On the viability of developing CAD data exchange standard for form features

Nilesh S. Joshi, Jami J. Shah

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

Abstract

Form feature data exchange is divided into three types: CAD-to-CAD, CAD-to-Downstream applications and inter-downstream applications. Essential characteristics for CAD-to-CAD and CAD-to-Downstream types of feature data transfer are established flowed by a set of criteria for evaluation of a form feature exchange schema. Contemporary neutral feature data exchange schemas like AP 224, AP 203 and NRep are evaluated. It is concluded that none of them is fully equipped to do the job. AP 203 belongs to the CAD-to-CAD feature data exchange class. It exchanges only the final part geometry and the feature model is lost. AP 224 and NRep belong to the CAD-to-Downstream class. AP 224 attempts to enlist all features that can be manufactured using milling and turning processes. It limits the user to finite set of features. On the other hand, NRep permits the user to define his own features and does not provide a standard set. For a complete feature data transfer between two CAD applications, one needs to model the design intent of each design feature and transfer it with construction history of creation of the part model while for an efficient feature data transfer between CAD and downstream applications, the schema needs to standardize a set of most common features but also provide means for the user to define customized features with desired parameterization and attributes.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publicationProceedings of the ASME International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference - DETC2005
Pages893-904
Number of pages12
Volume3 B
StatePublished - 2005
EventDETC2005: ASME International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference - Long Beach, CA, United States
Duration: Sep 24 2005Sep 28 2005

Other

OtherDETC2005: ASME International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference
CountryUnited States
CityLong Beach, CA
Period9/24/059/28/05

Fingerprint

Electronic data interchange
Computer aided design
Data transfer
Milling (machining)
Parameterization

Keywords

  • Feature data exchange evaluation criteria
  • Form feature data exchange
  • NRep
  • STEP AP 224
  • User-defined features

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Engineering(all)

Cite this

Joshi, N. S., & Shah, J. J. (2005). On the viability of developing CAD data exchange standard for form features. In Proceedings of the ASME International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference - DETC2005 (Vol. 3 B, pp. 893-904)

On the viability of developing CAD data exchange standard for form features. / Joshi, Nilesh S.; Shah, Jami J.

Proceedings of the ASME International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference - DETC2005. Vol. 3 B 2005. p. 893-904.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

Joshi, NS & Shah, JJ 2005, On the viability of developing CAD data exchange standard for form features. in Proceedings of the ASME International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference - DETC2005. vol. 3 B, pp. 893-904, DETC2005: ASME International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, Long Beach, CA, United States, 9/24/05.
Joshi NS, Shah JJ. On the viability of developing CAD data exchange standard for form features. In Proceedings of the ASME International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference - DETC2005. Vol. 3 B. 2005. p. 893-904
Joshi, Nilesh S. ; Shah, Jami J. / On the viability of developing CAD data exchange standard for form features. Proceedings of the ASME International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference - DETC2005. Vol. 3 B 2005. pp. 893-904
@inproceedings{fcb2d06db35f4c65a8bd6d334d8acf4c,
title = "On the viability of developing CAD data exchange standard for form features",
abstract = "Form feature data exchange is divided into three types: CAD-to-CAD, CAD-to-Downstream applications and inter-downstream applications. Essential characteristics for CAD-to-CAD and CAD-to-Downstream types of feature data transfer are established flowed by a set of criteria for evaluation of a form feature exchange schema. Contemporary neutral feature data exchange schemas like AP 224, AP 203 and NRep are evaluated. It is concluded that none of them is fully equipped to do the job. AP 203 belongs to the CAD-to-CAD feature data exchange class. It exchanges only the final part geometry and the feature model is lost. AP 224 and NRep belong to the CAD-to-Downstream class. AP 224 attempts to enlist all features that can be manufactured using milling and turning processes. It limits the user to finite set of features. On the other hand, NRep permits the user to define his own features and does not provide a standard set. For a complete feature data transfer between two CAD applications, one needs to model the design intent of each design feature and transfer it with construction history of creation of the part model while for an efficient feature data transfer between CAD and downstream applications, the schema needs to standardize a set of most common features but also provide means for the user to define customized features with desired parameterization and attributes.",
keywords = "Feature data exchange evaluation criteria, Form feature data exchange, NRep, STEP AP 224, User-defined features",
author = "Joshi, {Nilesh S.} and Shah, {Jami J.}",
year = "2005",
language = "English (US)",
isbn = "0791847403",
volume = "3 B",
pages = "893--904",
booktitle = "Proceedings of the ASME International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference - DETC2005",

}

TY - GEN

T1 - On the viability of developing CAD data exchange standard for form features

AU - Joshi, Nilesh S.

AU - Shah, Jami J.

PY - 2005

Y1 - 2005

N2 - Form feature data exchange is divided into three types: CAD-to-CAD, CAD-to-Downstream applications and inter-downstream applications. Essential characteristics for CAD-to-CAD and CAD-to-Downstream types of feature data transfer are established flowed by a set of criteria for evaluation of a form feature exchange schema. Contemporary neutral feature data exchange schemas like AP 224, AP 203 and NRep are evaluated. It is concluded that none of them is fully equipped to do the job. AP 203 belongs to the CAD-to-CAD feature data exchange class. It exchanges only the final part geometry and the feature model is lost. AP 224 and NRep belong to the CAD-to-Downstream class. AP 224 attempts to enlist all features that can be manufactured using milling and turning processes. It limits the user to finite set of features. On the other hand, NRep permits the user to define his own features and does not provide a standard set. For a complete feature data transfer between two CAD applications, one needs to model the design intent of each design feature and transfer it with construction history of creation of the part model while for an efficient feature data transfer between CAD and downstream applications, the schema needs to standardize a set of most common features but also provide means for the user to define customized features with desired parameterization and attributes.

AB - Form feature data exchange is divided into three types: CAD-to-CAD, CAD-to-Downstream applications and inter-downstream applications. Essential characteristics for CAD-to-CAD and CAD-to-Downstream types of feature data transfer are established flowed by a set of criteria for evaluation of a form feature exchange schema. Contemporary neutral feature data exchange schemas like AP 224, AP 203 and NRep are evaluated. It is concluded that none of them is fully equipped to do the job. AP 203 belongs to the CAD-to-CAD feature data exchange class. It exchanges only the final part geometry and the feature model is lost. AP 224 and NRep belong to the CAD-to-Downstream class. AP 224 attempts to enlist all features that can be manufactured using milling and turning processes. It limits the user to finite set of features. On the other hand, NRep permits the user to define his own features and does not provide a standard set. For a complete feature data transfer between two CAD applications, one needs to model the design intent of each design feature and transfer it with construction history of creation of the part model while for an efficient feature data transfer between CAD and downstream applications, the schema needs to standardize a set of most common features but also provide means for the user to define customized features with desired parameterization and attributes.

KW - Feature data exchange evaluation criteria

KW - Form feature data exchange

KW - NRep

KW - STEP AP 224

KW - User-defined features

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33144484143&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33144484143&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Conference contribution

SN - 0791847403

SN - 9780791847404

VL - 3 B

SP - 893

EP - 904

BT - Proceedings of the ASME International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference - DETC2005

ER -