Computer aided manufacturing planning for mass customization: part 2, automated setup planning

Pallet operation sequencing based on network part program logic

“…In contrast, given workpiece setups and workpiece disposition on the pallet, Ohashi [30] defined the operation sequence, optimising at first the machining sequence for each workpiece and subsequently the machining order of the workpieces. A similar approach was presented by Yao et al [31] while addressing a complete process planning system. After the automatic creation of the workpiece setups, the sequence for the machining of each setup was obtained on the basis of tool change time and machine tool adjustment time (e.g., table index time), satisfying precedence constraints.…”

“…Second, the proposed approach, integrating production planning aspects, copes with actual production conditions according to which it is normal to mount several workpieces and different part types on the same pallet. Indeed, the majority of the examined papers [14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28] are based on the hypothesis that only one workpiece is loaded on the pallet and the few papers considering more workpieces [29][30][31] seem to be valid only when the number of operations in the analysis is low. Thus, the applicability of these methods becomes strictly limited in opposition to the real production trend that aims to perform hundreds of operations on the same pallet to save the time of tool and pallet changes.…”

“…The main contribution of this work is the definition of an automatic approach that solves the pallet operation sequencing problem [30,31]. This approach that is integrated into a process planning framework [32] based on the STEP-NC [4] standard and the NetPP [8][9][10][11][12][13] leads to two main advantages.…”

Comparative Study of Machining Technology Selection to Manufacture Large-Size Components of Offshore Constructions

“…Each of machining technologies like milling, drilling, turning or grinding might have its own specified tool approaching direction (TAD) [19] which can be assigned to each feature [3,20] for automatic process planning realised with computer support. If features have more than one TAD, definite TAD should be assign to every feature according to some priorities of tight tolerance relation between features, the number of features and good machining practices [20].…”

Function blocks enabled dynamic set-up dispatching and execution monitoring

“…In other words, two constraints of set-up planning are treated separately; thus, the search space is narrowed before the search begins (Ong et al 2002). Recent efforts include set-up grouping strategies for make span minimisation (Yilmaz et al 2007) and automated set-up planning at both single part level and machine station level (Yao et al 2007). From the literature, it is evident that the flexibility of set-up planning has not been fully addressed, especially from the viewpoint of integration of set-up planning and set-up dispatching.…”