module 110 according to one particular embodiment includes a CAD system 40 configured to generate a parametric master model 114 from editable geometry 112, and a knowledge base environment 118 includes: It is configured to apply KBE part design generation rules to the editable geometry 112 to obtain a parametric master model 114. The knowledge base environment 118 is further configured to apply KBE part design inspection rules to the parametric master model 114 to verify that the parametric master model 114 meets functional and manufacturability requirements. . As mentioned above, the knowledge base environment 118 may be internal to the CAD system 40 or external. Specifically, CAD system 40 is further configured to generate editable geometry 112 from data characterizing component 10, such as the measurement data described above.
[0070]
According to a more specific embodiment, the part design master model module 110 includes a linked model environment LME 30 configured to create at least one design analysis context model 150 and an engineering analysis to perform an engineering analysis. And a code 121. For example, as shown in FIG. 5, the engineering analysis 121 is linked via the LME 30. More specifically, the component design master model module 110 further includes a component data management PDM system 20 configured to store operating condition data for extracting boundary conditions. More specifically, PDM 20 is further configured to store all other product related data and revision history. The LME 30 is configured to link the PDM system 20 to the meshed design model 221 to map boundary conditions on the meshed design model 221 as shown in FIG. To add geometric tolerances to parametric master model 114, CAD system 40 is configured to process parametric master model 114 with productivity data. Although FIG. 7 illustrates this process as being performed in the tooling CAD system 42, the addition of geometric dimensions and tolerances may be performed in either the CAD system 40 or the tooling CAD system 42. Further, as described above, the CAD system 40 and the tooling CAD system 42 may be the same CAD system or may be different CAD systems.
[0071]
As shown in FIG. 7, according to one particular embodiment, the tooling master model module 130 receives the parametric master model 114 and processes it according to geometric dimensions and tolerances before obtaining an orientation GD & T model 133. Tooling CAD system 42 configured to direct the parametric master model 114 to generate a production context model 136 from the parametric master model. Tooling master model module 130 further includes a tooling knowledge base environment 243 configured to apply manufacturing design rules 242 to orientation GD & T model 133 to obtain manufacturing context model 136. As described above, the manufacturing rules include the tooling design rules and the path generation rules.
[0072]
Complex manufacturing processes employ two or more forming steps and may include one or more machining steps. Accordingly, tooling CAD system 42 is preferably configured to generate a manufacturing context model for some manufacturing steps. For this particular embodiment, as shown in FIG. 7, the CAD system 42 is further configured to direct the manufacturing context model 136 to obtain the directing GD & T model 133, and the tooling knowledge base environment 243 includes: Further configured to apply manufacturing design rules 242 to the orienting GD & T model 133 to generate the manufacturing context model 136.
[0073]
To generate the tooling master model 134 from the manufacturing context model 136, the tooling knowledge base environment 243 is further configured to apply tooling design rules to the manufacturing context model 136. In this embodiment, tooling CAD system 42 is further configured to retrieve tooling geometry 62 from manufacturing context model 136 using tooling design rules.
[0074]
To evaluate the tooling master model 134, according to the embodiment shown in FIG. 6, the tooling master model module 130 includes a tooling linked model environment (tooling LME) configured to create at least one tooling context model 141. ) 300 and a manufacturing process analysis code 321 for executing a manufacturing process analysis. As shown in FIG. 6, the manufacturing process analysis 321 is linked via the tooling LME 300. Specifically, the tooling master model module 130 further includes a tooling component data management PDM system 320 configured to store operating condition data for retrieving boundary conditions and to store process parameters. Specifically, tooling PDM 320 is further configured to store all other product related data and revision history. As indicated in FIG. 6, tooling LME 300 is configured to link PDM system 320 to meshing tooling model 136 to map boundary conditions onto meshing tooling model 146. Tooling LME 300 is further configured to link tooling PDM system 320 to manufacturing process analysis 321 to provide process parameters for performing a manufacturing process analysis.
[0075]
To generate the hard tooling 400, the tooling CAD system 42 is further configured to add geometric dimensions and tolerances to the tooling master model 134, for example, as shown in FIG.
[0076]
In addition, when re-engineering a system or subsystem rather than a component, the system 100 further includes a product control structure (not shown) to lay out the overall system configuration and control changes in a top-down manner.
