model driven product realization - diva portal747228/fulltext01.pdf · model driven product...

MODEL DRIVEN PRODUCT REALIZATION

A holistic demonstration of model driven product development

ARJUN KASA NARASIMHA MURTHY

Master of science thesis Stockholm, Sweden 2014

A

Abstract

Model driven product realization is an emerging methodology in industrial scenario. It focuses on using 3D models in various formats to design, manufacture and inspect a product. The benefits of this methodology are improved cross functional interoperability, reliable modeling and simulation, optimized design decision making, improved performance predictability, strengthened collaborative environment and shortened development time. Currently the prominence of 2D drawings and its usage is still prevalent in the industries which results in under‐utilization of the presently available CAx systems leading to diminished productivity.

This thesis is aimed to demonstrate the capabilities and impact of model driven approach to formulate an efficient product development methodology in a real industry scenario. For achieving the intent a prototype product is considered which is used in suspension system of the research concept vehicle developed by KTH transport labs. The scope includes the industrialization of the prototype resulting in new/final design, process plan, operation plan inspection plan and eventually a manufactured part using annotated 3D models at all stages. It also showcases the process and product feedback methodologies possible by this approach.

The foundations for this demonstration are ISO 10303 standard and STEP (standard for the exchange of product model data) application protocols. These define the computer interpretable representation and exchange of product manufacturing information across various domains. There have been considerable advancements in these standards in recent years but a standard way of approaching the model driven product development does not exist. Hence this demonstration enables as a stepping stone for implementation of this approach in real world.

Keywords: 3D models, ISO 10303, STEP, CAx

B

Acknowledgements

Pursuing Master’s degree abroad was like a dream come true for me and especially my parents. Reeling up the entire journey of two years at this final juncture I am grateful to them for providing me with all the best opportunities in life along with immense love and care.

My friends and colleagues have always been a great deal of support and were a pseudo family so far away from home. Recalling every moment of hardship, fun and cordialness, the path till now would have been difficult and void without them.

Acquiring new skill set and knowledge is a commendable experience and when it is imparted through a group of learned, experienced, talented and friendly teachers it turns out to be a lifetime achievement. On this note I respectfully thank all my teachers, lecturers and professors who never stepped back in providing me unbiased guidance and support.

Master thesis marks the end semester of the degree but begins the period of self‐exploration and challenge which tests the limits of our knowledge, patience, determination and passion. The experience of working on this thesis is an amalgamation of emotions which would have not been possible if Thomas Lundholm did not provide me the opportunity. Thank you Thomas for your belief in me and for all the support, suggestions and advice you provided me all through the thesis and never forgetting to smile.

At the point of my struggle in the thesis, I was pushed forward with confidence by Magnus Lundgren. He has been more than a supervisor to me and helped me in every step of my thesis relentlessly spending his valuable time to see through that I achieve my goals. His constant presence and humbleness to share the vast practical knowledge has given me immense motivation. Even though I cannot express my gratitude in words, I genuinely thank Magnus for all his time, effort, patience, light heartedness and guidance.

I also humbly thank Mikael Hedlind, Yuijang Li and Gunilla Sivard for providing me insight and support to complete the thesis.

Lastly I would sincerely thank KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm and XPRES for providing me this great opportunity and adding value to my professional life.

Thank you almighty for everything that begins and end with you.

Tableofcontents

2

ABSTRACT A

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS B

LIST OF FIGURES I

LIST OF TABLES III

LIST OF ACRONYMS IV

INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 BACKGROUND 1 1.2 THESIS OUTLINE 3 1.3 RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESIS 3

FRAME OF REFERENCE 5

2.1 MODEL BASED ENTERPRISE 5 2.2 MODEL BASED DEFINITION 8 2.3 PRODUCT LIFE‐CYCLE MANAGEMENT 9 2.4 CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT 10 2.5 PRODUCT MANUFACTURING INFORMATION 10 2.6 MODEL BASED ANNOTATION 11 2.7 ENGINEERING TOLERANCES AND GD&T 11 2.8 MBE 3D MODELS 13 2.9 FUNDAMENTALS OF PRODUCT REALIZATION AND PROCESS PLANNING 13 2.10 STEP‐NC 15 2.11 STEP APPLICATION PROTOCOLS 17 2.12 MODEL BASED SYSTEM ENGINEERING 19 2.13 MODEL QUALITY 20 2.14 TECHNICAL DATA PACKAGE 21 2.15 MODEL DATA INTERPRETATION 21 2.16 MODEL DATA RETENTION 21

METHOD 23

3.1 PRODUCT DESIGN 26 3.1.1 AXIS OR MEDIAN FEATURE 32 3.1.2 PROJECTED TOLERANCE ZONE 32 3.1.3 TOLERANCE ZONE BETWEEN TWO POINTS 33

3.1.4 UNILATERAL AND UNEQUAL PROFILE TOLERANCE 33 3.1.5 DIRECTION OF TOLERANCE ZONES 34 3.2 PROCESS PLANNING OR PRODUCTION DESIGN 37 3.2.1 SETUP 1 39 3.2.2 SETUP 2 41 3.2.3 SETUP 3 42 3.2.4 SETUP 4 44 3.2.5 SETUP 5 46 3.2.6 SETUP 6 49 3.3 VERIFICATION 51 3.3.1 DETAILED DISCUSSION ABOUT THE DATA AVAILABLE IN STEP‐NC FOR INSPECTION AND VERIFICATION 56

