CAD Geometry Definition Accuracy via Singular Constraint Detection

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

In CAD systems, under-defined geometries due to singular constraint schemes can lead to errors where geometries appear well-defined but are not, and adding more constraints can over-define the model rather than resolving the issue, causing unexplained errors.

Innovation Solution

A method to identify under-defined geometries by determining the degree of freedom for each geometry, identifying constraints, and distinguishing between well-defined and under-defined geometries, specifically identifying those under-defined due to singular configurations (UDS) and storing indicators for UDS and computed-from-singular geometries.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Manufacturing precision

If more constraints are added to resolve under-defined geometries, then the model definition accuracy improves, but the model becomes over-defined causing errors

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvegeometry definition accuracyVSAvoidmodel validity
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary analysis of the constraint scheme before final model validation. By detecting singular configurations in advance and identifying under-defined geometries beforehand, the system can resolve issues without adding excessive constraints that would cause over-definition errors.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system implements feedback mechanisms that continuously monitor constraint satisfaction and geometry definition status. When under-defined geometries are detected, the system provides feedback to adjust the constraint scheme appropriately, preventing both under-definition and over-definition conditions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

2Ease of operation

If constraint schemes are simplified to reduce complexity, then ease of operation improves, but under-defined geometries increase causing unexplained errors

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveconstraint scheme simplicityVSAvoidgeometry definition reliability
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system automatically analyzes and adjusts constraint schemes without requiring manual intervention. It self-diagnoses singular configurations and under-defined geometries, then automatically resolves them by adjusting the constraint scheme while maintaining operational simplicity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The system dynamically changes constraint parameters and configuration settings to resolve under-defined geometries. By adjusting constraint values, types, and arrangements based on detected singularities, the system maintains simple operation while ensuring reliable geometry definition.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Measurement precision

If detailed analysis of each geometry is performed to identify UDS, then measurement precision of geometry status improves, but computational time increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvegeometry status identification accuracyVSAvoidanalysis computation time
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system segments the complex model into individual geometries and constraint schemes for targeted analysis. By processing each geometry's constraint scheme separately and identifying singular configurations at the local level, the system achieves precise UDS detection without requiring exhaustive analysis of the entire model.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system applies partial analysis focused on identifying singular configurations and under-defined geometries rather than performing complete exhaustive analysis. By concentrating computational resources on detecting critical issues like singular constraint schemes, the system achieves sufficient precision without excessive computational time.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Data Source

PatentUS9400853B2System and method for identifying under-defined geometries due to singular constraint schemes
Publication Date: 2016.07.26 SIEMENS INDUSTRY SOFTWARE INC
  • US9400853B2 patent drawing
  • US9400853B2 patent drawing
  • US9400853B2 patent drawing

AI summary

Systems, methods, and computer program products for identifying under-defined geometries due to singular constraint schemes. A method includes receiving a CAD model having a plurality of geometries and determining the degrees of freedom for each of the geometries. The method includes identifying a number of constraints on each of the geometries and identifying any of the geometries that are under-defined and any of the geometries that are well-defined. The method includes identifying any of the under-defined geometries that are under-defined due to singular (UDS) and storing a UDS indicator for each of the geometries identified as UDS. The method can include identifying geometries computed from these UDS geometries (CFS) and storing a CFS indicator for each of the geometries identified as CFS.