[0077]
While only certain features of the invention have been illustrated and described, many modifications and changes will occur to those skilled in the art. It is, therefore, to be understood that the appended claims will cover all such modifications and changes that fall within the true spirit of the invention.
[0078]
The reference numerals in the claims are not intended to narrow the scope of the present invention but to facilitate understanding of the present invention.
[Brief description of the drawings]
FIG. 1 is a schematic block diagram (eg, a flowchart) illustrating one implementation of a method for re-engineering a part.
FIG. 2 is a block diagram illustrating generation of editable geometry from measurement data acquired for a part.
FIG. 3 is a hybrid system / process block diagram illustrating the generation of a parametric master model from editable geometry using KBE part design generation inspection rules.
FIG. 4 is a hybrid system / process block diagram illustrating a particular example of the process of FIG. 3 for a turbine blade.
FIG. 5 is a hybrid system / process block showing generation of a design analysis context model from a parametric master model, creation of a design analysis context model for performing an engineering analysis, and execution of an engineering analysis for evaluating the parametric master model. Diagram.
FIG. 6 is a hybrid system / process block showing generation of a tooling context model from a tooling master model, creation of a tooling context model to perform a manufacturing process analysis, and execution of a manufacturing process analysis to evaluate the tooling master model. Diagram.
FIG. 7 is a hybrid system / process block diagram illustrating generation of a tooling master model from a parametric master model.
FIG. 8 is a process block diagram illustrating the generation, testing, and evaluation of hard tooling.
FIG. 9 shows a turbine blade.
FIG. 10 is a diagram showing generation of a manufacturing context model for a hypothetical part manufactured through four manufacturing steps.
[Explanation of symbols]
10 parts, 11 airfoil, 12 platform, 13 dovetail, 15 measurement data, 30 linked model environment (LME), 40 computer-aided design (CAD) system, 42 tooling CAD system, 62 Tooling geometry, 100: System, 110: Part design master model module, 112: Editable geometry, 114: Parametric master model, 115: Associative copy, 116: KBE part design generation rule, 117: KBE part design inspection rule, 120 Design master model, 121 ... Engineering analysis, 130 ... Tooling master model module, 132 ... Tooling feature, 133 ... Direction GD & T model, 134 ... Tooling master model, 136 ... Manufacturing context 141, tooling context model, 142, associative copy, 146, meshing tooling model, 147, tooling analysis model, 150, design analysis context model, 212, non-parametric CAD model, 222, design analysis model, 223, engineering analysis Data, 242: Tooling design rules, 300: Tooling LME, 321: Manufacturing process analysis, 323: Tooling analysis data, 400: Hard tooling, 410: Test parts, 420: Measurement data

Claims (23)

In the method of re-engineering the part (10),
Generating a parametric master model (114) of the part (10) from the editable geometry (112) for the part (10);
Generating a manufacturing context model (136) including a plurality of tooling features (132) from a design master model (120) including a parametric master model (114);
Creating a tooling master model (134) including a tooling geometry (62) for the part (10) from the manufacturing context model (136). Obtaining data characterizing the part (10);
Generating the editable geometry (112) for the part from the data. The method of claim 2, wherein said obtaining comprises measuring a part (10) to obtain data. 4. The method of claim 3, wherein said measuring comprises performing at least one of digital radiography and optical scanning. 3. The method according to claim 2, wherein the data comprises geometric data on the part (10). The method of claim 5, wherein the data further comprises attribute data of the part (10). Generation of editable geometry (112) for the part (10)
Generating a non-parametric computer aided design (CAD) model (212) of the part (10) from the geometric data;
The method of claim 5, comprising reconstructing the non-parametric CAD model (212) by performing inverse CAD modeling to obtain the editable geometry (112). Generation of the non-parametric CAD model (212) of the part (10)
Shrinking the data to obtain a subset of the data;
Splitting the subsets to obtain a plurality of feature subsets of data, each corresponding to one feature (11), (12), (13) of the part (10);
Performing geometric feature extraction from the feature subset to obtain a plurality of curves and surfaces characterizing features (11), (12), (13) of the part (10);
The method of claim 7 including importing curves and surfaces into computer aided design (CAD) geometry to obtain a non-parametric CAD model (212). The method of claim 1, further comprising obtaining editable geometry (112) from the legacy design information. The method of claim 1, wherein generating the parametric master model comprises identifying and extracting a plurality of critical parameters from an editable geometry (112). The extraction of the critical parameters includes:
Applying a plurality of knowledge-based engineering (KBE) part design generation rules to the editable geometry (112) to obtain a parametric master model (114);
