A.F. Pokhilko - Ph. D. (Eng.), Associate Professor, Professor, Department «Applied Mathematics and Informatics», Ulyanovsk State Technical University E-mail: Paf_54@mail.ru D.E. Tsygankov - Post-graduate Student, Department «Applied Mathematics and Informatics», Ulyanovsk State Technical University E-mail: d.tsyg@mail.ru

The present level of information technologies development in the design brings to the fore the design documentation provided in electronic form - 3D-models. At this point, the working documents introduced a huge number of different changes, which require timely changing the solutions obtained in the respective CAD-system. To account for all the changes need to permanently modify assembly 3D-model. The standard approach to assemblies modification - editing in the context of an assembly cannot be fully feasible, since the details are not correlated with each other and there is no possibility of establishing relations between the 3D-models of its parts. Thus, this approach violates the design solution integrity, and therefore cause the need to design solution restructure. As a solution to this problem, the approach to design decisions modifiability achieving on the level on 3D-assembly, based on the concept of assembly unit by multibody 3D-model. Representation assembly unit as a process made possible by the displacement from the level of decomposition of «3D-Assembly» level to the «3D-Detai» level. This is accompanied by two next critical transformation. Assembly model is considered as a multibody 3D-model of the detail that ensures the preservation of all the each of its components construction processes. Details - assembly components are be considered as separate solid-state 3D-objects in the context of a single detail that allows the associative connections between them. Thus, one file contains a complete components set to their construction process. This approach main advantage is to input «external» relationships between project procedures relating to the various parts, which allows for assembly unit full parameterization, which feature is the possibility of interference parameters component parts against each other. The consequence is not only to ensure the integrity of the design solutions, but also the ability to manage the results of the design at the highest level - assembly 3D-model.

 

1. Nosov K.G. Kognitivnyjj podkhod k resheniju zadach modelirovanija i proektirovanija v SAPR // Prikladnaja matematika i voprosy upravlenija. 2015. № 1. S. 73−85.
2. Poljakov JU.N. Kompleksy programm dlja sozdanija 3D geometricheskikh modelejj sudov na rannikh stadijakh proektirovanija // Sudostroenie. 2015. № 6. S. 9−11.
3. Cygankov D.EH., Pokhilko A.F. Predstavlenie processa proektirovanija na baze obobshhenija ehlementarnykh operacijj do urovnja semanticheskikh edinic // Avtomatizacija processov upravlenija. 2015. № 3. S. 81−88.
4. Evgenev G.B., Kokorev A.A., Pirimjashkin M.V. Metod generacii 3D modelejj v produkcionnykh bazakh znanijj // Izvestija VUZov. Ser. Mashinostroenie. 2015. № 4. S. 38−48.
5. Gorbachev I.V., Pokhilko A.F. Struktura formalnogo predstavlenija processa proektirovanija v funkcionalno adaptirovannojj SAPR // Infokommunikacionnye tekhnologii. 2010. T. 8. № 1. S. 75−78.
6. Vasilev K.K., Krasheninnikov V.R. Statisticheskijj analiz izobrazhenijj. Uljanovsk: UlGTU. 2014. 214 s.
7. Pokhilko A.F., Cygankov D.EH. Predstavlenie processa proektnojj dejatelnosti s ispolzovaniem semantiki procedurnogo modelirovanija // Radiotekhnika. 2015. № 6. S. 79−82.
8. Cygankov D.EH., Gorbachjov I.V., Pokhilko A.F. Infologicheskoe opisanie sborochnojj 3D-modeli na osnove procedurnogo predstavlenija tverdotelnykh komponent // Izvestija Samarskogo nauchnogo centra RAN. 2014. T. 16. № 6. S. 629−632.