Aircraft Comparison System for Assembly Configuration Differences
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
The assembly of aircraft is hindered by the need for operators to spend time reviewing instructions and receiving additional training due to changes in customer options, leading to increased assembly time and expense.
Innovation Solution
A method and apparatus that compares aircraft parts by identifying differences between a current model and a previously assembled model, using graphical representations to display these differences, facilitating quicker familiarization with new options and reducing assembly time.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Manufacturing precision
If operators review instructions and receive additional training for new customer options, then assembly accuracy and quality are improved, but assembly time and production cost increase
Solution Approach 1:
The system performs preliminary comparison of customer options against the previous aircraft configuration before assembly begins. By pre-identifying differences in engines, seats, galleys, lavatories, and other components, the system prepares difference lists and graphical representations in advance, allowing operators to review only relevant changes rather than studying complete instructions from scratch.
Solution Approach 2:
The system creates simplified copies or representations of the configuration differences through graphical user interfaces that display visual comparisons between the current and previous aircraft models. These graphical representations include icons, images, and structured lists that replicate the essential information needed for assembly without requiring operators to study detailed technical drawings and manuals.
2Manufacturing precision
If operators review detailed instructions and blueprints for new options, then assembly accuracy is improved, but time and expense increase
Solution Approach 1:
The system segments the configuration information into distinct categories such as engines, seats, galleys, lavatories, and other components. Each difference is presented as a separate, organized item in the graphical interface, allowing operators to process information in manageable chunks rather than reviewing a single complex document containing all possible changes.
Solution Approach 2:
The system creates simplified graphical representations that copy only the essential difference information needed for assembly. Instead of requiring operators to interpret detailed blueprints and technical specifications, the system presents visual icons, images, and structured data that replicate the critical configuration changes in an easily consumable format.
3Adaptability or versatility
If comprehensive training is provided for all possible customer options, then operators can handle any configuration change, but training time and cost increase
Solution Approach 1:
The system creates visual copies and representations of configuration differences that can be quickly displayed and reviewed. By using graphical user interfaces with icons, images, and structured lists, the system provides immediate visual reference material that serves as on-demand training, eliminating the need for extensive preliminary training programs while maintaining operator adaptability.
Solution Approach 2:
The system introduces a computational intermediary that automatically compares configurations and generates difference lists. This intermediary processes the complex information matching and comparison tasks, translating detailed configuration data into simplified graphical representations that operators can easily interpret, thereby reducing the knowledge burden on operators while maintaining versatility.
Data Source
AI summary
A method and apparatus for comparing aircraft parts. A first model is identified for a first aircraft for assembly. A second model is identified for a second aircraft that has been assembled. First parts for the aircraft in the first model are compared with second parts for the second aircraft in the second model. Graphical representations of the first parts and the second parts are displayed illustrating a difference between the first parts and the second parts from a comparison of the first parts and the second parts.