RESULTS 60

4.1 UPRIGHT MANUFACTURING 60

CONCLUSION 64

FUTURE WORK 67

BIBLIOGRAPHY 69

APPENDIX 71

I

Listoffigures

Figure 1 Research methodology ............................................................................................................ 4

Figure 2 MBE areas ................................................................................................................................ 6

Figure 3 MBE architecture ..................................................................................................................... 7

Figure 4 MBE functions and data flow (Simon P. Frechette and Manufacturing system Integration division, 2011) ........................................................................................................................................ 8

Figure 5 MBD development cycle ........................................................................................................... 9

Figure 6 Production system development (Lundgren, 2012) .............................................................. 14

Figure 7 Process model (International standards organizaiton, 2008) ............................................... 15

Figure 8 The STEP‐NC infromation model (Loffredo, et al., u.d.) ........................................................ 16

Figure 9 Comparision between standard and STEP :Design to manufacturing data pipelines (Loffredo, et al., u.d.) ........................................................................................................................... 18

Figure 10 Role of Applicaiton protocols in an enterprise (Loffredo, et al., u.d.) ................................. 19

Figure 11 Model quality assurance cycle ............................................................................................. 20

Figure 12 Thesis method framework ................................................................................................... 23

Figure 13 MBE implementation capability levels (Anon., u.d.) ........................................................... 24

Figure 14 Research concept vehicle .................................................................................................... 25

Figure 15 Upright design improvements ............................................................................................. 26

Figure 16 Prototype 2D drawings ........................................................................................................ 29

Figure 17 Siemens NX PMI ................................................................................................................... 29

Figure 18 Annotated view of the upright ............................................................................................ 30

Figure 19 Difference in 2D and 3D tolerance representations ............................................................ 32

Figure 20 .............................................................................................................................................. 32

Figure 21 .............................................................................................................................................. 33

Figure 22 .............................................................................................................................................. 33

Figure 23 Unequal profile tolerance .................................................................................................... 33

Figure 24 Unilateral profile tolerance .................................................................................................. 33

Figure 25 Intersection plane indicators ............................................................................................... 34

Figure 26 Orientation plane indicators ................................................................................................ 34

Figure 27 3D annotated upright CAD model ....................................................................................... 35

Figure 28 (Quintana, et al., 2010) ........................................................................................................ 36

Figure 29 Role of process planner (Bagge, 2014) ................................................................................ 37

II

Figure 30 Elements of process planning (Lundgren, 2013) ................................................................. 38

Figure 31 Setup 1 toolpath .................................................................................................................. 40






Figure 37 Vector based control codes (Hardwick, et al., 2012) ........................................................... 52

Figure 38 Vision based control (Hardwick, et al., 2012) ...................................................................... 52

Figure 39 .............................................................................................................................................. 53

Figure 40 .............................................................................................................................................. 53

Figure 41 .............................................................................................................................................. 54

Figure 42 .............................................................................................................................................. 54

Figure 43 3D model with annotation in STEP‐NC machine ................................................................. 56

Figure 44 Fixture and machine representation in STEP‐NC ................................................................. 57

Figure 45 Machine kinematics in STEP‐NC .......................................................................................... 57

Figure 46 STEP‐NC inspection .............................................................................................................. 58

Figure 47 Estimating process results using STEP‐NC (Hardwick, et al., 2012) ..................................... 59

Figure 48 Hermle C50 machining center ............................................................................................. 61

Figure 49 Raw material: aluminium block ........................................................................................... 61

Figure 50 Machining fixtures ............................................................................................................... 62

Figure 51 Setup 1 machining ............................................................................................................... 62

Figure 52 Setup 2 machining ............................................................................................................... 63

Figure 53 Setup 3 maching................................................................................................................... 63

Figure 54 Difference between model driven product realizaiton and conventional methods (Hedlind, 2013) .................................................................................................................................... 65

III

Listoftables

Table 1 List of Application protocols ................................................................................................... 17

Table 2 Level 6 :Model based enterprise (Anon., u.d.) ........................................................................ 24

Table 3 CAD application requirements ................................................................................................ 27

Table 4 Setup 1 specificaitons .............................................................................................................. 40

Table 5 Setup 2 specificaitons .............................................................................................................. 41

Table 6 Setup 3 operation list .............................................................................................................. 43




Table 10 History of STEP‐NC (Hardwick, et al., 2012) .......................................................................... 55

IV

Listofacronyms AP‐Application protocol ....................................................................................................................... 17

CAD‐Computer aided drawing ............................................................................................................... 2

CAM‐Computer aided manufacturing ................................................................................................... 2

CAPP‐Computer aided process planning ............................................................................................. 38

CM‐Configuration management .......................................................................................................... 10

CMM‐Coordinate measuring machine ................................................................................................ 59

CMM‐Coordinate‐measuring machine ................................................................................................ 11

DFMEA‐ Design failure mode and effect analysis ................................................................................ 31

DPD‐Digital product definition ............................................................................................................... 8

ERP‐Enterprise resource planning ......................................................................................................... 1

GD&T‐Geometric dimensioning and tolerancing .................................................................................. 8

GPS‐ Geometrical product specifications ............................................................................................ 11

IGES‐Initial graphics exchange specification ........................................................................................ 15

INCOSE‐International council of systems engineering ........................................................................ 19

ISO‐International organization for standards ...................................................................................... 15

MBD‐Model based definition ................................................................................................................ 8

MBE‐Model based enterprise ................................................................................................................ 5

MBSE‐ Model based system engineering ............................................................................................ 19

NIST‐National institute of standards and technology ........................................................................... 5

OMG‐Object management group ........................................................................................................ 19

PLM‐Product life‐cycle management..................................................................................................... 1

PMI‐Product manufacturing information .............................................................................................. 1

RCV‐Research concept vehicle ............................................................................................................. 25

RPN‐Risk priority number .................................................................................................................... 31

STEP‐NC ................................................................................................................................................ 15

TDP‐Technical data package .................................................................................................................. 9

XMI‐XML metadata interchange .......................................................................................................... 19

Model driven product realization

1 | P a g e

Chapter1.

