Method and system for representation-agnostic composition of hybrid manufacturing services

Patent metadata

Field	Value
Publication number	US-11650578-B2
Application number	US-202117397499-A
Country	US
Kind code	B2
Filing date	Aug 9, 2021
Priority date	Aug 9, 2021
Publication date	May 16, 2023
Grant date	May 16, 2023

Abstract

Two or more computational services are defined that each represent a respective different manufacturing capability used to partially create a target part model. A common space shared among the computational services is defined to reference the target part model and manufacturing primitives corresponding to each capability. The computational services are queried to construct a logical representation of the planning space based on intersections among the primitives. One or more process plans are formed using the different manufacturing capabilities to manufacture the part.

First claim

The invention claimed is:

1. A system, comprising:
two or more computational services that each represent a respective different manufacturing capability used to partially create a target part model of a part, each of the two or more computational services responding to queries on manufacturing primitives, the manufacturing primitives representing additive or subtractive region of influence within a space of the target part model; and
an orchestrator operational on a computer and configured to:
define a common space shared among the computational services to reference the target part model and the manufacturing primitives corresponding to each capability;
submit the queries to the computational services and use responses to the queries to construct a logical representation of a planning space based on intersections among the manufacturing primitives that satisfy a manufacturability test; and
form one or more process plans using the different manufacturing capabilities to manufacture the part according to the planning space.

2. The system of claim 1 , wherein the orchestrator additionally queries or computes quantitative measures of the intersections and cost factors to determine cost-effective or optimal process plans to manufacture the part.

3. The system of claim 1 , wherein the two or more computational services determine the intersections based on delegation by the orchestrator.

4. The system of claim 3 , wherein the target part model additionally comprises requirements for material properties and the orchestrator queries the computational services for material properties associated with intersection regions.

5. The system of claim 1 , wherein the intersections are implicitly computed by the orchestrator by sampling the common space and applying pointwise conjunctions to membership classification queries at sampled coordinates.

6. The system of claim 5 , wherein the target part model additionally comprises requirements for material properties and the orchestrator queries the computational services for material properties associated with intersection regions or probes the sampled coordinates for the material properties.

7. The system of claim 1 , wherein the orchestrator is further configured to query the two or more computational services to determine support for pairwise intersection queries, and in response to a queried service supporting the pairwise intersection queries, the queried service provides yes/no answers to whether shapes intersect in a common space, otherwise the orchestrator submits point membership classification queries to the queried service.

8. The system of claim 1 , wherein forming the process plan comprises forming a truth table that encodes an inclusion or exclusion of each of the primitives, entries of the truth table obtained as groups of queried points with identical point membership classification responses across all of the computational services or directly from pairwise intersection queries on the computational services.

9. The system of claim 1 , wherein forming the process plan comprises encoding a disjunctive normal form in which canonical intersection terms are included or excluded in an as-manufactured shape from some combination of additive manufacturing and subtractive manufacturing actions such that the as-manufactured shape is interchangeable with the target part model.

10. The system of claim 1 , wherein forming the process plan comprises encoding a conjunctive normal form of partial ordering constraints on the order of appearance of additive manufacturing and subtractive manufacturing actions in the process plan that can generate an as-manufactured shape interchangeable with the target part model.

11. A method, comprising:
defining two or more computational services that each represent a respective different manufacturing capability used to partially create a target part model of a part, each of the two or more computational services responding to queries on manufacturing primitives, the manufacturing primitives representing additive or subtractive region of influence within a space of the target part model;
defining a common space shared among the computational services to reference the target part model and the manufacturing primitives corresponding to each capability;
submitting the queries to the computational services and using responses to the queries to construct a logical representation of a planning space based on intersections among the manufacturing primitives that satisfy a manufacturability test; and
forming one or more process plans using the different manufacturing capabilities to manufacture the part according to the planning space.

12. The method of claim 11 , further comprising additionally querying or computing quantitative measures of the intersections and cost factors to determine cost-effective or optimal process plans to manufacture the part.

13. The method of claim 11 , wherein the two or more computational services determine the intersections.

14. The method of claim 13 wherein the target part model additionally comprises requirements for material properties, the method further comprising querying the computational services for material properties associated with intersection regions.

15. The method of claim 11 , wherein the intersections are implicitly computed by sampling the common space and applying pointwise conjunctions to membership classification queries at sampled coordinates.

16. The method of claim 15 , wherein the target part model additionally comprises requirements for material properties, the method further comprising querying the computational services for material properties associated with intersection regions or probing the sampled coordinates for the material properties.

17. The method of claim 11 , further comprising querying the two or more computational services to determine support for pairwise intersection queries, and in response to a queried service supporting the pairwise intersection queries, receiving from the queried service yes/no answers to whether shapes intersect in a common space, otherwise submitting point membership classification queries to the queried service.

18. The method of claim 11 , wherein forming the process plan comprises forming a truth table that encodes an inclusion or exclusion of each of the primitives, entries of the truth table obtained as groups of queried points with identical point membership classification responses across all of the computational services or directly from pairwise intersection queries on the computational services.

19. The method of claim 11 , wherein forming the process plan comprises encoding a disjunctive normal form in which canonical intersection terms are included or excluded in an as-manufactured shape from some combination of additive manufacturing and subtractive manufacturing actions such that the as-manufactured shape is interchangeable with the target part model.

20. The method of claim 11 , wherein forming the process plan comprises encoding a conjunctive normal form of partial ordering constraints on the order of appearance of additive manufacturing and subtractive manufacturing actions in the process plan that can generate an as-manufactured shape interchangeable with the target part model.

Assignees

• Palo Alto Res Ct Inc

Inventors

• Behandish Morad
• Nelaturi Saigopal

Classifications

• G05B19/4183

  characterised by data acquisition, e.g. workpiece identification · CPC title

• G06F30/20 Primary

  Design optimisation, verification or simulation (optimisation, verification or simulation of circuit designs G06F30/30) · CPC title

• G06F2113/10

  Additive manufacturing, e.g. three-dimensional [3D] printing · CPC title

• G05B19/41885

  characterised by modeling, simulation of the manufacturing system · CPC title

• G05B19/4188 Primary

  characterised by CIM planning or realisation · CPC title