4.

CAD/CAM data exchange

Computer databases are now replacing paper blueprints in defining product geometry
and nongeometry for all phases of product design and manufacturing. It becomes
increasingly important to find effective procedures for exchanging these databases.
Fundamental incompatibilities among entity representations greatly complicate
exchanging modelling data among CAD/CAM systems. Even simple geometric
entities such as circular arcs are represented by incompatible forms in many systems.
The database exchange problem is complicated further by the complexity of
CAD/CAM systems, the varying requirements of organisations using them, the
restrictions on access to proprietary database information, and the rapid pace of
technological change.

Transferring data between dissimilar CAD/CAM systems must embrace the complete
product description stored in its database. Four types of modelling data make up this
description.
1. Shape data. This data consists of both geometrical and topological information as
well as part or form features.
2. Nonshape data. It includes graphics data such as shaded images, and global data as
measuring units of the database and the resolution of storing the database
numerical values.
3. Design data. This data has to do with the information that designers generate from
geometric models for analysis purposes.
4. Manufacturing data. It consists of information as tooling, NC tool paths,
tolerancing, process planning, tool design, and bill of material.

The need to exchange modelling data is directly motivated by the need to integrate and
automate the design and manufacturing processes to obtain the maximum benefits
from CAD/CAM systems. There is always the demand to be able to tie together two or
more of these systems to form an application that shares common data. This demand
exists either internally within a single organisation or externally as in the case of
subcontract manufacturer or component suppliers.

63
The problem of data exchange has two solutions: direct and indirect. The direct
solution (Fig. 4.1) entails translating the modelling data stored in a product database
directly from one CAD/CAM system format to another, usually in one step. On the
other hand, the indirect solution (Fig. 4.1) is more general and adopts the philosophy
of creating a neutral database structure (also called a neutral file) which is independent
of any existing or future CAD/CAM system. This structure acts as an intermediary and
a focal point of communication among dissimilar database structures of CAD/CAM
systems. The structure of the neutral database must be general, governed only by the
minimum required definitions of any of the modelling data types, and be independent
of any vendor format.

System
5

System System
4 3

System System
1 2

(a) Direct translators

System
5

System
System
4 Neutral 3
database
structure

System System
1 2

(b) Indirect translators

Fig. 4.1. Methods of Exchanging Modelling Data

Each type of translator has its advantages and disadvantages. Direct translators
provide a satisfactory solution when only a small number of systems are involved, but

64
as this number increases the number of translator programs that need to be written
becomes prohibitive. On the other hand, indirect translators do not suffer from the
increasing numbers of programmes to be written as in the case of direct ones.
Moreover, indirect translator philosophy provides stable communication between
CAD/CAM systems, protects against system obsolescence, and eliminates dependence
on a single-system supplier. Indirect translators based on standard neutral file format
are now the common practice while direct translators are seldom used.

The upsurge of interest in product data exchange has led various national and
international groups and organisations to search for definitions of standards for this
purpose. There exist few standards that have been adopted, implemented, and tested
by various vendors and users. The evolution of these standards follows a similar path
to the evaluation of the CAD/CAM technology itself. The first tier of efforts
concentrated on exchanging shape data only. Initially, the problem was to transfer
mainly geometrical data. However, as users became more experienced, it was realised
that topological data needed to be transferred as well for a complete definition of
shape data.

5. Mechanical assembly

When the product is designed, consideration is generally given to the ease of

manufacturing its individual parts and how the final product would look. Little
attention is usually given to those aspects of design that will facilitate assembly of the
parts, and great reliance is often placed on assembly or production engineers to solve
any assembly-related problems. As products are becoming more complex and labour
is becoming more expensive, the demand to pay more attention to the assembly
process during the design phase of a product is becoming increasingly high.

The obvious ways to facilitate the assembly process at the design phase are:
• to simplify the product by reducing the number of different parts to a minimum;
• to introduce guides and tapers into the design of various parts;
• to design the base parts with features that make them suitable for quick and
accurate location on the assembly line or work carrier.

65
Apart from the assembly considerations at the design phase, which are discussed
above, there are other relevant issues to geometric modelling and to the CAD/CAM
technology, in particular:
• modelling and representing assemblies;
• generating assembly sequences;
• analysing assemblies.

5.1 Assembly modelling

An assembly is a collection of independent parts. It is important to understand the

nature and the structure of dependencies between parts in an assembly to be able to
model the assembly properly. In order to determine, for example, whether a part can
be moved and which other parts will move with it, the assembly model must include
the spatial positions and hierarchical relationships among the parts, and the assembly
or placement constraints between parts. The modelling representation of hierarchical
relationships and placement constraints are what distinguishes between modelling
individual parts and assemblies, and consequently between geometric modellers and
assembly modellers.

