3D Mechanical Part Edge Selection for Similar Sharp Features

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing CAD systems lack efficiency and ergonomics in multi-selecting edges of mechanical parts, particularly in identifying and selecting sharp edges that are similar, which is crucial for designing and manufacturing processes.

Innovation Solution

A computer-implemented method within a CAD system automatically identifies and selects sets of edges that are directed similarly, allowing for like-edge detection and multi-selection, without user intervention, by using a predetermined threshold based on manufacturing processes such as machining or molding, and applies fillet or round operations to selected edges.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If manual multi-selection of edges is performed in existing CAD systems, then users can select multiple edges for design operations, but the process is time-consuming and inefficient

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveedge selection efficiencyVSAvoidtime for multi-selecting edges
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system pre-calculates and stores the directional attributes of all edges in the mechanical part model before the user needs to select them. When a user initiates an edge selection operation, the system immediately retrieves pre-computed directional information and performs the selection based on the user's criteria without requiring time-consuming real-time calculations, thus significantly reducing selection time while maintaining accuracy

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The patent replaces the manual mechanical interaction of visually inspecting and individually clicking each edge with an automated computational system. The CAD system automatically compares edge directions using mathematical calculations (dot products, angle computations) against user-defined criteria, substituting the manual mechanical selection process with an efficient algorithmic approach that rapidly identifies and selects all matching edges

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

2Ease of operation

If existing methods for multi-selection of edges are used, then edge selection can be performed, but the process lacks ergonomics and user-friendliness

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveergonomics of edge selectionVSAvoidcomplexity of selection process
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system enables users to define their selection criteria once (such as directional ranges, edge types, or geometric properties), and then the system autonomously performs the entire selection process without requiring users to manually evaluate or adjust each edge. The automated filtering and selection mechanisms handle the complex evaluation logic, making the operation simple and ergonomic for users while managing the underlying complexity internally

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements a universal edge selection mechanism that can handle multiple selection criteria and edge types through a single integrated interface. The system accommodates various selection modes (directional selection, geometric property selection, topological relationship selection) within one unified tool, eliminating the need for users to learn or switch between multiple specialized selection methods, thereby improving ergonomics while managing complexity through consolidation

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

3Productivity

If automatic identification of similar edges is implemented, then multiple sharp edges can be selected automatically improving efficiency, but requires complex algorithms for detecting similar edges

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveautomatic edge selection speedVSAvoidalgorithm complexity for edge detection
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the edge detection task into distinct computational stages: first extracting basic edge geometric properties (direction vectors, lengths, positions), then comparing these properties against similarity criteria, and finally grouping edges that meet the thresholds. This segmentation allows the system to handle complex similarity detection through a series of simpler, more manageable computational steps, reducing overall algorithmic complexity while maintaining high selection speed

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system employs adjustable similarity thresholds and comparison parameters that can be modified based on the specific design context and user requirements. By parameterizing the similarity criteria (such as angular tolerance ranges, length ratio thresholds, or directional alignment requirements), the system can adapt to different detection needs without requiring fundamentally different algorithms, thus managing complexity through configurable parameters rather than multiple specialized algorithms

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

4Manufacturing precision

If like-edge detection is performed to select geometrically similar edges, then design accuracy is improved, but requires precise measurement and comparison of edge properties

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveaccuracy of edge selectionVSAvoidprecision required for edge property measurement
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSMeasurement precision

Solution Approach 1:

The patent introduces intermediary computational constructs such as normalized direction vectors, standardized geometric descriptors, and intermediate similarity scores that mediate between raw edge measurements and final selection decisions. These intermediaries simplify the comparison process by transforming diverse edge properties into unified metrics, reducing the precision requirements of direct measurements while maintaining high selection accuracy through systematic intermediate processing

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Solution Approach 2:

The system performs preliminary standardization and normalization of edge properties before comparison, pre-computing standardized vectors and geometric descriptors that are inherently more suitable for comparison operations. This preliminary processing reduces measurement precision requirements by transforming raw data into forms that are more robust to minor variations, while the pre-established comparison frameworks ensure accurate identification of truly similar edges

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Data Source

PatentUS11295040B2Designing a mechanical part
Publication Date: 2022.04.05 DASSAULT SYSTEMES SA
  • US11295040B2 patent drawing
  • US11295040B2 patent drawing
  • US11295040B2 patent drawing

AI summary

The disclosure notably relates to a computer-implemented method for designing, with a CAD system, a 3D modeled object representing a mechanical part. The method includes providing a B-rep representing the mechanical part. The B-rep has faces, edges and vertices. The method includes providing a sharp edge. The method further includes, automatically by the CAD system, identifying a set of edges. The set of edges includes the provided sharp edge. Each first edge of the set of edges is directed similarly to at least one second edge of the set of edges, the first edge and the second edge sharing a face. The method further includes, automatically by the CAD system, selecting sharp edges within the set of edges. Such a method constitutes an improved method for designing a mechanical part.