Generative 3D Part Design for 2.5-Axis Subtractive Manufacturing
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Existing CAD software struggles to generate 3D models that are compatible with 2.5-axis subtractive manufacturing processes, leading to inefficiencies in machining time, programming, and the need for custom fixtures.
Innovation Solution
A computer-aided design process that iteratively modifies 3D geometry and topology using geometry and simulation result filtering to ensure compatibility with 2.5-axis subtractive manufacturing, ensuring flat top and flank regions that facilitate milling, and using tool accessibility and void generation to enhance manufacturability.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Weight of moving object
If generative design is used to create optimized 3D geometry, then weight and structural performance are improved, but compatibility with 2.5-axis subtractive manufacturing deteriorates
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies preliminary action by incorporating manufacturing constraints and filtering rules into the generative design process before final geometry creation. The system pre-defines 2.5-axis manufacturing limitations, tool accessibility requirements, and void generation rules that guide the optimization algorithm to produce geometries that are both weight-optimized and manufacturable from the outset, avoiding the need for post-processing modifications
Solution Approach 2:
The patent utilizes parameter changes by dynamically adjusting geometric parameters during the generative design process to satisfy both performance and manufacturing constraints. The system modifies parameters such as surface curvature, feature size, and topology to ensure compatibility with 2.5-axis milling operations while maintaining structural optimization goals
2Strength
If complex 3D geometry is generated for optimal performance, then structural efficiency is improved, but CAM programming time and machining complexity increase
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies local quality by implementing spatially-varying filtering rules that apply different geometric constraints to different regions of the part based on local manufacturability requirements. The system identifies critical areas such as tool accessibility zones, void regions, and flat surface requirements, applying appropriate filtering criteria locally to maintain structural efficiency while reducing overall CAM programming complexity
Solution Approach 2:
The system performs preliminary filtering and geometry simplification during the design phase to reduce CAM programming time. By pre-establishing manufacturable geometry rules and filtering out non-manufacturable features before CAM generation, the system eliminates the need for complex post-processing and manual geometry modifications in the CAM programming stage
3Reliability
If highly optimized generative design is used, then part performance is improved, but need for custom fixtures and specialized manufacturing increases
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies universality by designing the generative system to produce geometries that are universally compatible with standard 2.5-axis manufacturing processes and conventional fixtures. The filtering rules ensure that optimized parts can be manufactured using standard tooling and equipment, eliminating the need for custom fixtures or specialized manufacturing setups while maintaining high performance
4Ease of manufacture
If geometry filtering is applied to ensure 2.5-axis manufacturability, then ease of manufacture is improved, but design flexibility and optimization freedom are reduced
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies partial action by implementing selective filtering that applies manufacturing constraints only to specific geometric features and regions where they are necessary, rather than imposing uniform constraints across the entire design. The system applies filtering rules partially to maintain design flexibility in critical performance areas while ensuring manufacturability in tool-accessible regions
Solution Approach 2:
The system utilizes parameter changes to dynamically adjust the stringency of filtering rules based on local design requirements and manufacturing constraints. By varying geometric parameters such as feature size thresholds, curvature limits, and void placement rules, the system maintains design flexibility while ensuring 2.5-axis manufacturability
Data Source
AI summary
Methods, systems, and apparatus, including medium-encoded computer program products, for computer aided design of physical structures, where the 3D models of the physical structures are produced so as to facilitate 2.5-axis subtractive manufacturing, include: obtaining one or more design criteria and one or more boundary conditions, modifying a 3D shape of a modeled object in accordance with the one or more design criteria and the one or more boundary conditions, including employing geometry filtering or simulation results filtering in the iterative loop or inserting voids at locations selected using one or more shape skeleton lines, and providing the 3D shape of the modeled object for use in manufacturing the physical structure using one or more computer-controlled manufacturing systems that employ the 2.5-axis subtractive manufacturing process.