Assembly modellers can be thought of as more advanced geometric modellers where

the data structure is extended to allow representation and manipulation of hierarchical
relationships and placement constraints. The geometric modeller acts as a
preprocessor to the assembly modeller (Fig. 5.1). Designers first create all the shape
information (both geometry and topology) of the individual parts. Once the parts
design is complete, designers can utilise the assembly modeller to create the assembly
and analyse it. Creating the assembly from its parts requires specifying the placement
and spatial relationships between the parts. Assembly analysis may include
interference checking, mass properties, kinematic and dynamic analysis, and finite
element analysis.

66
 Geometric modeller

Geometric Geometric Geometric To part

model of part 1 model of part 2 ... model of part n analysis

Assembly modeller

Assembly model To assembly

analysis

Fig. 5.1. Generation of an Assembly Model

The link between the geometric and assembly modellers is established such that
designers need only to modify individual parts for design modification by using the
geometric modeller, and the assembly model is updated automatically.

Three requirements are necessary for assembly modelling.

1. Modelling of individual parts. Solid modelling, specifically boundary
representation, is the appropriate scheme because the placement constraints are
related to the faces, edges, and vertices of the assembled parts.
2. Specifying the hierarchical relationships between parts in the assembly. The most
natural way to represent the hierarchical relationships between the various parts of
an assembly is an assembly tree (Fig. 5.2). An assembly is divided into several
subassemblies at different levels, and each subassembly at depth (n - 1) is
composed of various parts. The leaves of the tree represent individual parts (a

67
 subassembly leaf can be decomposed into its individual parts), its nodes represent
subassemblies, and its root represents the assembly itself.

Level 0 Assembly

Level 1 Subassembly Part Subassembly

...

Level n-1 Subassembly Part Part

Level n Part Part Part

Fig. 5.2. Assembly Tree

3. Specifying the placement constraints between parts. Placement feature information

can be provided interactively with ease because placement features are simple
graphics entities such as faces and centrelines. By assigning the placement
constraints, the transformation matrices that merge parts into their assembly can be
automatically computed and stored for each part. In addition, using placement
constraints instead of providing transformation matrices determines whether or not
the parts in an assembly can be assembled. The possible placement constraints in
Pro/Engineer are listed below.

68
• Mate. Mate is used to make two surfaces touch one another: coincident and
facing each other.

• Mate offset. Mate offset makes two planar surfaces parallel and facing each
other. The offset value determines the distance between two surfaces.

• Align. Align makes two planes coplanar: coincident and facing in the same
direction. It also aligns revolved surfaces or axes to be coaxial.

• Align offset. Align offset aligns two planar surfaces at an offset: parallel and
facing in the same direction.

69
• Insert. The Insert command inserts a “male” revolved surface into a “female”
revolved surface, aligning their respective axes.

• Orient. The Orient command orients two planar surfaces to be parallel and
facing in the same direction; offset is not specified.

• Coordinate systems. The Coord Sys places a component into an assembly by

aligning its coordinate system with a coordinate system in the assembly. The
parts will be assembled by aligning the corresponding X, Y, and Z axes of the
selected systems.

70
The inference of the location and orientation of a part in an assembly from placement
constraints requires computing its transformation matrix from these constraints. This
matrix relates the part’s local coordinate system to the global coordinate system of the
assembly.

6.2 Representation schemes

An assembly of parts can be represented by the description of its individual

components and their relationships in the assembly. An assembly database stores the
geometric models of individual parts, the spatial positions and orientations of the parts
in the assembly, and the assembly or attachment relationships between parts. Three
representation schemes and their related data structures exist: Graph structure,
Location graph and Virtual link. The inherent problem that all assembly data
structures attempt to solve is how to assign assembly data interactively to build or
develop the assembly. The main difference between these schemes stems from the
way the user provides the assembly data, that is, the locations and orientations of the
various parts and their hierarchical relationships. The first two schemes utilise the
working coordinate system method, while the third scheme utilise the placement
constraints method.

6.3 Assembly analysis

Various CAD/CAM systems provide various analysis tools to analyse assemblies once
they are created. Among the popular analysis tools are:

71
• the generation of assembly drawings;
• exploded views of assemblies;
• shaded images of assemblies;
• cross-sectional views;
• mass property calculations;
• interference checking;
• kinematic and dynamic analyses;
• finite element analysis;
• animation and simulation.

72