3D Geometry Decomposition into 2D Panels for Automated Assembly
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Current CAD/CAM applications require manual and intuitive processes for manufacturing 3D objects, involving trial and error to derive manufacturing plans from 3D geometry, which is time-consuming and lacks precision.
Innovation Solution
A method to decompose 3D geometry into a collection of 2D panels, where each panel encodes a distinct portion of the 3D model, allowing automatic assembly by merging panels at appropriate seams and creating bends/folds, using cost functions to filter and select mergings that result in flattenable panels, thus generating a 'coded assembly' plan.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Manufacturing precision
If manual trial and error process is used to derive manufacturing plans from 3D geometry, then designer intuition and tailoring skills can be applied, but the process is time-consuming and lacks precision
Solution Approach 1:
The patent replaces the manual mechanical process of trial-and-error design with an automated computational system. The software application automatically decomposes 3D geometry into 2D panels using algorithms, eliminating the need for manual trial-and-error manipulation while maintaining design flexibility. This substitution of manual mechanical operations with automated computational processes simultaneously improves precision and reduces time loss.
Solution Approach 2:
The system enables self-service by allowing the manufacturing plan to be automatically generated from the 3D model without requiring continuous manual intervention. The software autonomously performs the decomposition, panel generation, and assembly instructions creation, freeing the designer from time-consuming manual tasks while ensuring precise, consistent results through algorithmic processes.
2Adaptability or versatility
If manual process is used to create manufacturing plans, then flexibility in material selection and assembly methods can be maintained, but the complexity of the design process increases
Solution Approach 1:
The patent segments the complex manufacturing planning process into distinct automated stages: 3D geometry decomposition, 2D panel generation, seam identification, and assembly instructions creation. This segmentation reduces overall process complexity by breaking down the manual trial-and-error approach into systematic, automated steps while maintaining adaptability through configurable parameters at each stage.
Solution Approach 2:
The system maintains versatility by allowing parameter changes in material properties, panel configurations, and assembly methods without increasing design process complexity. The software accommodates different materials and assembly techniques through adjustable parameters and constraints, enabling flexible adaptation while the automated core processes handle the computational complexity.
3Productivity
If automated decomposition into 2D panels is implemented, then design and manufacturing time is reduced, but the complexity of the algorithm and processing increases
Solution Approach 1:
The patent replaces complex manual design mechanics with automated computational algorithms. The software application performs the sophisticated tasks of 3D-to-2D decomposition, panel optimization, and assembly planning through automated algorithms, achieving high productivity while managing algorithmic complexity through systematic computational approaches rather than manual procedures.
Solution Approach 2:
The system introduces an intermediary software layer that mediates between the 3D model and the manufacturing process. This intermediary automatically handles the complex algorithmic transformations, converting 3D geometry into manufacturable 2D panels with embedded assembly instructions, thereby increasing productivity while shielding users from algorithmic complexity.
4Manufacturing precision
If manual panel creation is used, then control over each panel's geometry can be maintained, but the quantity of time and effort required increases
Solution Approach 1:
The system enables self-service by automatically generating precise panel geometries from the 3D model without requiring manual creation or adjustment. The software autonomously determines optimal panel shapes, sizes, and configurations while maintaining geometric precision through algorithmic calculations, eliminating time-consuming manual panel drafting while preserving control over geometric accuracy.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent replaces manual geometric construction with automated computational geometry processing. The software application performs precise 3D-to-2D projections, panel boundary calculations, and geometry optimization through algorithms, maintaining exact geometric control while eliminating the time and effort required for manual panel creation and adjustment.
Data Source
AI summary
Techniques are described for decomposing three-dimensional (3D) geometry into an assemblable collection of two-dimensional (2D) panels. Importantly, the 3D geometry is automatically encoded into the 2D panels, allowing the 3D geometry to be recreated simply by joining the 2D panels at the appropriate seams and creating the appropriate bends/folds in each panel. Further, each panel has edges, vertices, and faces which can be encoded in the panelization, allowing assembly instructions to be algorithmically generated, Doing so allows users to be provided with a step-by-step instructions carried out to realize the 3D geometry encoded in the 2D panels.