11. The method of claim 10, comprising applying a plurality of KBE part design inspection rules to the parametric master model to ensure that the parametric master model (114) meets a plurality of functional and manufacturability requirements. . The method of claim 1, further comprising creating at least one design analysis context model (150) consisting of an associative copy (115) of the parametric master model (114) configured to perform an engineering analysis (121). . The method of claim 12, wherein at least two design analysis context models (150) are created, each configured to perform a different engineering analysis (121). Further comprising preparing a design analysis context model (150) to perform the analysis, said preparation comprising:
Meshing the design analysis context model (150) using the analysis code guidelines to obtain a meshed design model (221);
Mapping a plurality of boundary conditions on the meshed design model (221) using the analysis code guidelines to obtain a design analysis model (222);
The method is
An engineering analysis is performed on the design analysis model (222) by executing the engineering analysis code using the design analysis model (222) and the plurality of convergence criteria to obtain a plurality of engineering analysis data (223). To do,
Evaluating the engineering analysis model (223);
If the engineer link analysis data is unsatisfactory, the method is:
Modifying the parametric master model (114) using multiple redesign goals;
13. The method of claim 12, further comprising, after modifying the parametric master model (114), repeating the execution of the engineering analysis (121). Further comprising processing the parametric master model (114) with productivity data from the productivity database (240) to add geometric dimensions and tolerances (GD & T) to the parametric master model (114). The method of claim 1, wherein the design master model (120) comprises a parametric master model (114) with geometric dimensions and tolerances. Generation of the manufacturing context model (136) includes:
Orienting the parametric master model (114) using geometric dimensions and tolerances to obtain an orientation GD & T model (133);
The method of claim 15, comprising applying a plurality of manufacturing design rules (242) to the oriented GD & T model (133) to obtain a manufacturing context model (136). Generation of the manufacturing context model (136) includes:
Orienting the manufacturing context model (136) to obtain an orientation GD & T model (133);
Applying a manufacturing design rule (242) to the orienting GD & T model (133) to generate a manufacturing context model (136) including at least one additional manufacturing step, wherein the orienting and applying the additional manufacturing step 17. The method of claim 16 performed for each of the following. The manufacturing design rule includes a plurality of tooling design rules, and creating the tooling master model (134) includes applying the tooling design rules to the manufacturing context model (136) to obtain the tooling master model (134). 17. The method of claim 16, comprising including tooling geometry (62) derived from tooling features (132) by applying the tooling design rules. The method of claim 16, further comprising creating at least one tooling context model (141) that includes an associative copy (142) of the tooling master model (134) configured to perform a manufacturing process analysis (321). Method. 20. The method of claim 19, wherein at least two tooling context models (141) are created, each configured to perform a different manufacturing process analysis (321). Further comprising preparing a tooling context model (141) for performing a manufacturing process analysis (321), said preparation comprising:
Meshing the tooling context model (141) using the analysis code guidelines to obtain a meshed tooling model (146);
Mapping a plurality of boundary conditions onto the meshed tooling model (146) using the analysis code guidelines to obtain a tooling analysis model (147);
The method further includes performing a manufacturing process analysis (321) on the tooling analysis model (147) to obtain a plurality of tooling analysis data (323), the execution comprising:
Executing the manufacturing process analysis code using the tooling analysis model (147), the plurality of convergence criteria and the plurality of process parameters;
Evaluating the tooling analysis data (323);
If the tooling analysis data is not satisfactory,
Modifying the tooling master model (134) using multiple manufacturing goal tooling design tradeoffs;
20. The method of claim 19, further comprising, after modifying the tooling master model (134), repeating the execution of the manufacturing process analysis (321). The method of claim 16, further comprising adding a plurality of geometric dimensions and tolerances (GD & T) to the tooling master model (134). The tooling master model (134) further includes a plurality of process parameters, the method comprising:
Generating a hard tooling (400) using the tooling master model (134) with geometric dimensions and tolerances;
Manufacturing at least one test part (410) using hard tooling (400) and using process parameters;
Inspecting the test part (410) to obtain a plurality of measurement data (420);
23. The method of claim 22, further comprising: evaluating the measurement data (420) to determine whether the test part (410) meets a plurality of engineering criteria for the part (10).

Images