Introduction

The only person who is educated is the one who has learned how to learn and change ‐Carl Rogers

1.1 BackgroundIn the age of digital factories and networked manufacturing, computer aided systems play a vital role in achieving predetermined goals. Technological advances in manufacturing methods and its related technologies are creating constant demand for integrated production with virtually no boundaries between these various systems.

Technology and supporting infrastructure are the engines of economic growth (Simon P. Frechette and Manufacturing system Integration division, 2011).It is impossible for a single vendor or company to provide next‐generation software tools compatible with each other .Hence global companies like GE and Intel are working towards implementing intelligent manufacturing systems focusing on high level interoperability and seamless exchange of data. A conventional factory has many layers of functions working in synchronous towards common goals like good quality, low cost and on‐time delivery. An immense array of information flow and exchange is required between the functions to successfully achieve these goals. In order to enable the data exchange ERP‐enterprise resource planning and PLM‐product life‐cycle management are used, but these are not capable of accessing multiple on‐line software systems due to several data formats and schema developed by different software vendors. The only means of communicating PMI‐product manufacturing information to drive manufacturing process was through conventional 2D drawings either in digital format or as a document.

The practice of using 2D drawings to design, manufacture and inspect a product is followed since the advent of industries. Even though comprehensive standards and expertise exist, the usages of these drawings have inherent disadvantages which cannot be overlooked when compared to currently available technologies. Some of the limitations of using a 2D drawing are as follows,


2 | P a g e

Difficulty in visualization

Limited ability to test form, fit and function

Requires training to read/interpret

Difficult to convey intricate PMI, time consuming to produce and error prone

A model generally is an approximation or representation of a real world process, concept or system. In the context of the thesis will be 3D digital CAD, CAM or CAE system models generated using software capable of producing system neutral files that can be exchanged, read, translated and edited on each of these platforms.

The advent of computer aided systems changed the way we design and interact with PMI. Invention of the 3D CAD‐computer aided drawing or CAM‐computer aided manufacturing is attributed to a French engineer, Pierre Bezier (Arts et Metiers ParisTech, Renault).

The mathematical work concerning surfaces, he developed called UNISURF, between 1966 and 1968, to ease the design of parts and tools for the automotive industry. Then, UNISURF became the working base for the following generations of CAD software (Bozdoc & Martian, 2003). Early CAD models were meant for human viewing, but eventually it evolved interpretable files by other engineering software applications. A wide range of standards interchangeable or neutral formats are available today to enable system‐system transfer of engineering data.

In the context of manufacturing, model drives production and quality activities. A model here is a container of nominal geometry and product manufacturing information which includes geometric dimensions/tolerances, material specifications, bill of materials, process specifications, inspection requirements and customer specific requirements.

The advantages of using models instead of 2D documents will be,

Comprehensive alternative for 2D drawings

Serves as a single authoritative source of product definition

Simplified visualization and interpretation

Better control of changes as there are fewer files to manage

Offers easy re‐usability, accessibility and changeability

Computer interpretability and data associativity are two factors providing models significant upper‐hand over drawing based engineering. The ease of software applications directly accessing models and its information results in fewer errors and reduces processing time. Data associativity is critical for model integrity. On the contrary it is very difficult to maintain this integrity. Tolerances, material properties, surface finish and other information must be associated with specific features in the model. Hence associativity is very important for interpretation of models by applications (Frechette, et al., 2011).

Process and product development are getting complex in today's scenario owing to factors, variables and collaborators involved in designing an optimized production system. In order to harness the benefits of model driven approach and to meet the pace of current industrial advancements we need to defined a standardized procedure to use interchangeable models in the process, product and concept development. Hence the aim of this thesis is to develop and demonstrate a standardized methodology of model driven product realization in an industrial scenario, supported by discussing its comprehensive benefits at each stage.


3 | P a g e

1.2 ThesisoutlineThe particular thesis is a result of current research undertaken jointly by XPRES which is a joint initiative between KTH, Mälardalens hogskola (MDH) and the Swerea research group and Scania.

Chapter1 introduces basic background, purpose, scope, delimitation; brief explanation of methodology and expected results. The research question arises from the current industry situation and developments. A possible direction to the solution is defined.

Chapter 2 defines a frame of reference for this thesis. This includes all the topics and references utilized to undertake the thesis and successfully arrive at results.

In chapter 3 we can read about the complete methodology and its development in detail. Model driven approach at each stage of product realization i.e. design, process planning, production and verification will be discussed.

Chapter 4 aims at verifying the methods by manufacturing a product using the developed methodology and explaining each step of the process.

Finally chapter 5 concentrates on conclusion and interpreting the results achieved by the thesis leading way to answer formulated research questions and to prove the hypothesis.

In the end, chapter 6 will focus on discussions about recommendations for future work and learning outcomes.

1.3 ResearchquestionsandhypothesisThe objective of the thesis can be explained in an orderly stepwise research questions. These questions will highlight the purpose, structure and importance of the thesis.

