Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-2n9c9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-14T09:06:27.142Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Composite design and manufacturing critiquing system

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2009

Sherri L. Messimer,
John M. Henshaw,
John Montgomery and
John Rogers
Sherri L. Messimer
Affiliation:
Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, University of Alabama in Huntsville, Huntsville, AL 35899, U.S.A.
John M. Henshaw
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Tulsa, Tulsa, OK 74104, U.S.A.
John Montgomery
Affiliation:
Production Engineering Division, U.S. Army Missile Command, Redstone Arsenal, AL 35898, U.S.A.
John Rogers
Affiliation:
Center for Automation and Robotics, University of Alabama in Huntsville, Huntsville, AL 35899, U.S.A.
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An ongoing research effort is consolidating material and process knowledge in a critiquing system dealing with fuzzy criteria to aid designers in evaluating the incorporation of composite materials into their design. The extent of knowledge required to perform the task of evaluating composite processes and materials is often beyond the expertise of many design engineers as they lack understanding of the nature of composite material manufacturing. The system under development is known as the Composites Design and Manufacturing Critiquing System (CDMCS). The CDMCS critiques a submitted design through interaction with the user. An account of the strengths and weaknesses of the design is supplied to the user through the facilities. The current focus of the system is on process selection, but the system is generic so that other aspects of composite material manufacturing may be included. The system is implemented in Macintosh™ Common LISP. This article describes the features of the system that have been implemented. The system is currently being extended to cover more than the primary process component of the domain.

Keywords

Critiquing SystemsComposites Manufacturing

Information

Type
Articles
Information
AI EDAM , Volume 10 , Issue 1 , January 1996, pp. 65 - 79
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Blinn, J.M. (1977). Fuzzy sets in multiple criteria decision-making. In Multiple Criteria Decision Making, TIMS Studies in the Management Sciences (Starr, M.K., & Zeleny, M., Eds.), Vol. 6, pp. 129–146. North Holland Publishing, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Edwards, K.L., Abel, C.A., & Ashby, M.F. (1994). Optimal selection of composite materials in mechanical engineering design. In Computer Aided Design in Composite Material Technology IV (Blain, W.R., & Wilde, W.P., Eds.), pp. 85–91. Computational Mechanics Publications, Southampton, U.K.Google Scholar
Kosko, B. (1990). Fuzziness vs. probability. International Journal of General Systems 17(2–3), 211–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDowell, J.K., et al. , (1994). Expert systems for integrated material/part/process design in polymer composites. A task specific problem solving approach. In Computer Aided Design in Composite Material Technology IV (Blain, W.R., & Wilde, W.P., Eds.), pp. 103–108. Computational Mechanics Publications, Southampton, U.K.Google Scholar
Rao, K.P., et al. , (1990). An expert system approach for the design of composite laminates. Journal of the Indian Institute of Science 70, 231–248.Google Scholar
Rochowiak, D. (1988). Simple explanation and reasoning. Proc. AAAI’88 Workshop on Explanation, 95–98.Google Scholar
Rochowiak, D. (1990). Types of explanation and the looseness of knowledge. Proc. AAAI’90 Workshop on Explanation, 172–177.Google Scholar
Sarin, R.K. (1977). Interactive evaluation and bound procedure for selecting multi-attribute alternatives. In Multiple Criteria Decision Making, TIMS Studies in the Management Sciences (Starr, M.K., & Zeleny, M., Eds.), Vol. 6, pp. 211–224. North Holland Publishing, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Stefik, M. (1981). Planning with constraints. Artificial Intelligence 16(2), 111–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sussman, G.J., & Steele, G.L. (1980). CONSTRAINTS: a language for expressing almost hierarchical descriptions. Artificial Intelligence 14(1), 32–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilkins, D.J., & Karbhari, V.M. (1991). Concurrent engineering for composites. International Journal of Materials and Production Technology 6, 34–38.Google Scholar
Zadeh, L.A. (1965). Fuzzy sets. Information and Control 8, 333–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zumsteg, J.R. et al. , (1985). A prototype expert system for the design and analysis of composite material structures. Proc. ASME International Computers in Engineering Conference, 137–143.Google Scholar