Determining the Number of Distinct Solutions in Planar Mechanism Design

Lawrence W. Funke, Jonathan Raney, Cyler Caldwell
{"title":"Determining the Number of Distinct Solutions in Planar Mechanism Design","authors":"Lawrence W. Funke, Jonathan Raney, Cyler Caldwell","doi":"10.1115/detc2019-97360","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This work investigates two novel approaches to sorting solutions to planar-mechanism-synthesis problems. The examples contained herein are specific to planar morphing mechanisms, but the procedure is general and can easily be extended to any planar-mechanism-synthesis problem. The results indicate that the two approaches, namely self-organizing map (SOM) neural network and modal assurance criterion (MAC), can be used to sort a set of solution mechanisms into a reduced set of distinct solution groups. Additionally two sorting approaches (inclusive and exclusive) were investigated. This process can be used to take the initial set of solution mechanisms, often numbering in the hundreds, and pare it down to a significantly smaller set of substantially different designs. For the two case studies presented herein, one set was reduced by a factor of ten and the other by a factor of five. This means that a designer has fewer mechanisms to look through and that the differences in these mechanisms are clearer so that considerations such as size and joint locations may more easily be considered. It was found that the MAC method with inclusive sorting is generally a better starting point because it runs quickly and gives a more compact set of distinct solution mechanisms. The paper concludes with some recommendations for best practices for sorting solutions for a general mechanism-design problem.","PeriodicalId":178253,"journal":{"name":"Volume 5A: 43rd Mechanisms and Robotics Conference","volume":"33 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Volume 5A: 43rd Mechanisms and Robotics Conference","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1115/detc2019-97360","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This work investigates two novel approaches to sorting solutions to planar-mechanism-synthesis problems. The examples contained herein are specific to planar morphing mechanisms, but the procedure is general and can easily be extended to any planar-mechanism-synthesis problem. The results indicate that the two approaches, namely self-organizing map (SOM) neural network and modal assurance criterion (MAC), can be used to sort a set of solution mechanisms into a reduced set of distinct solution groups. Additionally two sorting approaches (inclusive and exclusive) were investigated. This process can be used to take the initial set of solution mechanisms, often numbering in the hundreds, and pare it down to a significantly smaller set of substantially different designs. For the two case studies presented herein, one set was reduced by a factor of ten and the other by a factor of five. This means that a designer has fewer mechanisms to look through and that the differences in these mechanisms are clearer so that considerations such as size and joint locations may more easily be considered. It was found that the MAC method with inclusive sorting is generally a better starting point because it runs quickly and gives a more compact set of distinct solution mechanisms. The paper concludes with some recommendations for best practices for sorting solutions for a general mechanism-design problem.
平面机构设计中不同解数的确定
这项工作研究了两种新的方法来分类解决平面-机制-综合问题。这里所包含的例子是专门针对平面变形机构的,但该过程是一般的,可以很容易地扩展到任何平面-机构-综合问题。结果表明,自组织映射(SOM)神经网络和模态保证准则(MAC)两种方法可以将一组解机制分类为不同解群的约简集。此外,还研究了两种分类方法(包括和排除)。此过程可用于获取解决方案机制的初始集(通常有数百个),并将其缩减为一个明显更小的完全不同的设计集。对于本文介绍的两个案例研究,一组减少了10倍,另一组减少了5倍。这意味着设计师需要查看的机构更少,这些机构之间的差异更清晰,因此可以更容易地考虑尺寸和关节位置等因素。研究发现,包含排序的MAC方法通常是一个更好的起点,因为它运行速度快,并且提供了一组更紧凑的不同的解决方案机制。本文最后给出了对一般机制设计问题的解决方案进行排序的一些最佳实践建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信