How does model driven product realization differ from conventional methods?

The initial research question basically emphasizes on the fundamentals of the thesis and its purpose. Model driven approach is a new concept wherein industries are slowly trying to understand its benefits and wide range functionality compared to existing methods of product and process development. Hence this question frames the foundation for the thesis and answering it comprehensively is very important to understand the need for this method in the industries.

What are the challenges involved in implementing model driven product realization?

Even with multi‐faceted benefits, implementing a new concept in place of a well‐established method will be with certain challenges. Discussing and proposing a procedure to overcome these challenges will provide an overview of practical aspects of the thesis concept.

How can model driven approach be implemented?

This research question is the core of the thesis and focuses on discussed method and demonstration to showcase its implementation. A real life product is chosen for the demonstration to replicate industrial scenario. The product is a suspension upright belonging to the research concept vehicle developed by KTH transport labs. Explaining in detail the development and utilization of models at each stage of design, process planning, production and inspection of this product will simultaneously answer this research question.


4 | P a g e

What are the benefits of model driven product realization?

To conclude the thesis the final research question will be to discuss the benefits of the model driven product and process development. The benefits should consider previous research questions and the industry requirements. It should also include a brief mention of the demerits of this approach to highlight the practical aspects.

These research questions state the general issues with this approach, and lead to the hypothesis to be tested:

“Implementation of model driven product realization will simplify, improve and optimize the product/process development in a manufacturing industry with long term impacts”.

Figure 1 Research methodology

Research questions and hypothesis

Frame of reference

Research method and results

Verification of results


5 | P a g e

Chapter2.

Frameofreference

Education is learning what you didn’t even know you didn’t know ‐Daniel J. Boorstin

Implementation of model driven product realization in general requires sound knowledge of certain topics and concepts without which it is difficult to understand the technicalities involved. The thesis is supported by many references including technical papers, Internet articles, PHD theses and conference proceedings. The concept as such is very popular with manufacturing industries presently and has drawn immense interest by many international organizations around the world. One of the prominent institutes working closely with model driven approach is NIST‐national institute of standards and technology.

Hence in this section a confined frame of these references are discussed in detail to define a boundary for the master thesis. The methodology discussed in chapter 3 can be directly related and deduced from these concepts.

2.1 ModelbasedenterpriseMBE‐model based enterprise is a new terminology for collective concepts that were developed in recent years. It is part of the progressive approach of integrated product realization, concurrent engineering and digital product life‐cycle management developed in 1990's. Implementing model based definition on enterprise levels can be viewed as MBE.

Model based enterprise is an organization that utilizes modeling/ simulation technologies to drastically improve, seamlessly integrate, and strategically manage all of its technical and business processes related to design, manufacturing, and product support. It is possible to optimize product innovation, development, manufacture and support by utilizing product/process models to define, execute, control and manage all enterprise processes to make the best decisions at every step of


6 | P a g e

the product life‐cycle (Next‐generation manufacturing technology initiative, 2005). MBE adaption can be defined over three broad functional areas,

Product realization and support

Resource management

Strategic management

Hence the functional model of MBE can be represented as below

Figure 2 MBE areas

To achieve MBE and organizational behaviour transformation, four elements are needed (Frechette, et al., 2011)

Empowerment of leaders at all levels

Adaptation to changing roles and responsibilities

Trust and encouragement

Active pursuit of conflict resolution

In a model based manufacturing enterprise fully annotated 3D master product models are used to facilitate product realization and each of the sub‐functions contribute in developing models and pushing them through the system. This can be visualized by MBE architecture diagram in Figure 3, where 3D model respiratory forms the core of the architecture and different functions play a vital role in exchanging these models to achieve optimized results in product realization process. The objective of MBE is to enable integration of all enterprise functions, enduring that they work together as a single seamless unit and everybody has immediate access to any information required.


7 | P a g e

Figure 3 MBE architecture

ModelsProduct/

process

Enterprise resource planning

Materirals resource planning

Product & process

development

Production & assembly

Quality inspection

Analysis & simulation

Technical documents

Customer support


8 | P a g e

Figure 4 MBE functions and data flow (Simon P. Frechette and Manufacturing system Integration division,

2011)

2.2 ModelbaseddefinitionMBD‐model based definition also known as DPD‐Digital product definition is using 3D models with PMI and associated meta‐data within 3D CAD software to define or provide specifications for individual components and product assemblies. The types of information included in a 3D model are GD&T‐geometric dimensioning and tolerancing, component level material specification, assembly level bill of materials, engineering configurations, design intent among others Hence it includes basically all the information required to define and manufacture a product. In contrast other methodologies have historically required accompanying use of 2D engineering drawings to provide such details to manufacturing processes (fcsuper, 2010).

MBD is being swiftly adopted by all sectors of the industries as the starting point towards a model based enterprise. The latest development in computer aided systems make it possible to inserting relevant associative 3D data for product design, development, manufacturing and inspections directly into the solid model, eliminating the need for drawings. The ease of creating multiple 3D models detailed and annotated for specific downstream groups is the essence of MBD.


9 | P a g e

3D design is the starting point of MBD enabling users to use 2D layout to work in a 3D environment with advanced 2D drafting capabilities during the conceptual phase of a project. For easy 3D geometry creation and to eliminate the need for it to be recreated in a downstream process, 2D geometry can be exported as profiles or planes and dimensions/tolerances annotations data can be added during the preliminary phase. The resulting 3D Master can be seamlessly shared with people across the value chain by providing free or inexpensive lightweight viewing applications which are available nowadays. This will introduce a virtual environment where digital communities and teams can meet in a real‐time to discuss and collaborate on any aspect of a product related program. The environment facilitates improved decision‐making by providing early and direct insight into dimensioning and tolerancing annotations, geometrical elements and features, and the relationships between elements (systems, 2013). The interactions in the virtual environment is a closed loop cycle where feedback from each function is used to improve and update the 3D master,

Figure 5 MBD development cycle

2.3 Productlife‐cyclemanagementManaging product related data and information throughout its life‐cycle i.e. from inception to disposal and sustainment is known as product life‐cycle management. Tracking the changes, improvements and updates in the product and its related information is very important for understanding its behaviour and to verify whether the functioning of product is as per requirements. PLM serves as the backbone for companies and their extended enterprises by integrating people, data, processes and business systems (guide, u.d.).

The core of model based enterprise (MBE) is product lifecycle management. This process is one of the key enablers of reuse of the data by all its users throughout its life‐cycle (Anon., u.d.).

PLM not only maintains configuration of the product data, but also all of its product structure. Product structure in its simplest form is nothing more than the CAD model or design document. A PLM system would then allow users a secure access to it.

One of the difficulties with use of a product lifecycle management is the transfer of the TDP‐technical data package from design department to downstream processes. The traditional method does not allow for the intelligent delivery of the product structure and all of its relationships (Anon., u.d.).

Conceptual design

Detailed designReview of design

Manufacturing Verification

3D Master


10 | P a g e

Model driven approach facilitates easy and effective way to convey 3D TDP and also provides extensive guidance to organize the annotated models. It also provides methodology to verify the quality of the data being received.

Hence model‐based definition new strategy of product lifecycle management (PLM) based on CAD models consisting of comprehensive sources of information for the overall product lifecycle. With MBD, product related data are structured inside native CAD models, instead of being scattered in different forms through the PLM database. Through next generation PLM software based on MBD, we aim to achieve the following

Suppression of redundant documents and drawings

Improved data consistency, better product/process virtualization

Better support for all computer‐aided technologies tasks under engineering and manufacturing disciplines

Organizations require a common approach to structure data in reusable, unified forms inside native three‐dimensional CAD models (Springer‐Verlag, 2011). For this reason, this thesis work has been developed by focusing the attention on a method for supporting the MBD implementation by the use of life‐cycle in a PLM system.

2.4 ConfigurationmanagementCM‐Configuration management is ensuring that a product's performance, functional and physical attributes consistently matches with its requirements, design and operational information throughout its life‐cycle (ANSI, 2011). Managing the data defining a product beyond simply controlling changes and revisions is an important aspect.

Configuration management is a key driver of quality assurance throughout the lifecycle of a product by managing and controlling everything that is being developed and produced. It has an impact on all activities from product development, engineering and manufacturing, through to project, programme and quality management. It is about understanding every aspect of a product and its development method. New product developments cannot begin until configuration management has documented and approved the development plan (Airbus, u.d.).

Tractability of product data is very important when a product is still in development yet multiple groups are making decisions based upon copies of that data. Compared to traditional CM of a drawing based product, it is even more difficult in a model based enterprise. In MBE there are many more data elements when compared to a drawing counterpart. The relationships between these elements must also be managed and are quite complex as there are many derivative models such as STEP, JT and PRC of each model that must be managed. Hence a PLM tool is needed in support of configuration management in a model based enterprise (Anon., u.d.).

2.5 ProductmanufacturinginformationCapturing and conveying information required for manufacturing a product as per specifications defined by the customers or designer is an integral part of product development and manufacturing process. The combination of all this information is known as PMI‐product manufacturing information. It is mainly non‐geometric attributes in 3D computer‐aided design and collaborative product development systems necessary for manufacturing product components or subsystems.


11 | P a g e

PMI may include geometric dimensions and tolerances, 3D annotation (text) and dimensions, surface finish, and material specifications (Siemens, 2007).

PMI is an integral part of creating 3D MBD. Industry standards for defining PMI include ASME Y14.41‐2003 Digital product data definition practices and ISO 1101:2004 GPS‐ geometrical product specifications ‐‐ geometrical tolerancing—tolerances of form, orientation, location and run‐out and ISO 16792:2006 (ISO, 2007). The ISO 10303 STEP standards also handle a wide range of PMI information.

The PMI annotation on the 3D CAD model is created in association to edges and faces, which can be exported into many neutral formats such as ISO 10303 STEP(In case of this thesis). This information can then be seamlessly used by a number of down‐stream processes. The PMI used to create annotations on a traditional 2D drawing can be visualized within the 3D model by other departments, either in the CAD/CAM system or in a 3D Product visualization tool, thus reducing the need for drawings leading to the concept of ‘drawing on demand’. Some 3D model formats enable computer‐aided manufacturing software to access PMI directly for CNC programming. The PMI also may be used by tolerance analysis and CMM‐coordinate measuring machine software applications if the modeling application permits (Nihon Unisys, u.d.).

PMI items can be organized in different views in 3D CAD software known as PMI Views. It may include orthographic, ISO or diametric views and also the particular state of the assembly (visibility, rendering mode, sometime even position of each element of the assembly) on which relevant PMI is created or related to features visible in these views.

2.6 ModelbasedannotationAnnotations are a type of PMI in the 3D models which include semantic text entity created to store model information without geometry. Annotations are used to provide complete product definition, both in dimensional forms and note forms. These include information about material specification, surface parameters, critical dimensions, designer’s notes, clamping and fixture points or any relevant information other than dimensions that is useful to downstream processes

Annotation elements and features allow the user to define dimensions and supporting data in 3D space. They can be parametric and will rotate with the model, can exist independently within the model, or be included in a feature. Each annotation data type should be placed on an appropriate layer and orientation plane corresponding to the view it represents (US Department of defence, 2004).Utilizing these 3D annotated models all the required manufacturing information can be circulated effectively without any loss of data and misinterpretations.

2.7 EngineeringtolerancesandGD&TEngineering tolerances in general are allowable level of variation or deviation from desired values. Dimensions, properties, or conditions may vary within certain practical limits without significantly affecting functioning of product; hence tolerances are specified to allow reasonable margin for imperfections and inherent variability without compromising its performance.

Tolerances are assigned to parts for compensating deviations in manufacturing processes. It is practically impossible for machines to hold dimensions precisely to the nominal value, so there must be acceptable degrees of variation. A manufactured part is said to be out of tolerance if any of its measured dimension does not lie in the tolerance limits and it is not a usable part according to


12 | P a g e

the design intent. Tolerances can be applied to any dimension and product based on ISO 1101:2012(geometric product specification) or ASME Y14.5M‐1994 standards.

GD&T serves as a system for defining and communicating engineering tolerances through standardized symbols on engineering drawings or 3D CAD solid models. In case of model based definition the tolerances and GD&T can be directly related to 3D CAD models forming a MBD dataset. The ASME 14.41 standard provides the first comprehensive standard for annotating 3D models with GD&T with the objective of viewing the content in 3D (Zeid, 2006).This standard provides rules for display, orientation and annotating methods when they are stored in a 3D model instead of 2D drawings. To support this concept few CAD software nowadays provides 3D annotation tools and I will be using Siemens NX 8TM for this purpose.

The advantage of using 3D tolerances and GD&T are synonymous to the explanations in Chapter 1 and in previous sections, in addition with 3D MBD datasets the requirement for technical expertise to understand designs and drawings is not required since it provides a realistic view of designs (Miller, 2005). The user of the 3D model can easily understand the geometry and associated GD&T data by manipulating i.e. translating, rotating or zoom the model (Carvajal, 2005). MBD datasets can provide information that is discreetly contained in the model, hence the model can be analysed further by downstream processes to extract additional information regarding to dimensions and specifications. Also inspection process can use these 3D GD&T information attached in the model to develop automated inspection plans or CMM programs with the help of mode‐based inspection software that has been developed over recent years.


13 | P a g e

2.8 MBE3DmodelsA digital representation of a product which is developed virtually in 3D space and semantically includes related PMI, annotations, tolerances and GD&T is known as 3D models. They can be CAD, CAM, CAE or inspection models either developed individually by each cross‐function or synchronously working with same model, populating relevant information in it at each stage.

3D models are characterized by enabling rapid prototyping, better CNC manufacturing methods, improved verification and shortened time to market.

2.9 FundamentalsofproductrealizationandprocessplanningProcess planning is considered to be a vital link between design and manufacturing which consists of preparing a set of instructions that describe the fabrication or assembly methods which will satisfy the engineering design specifications. The instructions generated by a process plan may consist in the following, but not limited to these:

Operations and its sequence

Machine tools

Materials

Manufacturing tolerances and inspection criteria

Work instruction or notes

Cutting parameters and process information

Fixtures and setup information

Representations of in process work piece shapes

Process planning can be initiated based on the needs from product development, manufacturing, quality or continuous improvements. As process plan should be developed in line with the existing factory or manufacturing setup, the main drivers of it will be product and resources (machine tools, cutting tools, fixtures, etc.). Hence process planning is part of production system development where it interacts with factory design, resource management and continuous improvement activities populating or accessing same set of data from a common database.


14 | P a g e

Figure 6 Production system development (Lundgren, 2012)

Product realization according to ISO 9001:2008 standards is the term used to describe the processes that an organization goes through to develop, manufacture, verify and deliver the a product. In concise it is a product development process used throughout the lifecycle of the product. Product realization process acts as a guide to product teams through project planning, tracking, design and verification, configuration management, validation and control (Stollerman, 1999). The process always begins with customer requirements with product realization team converting the input into a product and delivers it to customer. The supporting entities in an organization for product realization are resource management, top management, measurement, analysis and improvement departments. This can be represented in a process interaction model in Figure 7


15 | P a g e

Figure 7 Process model (International standards organizaiton, 2008)

The vision of this thesis and also the manufacturing industries for model based product realization will be to seamlessly integrate manufacturing and simulation tools enabling scattered teams to swiftly create product and process designs that achieve a balance of performance, cost, robustness of the product. The product model is considered as knowledge base that will control all processes across the product life‐cycle, capturing and sharing data to drive continuous improvement throughout the enterprise. The resulting model based knowledge base will support all aspects of maintenance, training and life‐cycle support (Next‐generation manufacturing technology initiative, 2005).

2.10 STEP‐NCSTEP‐NC (standard for the exchange of product model data‐Numerical control) is a new data standard for CNC machining that combines product and process information. STEP has been the result of constant effort by ISO‐International Organization for Standards since 1985 to develop a comprehensive standard for the electronic exchange of product data between computer aided product life‐cycle systems. ISO 10303 is the standard concerning STEP and its elements defining its scope which is broader compared to the existing CAD data exchange formats especially IGES‐initial graphics exchange specification. Developed in the United States the specification was primarily concerned to handle the exchange of pure geometric data between CAD systems, whereas STEP is intended for a much wider range of product‐related data covering entire life‐cycle of a product (Pratt, u.d.).


16 | P a g e

ISO 10303 covers wide variety of product types and life‐cycle stages, currently the overall standard is composed of 40 parts and hence the new version of standards ISO 14646 is divided into conformance classes as below (Loffredo, et al., u.d.)

1st conformance class: tool path interoperability

2nd conformance class: conditional programming constructs for closed loop programming

3rd conformance class: CAM process data that enables intersystem CAM data exchange

4th conformance class: CAD tolerance information that enables quality control applications on the CNC

The entities to be captured and exchanged using STEP and their relationships are defined in schemas written in an information modeling language called EXPRESS (Schenk & Wilson, 1994). The definitions of entities include rules that can be verified at translation to check certain aspects of semantic validity of the transferred instances. The outline of the STEP‐NC information model as n EXPRESS‐G diagram is as below,

Figure 8 The STEP‐NC infromation model (Loffredo, et al., u.d.)

The key advantage of STEP‐NC is that each operation in the part program is linked to all the other information by relationships shown in Figure 8. This enables the associativity principle of Model based product realization as now for any operation an application can find its tooling requirements, the parameters of its features, the geometry of the feature, the tolerances of the feature and any necessary strategy and technology information. Using this information, algorithms can be written to make CNC machines tool faster to execute and easier to operate (Loffredo, et al., u.d.).


17 | P a g e

2.11 STEPapplicationprotocolsThe implementable part of ISO 10303, which is the part defining models on which translators are based is knows as AP‐application protocol. They are applicable to one or more life‐cycle stages of a particular product class (Refer Table 1). AP’s in turn are constructed on the basis of a set of IR‐integrated resources that define the fundamental abstract constructs that can be specialized and applied for a wide variety of purposes and can accommodate different ways of looking at the same products through life cycle dependent product definitions (Pratt, u.d.).

These AP’s and IR’s form the product data architecture of STEP.

Table 1 List of Application protocols

Part Numbers Description of application protocols

Part 201 Explicit drafting

Part 202 Associative drafting

Part 203 Configuration controlled design

Part 204 Mechanical design using boundary representation

Part 205 Mechanical design using surface representation

Part 206 Mechanical design using wireframe representation

Part 207 Sheet metal dies and blocks

Part 208 Life cycle product change process

Part 209 Design through analysis of composite and metallic structures

Part 210 Electronic printed circuit assembly, design and manufacturing

Part 211 Electronics test diagnostics and remanufacture

Part 212 Electrotechnical plants

Part 213 Numerical control process plans for machined parts

Part 214 Core data for automotive mechanical design processes

Part 215 Ship arrangement

Part 216 Ship molded forms

Part 217 Ship piping

Part 218 Ship structures

Part 219 Dimensional inspection process planning for CMMs

Part 220 Printed circuit assembly manufacturing planning

Part 221 Functional data and schematic representation for process plans

Part 222 Design engineering to manufacturing for composite structures

Part 223 Exchange of design and manufacturing DPD for composites

Part 224 Mechanical product definition for process planning


18 | P a g e

Part 225 Structural building elements using explicit shape representation

Part 226 Shipbuilding mechanical systems

Part 227 Plant spatial configuration

Part 228 Building services

Part 229 Design and manufacturing information for forged parts

Part 230 Building structure frame steelwork

Part 231 Process engineering data

Part 232 Technical data packaging

Part 233 Systems engineering data representation

Part 234 Ship operational logs, records and messages

Part 235 Materials information for products

Part 236 Furniture product and project

Part 237 Computational fluid dynamics

Part 238 Integrated CNC machining

Part 239 Product life cycle support

Part 240 Process planning

Figure 9 shows the difference in data creation and transition in a traditional CNC control and the STEP‐NC method. In comparison with conventional method of data transfer between systems where old standards like IGES and RS‐274 D numerical controller standards are replaced with Application protocols like AP 203 e2, AP‐238 to seamlessly integrate these systems to work on one product or process model in neutral format and also to transfer relevant information without any loss of data or errors.

Figure 9 Comparision between standard and STEP :Design to manufacturing data pipelines (Loffredo, et al., u.d.)


19 | P a g e

2.12 ModelbasedsystemengineeringMBSE‐ model based system engineering is the formalized method of applying modeling to support system requirements, design, analysis, verification and validation activities from the beginning of conceptualization phase continuing throughout development and later life‐cycle phases. It can be generally viewed as systematically amalgamating system interfaces.

System modeling standards developed recently are having a significant impact on the application and use of MBSE. The OMG‐object management group systems modeling language (SysML) is a general purpose graphical modeling language for specifying, designing, analysing, and verifying complex systems that was adopted by the OMG in 2006 and is now widely implemented in MBSE support tools. SysML belongs to a broader family of standards being developed by the object management group which concentrates on XMI‐XML metadata Interchange hence enabling a means to interchange modeling information between tools using the XML format.

ISO 10303‐233 Application protocol for systems engineering (AP233) is a data exchange standard designed to support the exchange of systems engineering data between the many and varied SE tools. Data from systems modeling tools is included in the scope of AP233. OMG and ISO have been working together and in cooperation with the INCOSE‐international council of systems engineering’s model Driven Systems working group to align their specifications. Model and data interchange are essential to advancing the practice of MBSE to achieve the high level of integration

Figure 10 Role of Applicaiton protocols in an enterprise (Loffredo, et al., u.d.)


20 | P a g e

required among different modeling domains (Simon P. Frechette and Manufacturing system Integration division, 2011).

2.13 ModelqualityModels being very advantageous to use and build will create numerous problems, cause havoc in downstream processes and finally bring production process to halt if it contains errors or missing data. Errors in models are not easy to detect and faulty models can cause inefficiency, cost overruns and poor product quality.

Quality issues in models arise from a variety of contributing factors that include operator errors, model development techniques, CAD system errors and data translation errors. Also some designers lack the basic knowledge of process requirements and constraints leading to erroneous models as they don’t have an efficient way to validate models against the requirements to identify potential problems. Hence 3D models with quality problems cannot be certified as the master reference.

A combination of improved modeling techniques and better error detection is required to solve the problem of faulty models. 3D product models are very complex and contain multiple data entities and relationships. Hence data validation of 3D models is very challenging and by necessity should start at basic level of check lists used to validate drawings. As model quality assurance and validation is a laborious task, it should be automated by establishing data requirements, standards and deterministic metrics by certification authority as a measurable.

Advanced data analysis and validation techniques make MBE data quality certification feasible. Unfortunately there are currently no standard processes for data validation and ensuring that software application revisions maintain a consistent view of the certified data.

Figure 11 Model quality assurance cycle

Customer delivery

Full TDP review Semi automated

Derivative creation

Triggered validation Human approval

Product lifecycle management check‐in

Triggered validation Human approval

Design model creation

Concurrent validation Semi automated


21 | P a g e

2.14 TechnicaldatapackageA technical data package (TDP) is a collective term used for technical description of an item required to support a data acquisition strategy, production, engineering, and logistics support processes. The description ensures optimum product performance by defining the required design configuration or performance requirement and procedures. It basically consists of technical data such as models, drawings, associated lists, specifications, standards, and performance specifications (Department of Defense, u.d.).

The current state of TDP is the master data format for components and assemblies in 2D drawings and 3D models are currently used as reference. This leads to issues in adequate data transfer, confusions in data ownership/rights and insufficient information about the type of data formats to be used.

The advancements in the field of MBE have given rise to an opportunity to improve the state of TDP and its use. By progressing from 2D printed documents of conveying product definition to 3D models the full potential of TDP is achieved. The product descriptions in 3D models are not only archived in a digital product model but the information becomes reusable without manual re‐entry. This computer interpretable information enables high level automation that leads to both speed and accuracy of data manipulation. Reaping full benefits of 3D product definition achieved through MBE will enable steps required for fully effective use of TDP’s in appropriate order and timeliness (Frechette, et al., 2011).

2.15 ModeldatainterpretationModel data enterprise solves the problem of manual interpretation issues but increased reliance on digital product models presents a significant problem over time in‐terms of machine interpretation. Software products are updated frequently to include or extend its capabilities to match the user’s ever‐changing requirements, but the newer versions are not always compatible with models developed in older versions. Hence the revision of commercial software is not in control of user and the interpretation of models by revised applications can be varied. Moreover the user will be completely unaware.

Industries in collaboration with software vendors are trying to solve this issue, until which 3D CAD models are archived by converting them to 2D drawings and saving them as digital images. 2D digital image formats have advantages in terms of data viability over time when compared with native 3D CAD formats or even standard‐based 3D formats, with one downside of 3D digital images carry substantially less information than the original native 3D models (Simon P. Frechette and Manufacturing system Integration division, 2011).

2.16 Modeldataretention3D native models are easily accessible as long as the software applications used to create them are available. Hence archiving data, computer hardware, operating system and application software used to create model is very important to assure access to native models for long term. Initial pilot MBE implementations have demonstrated reduced costs and faster product delivery but having difficulty dealing with digital‐only records. This is because of longer product life‐cycles combined


22 | P a g e

with digital only records will require industry to create new and innovative methods to use and preserve MBE system data.

The average lifecycle of a product in a manufacturing industry is about 50 years which is significantly longer than the expected lifetimes of the design and manufacturing software applications used to create the data. To achieve the goal of full lifecycle support product data must be accessible even if the software used to create the data is no longer available or valid.

Complex product systems contain huge amounts of associated data including design, analysis, testing, materials, manufacturing, technical manuals, etc. The data types and the probable future use of the data must be considered when selecting an archive format because certain meta‐data is critical to support indexing and search capabilities of the data repository. The number of formats available to represent engineering data is very large. The major classes are: proprietary native formats, standards‐based neutral file format, and proprietary neutral file format. The selection of the product model data format is dependent on several variables. These include the type of data, the intended use of the data, the availability of translators, the projected duration of the program, and the maturity data definition specification. In general the longer the duration of the system, the more desirable formats are open, freely distributable standards. If the data definition is stored with the data, it is reasonable to expect the data could be recovered even in the 50+ year time frame. To maintain constant access to the data, the data can be translated continuously as new applications are installed, but this is a very expensive and resource‐intensive process. Many organizations choose to maintain the original application and computer platform. This method is effective, but the risk of equipment failure over time is high. Current data archiving methods include:

• Continuous migration of data in native format

• Original application and hardware preservation

• Standard formats, such as, ISO 10303, pdf, and standard image formats

• Widely supported proprietary formats

MBE data must be available for the entire product lifecycle. Data must be interpretable by applications that may be many generations separated from the applications that were used to create the data. To optimize data‐archiving costs, data should be archived in accordance with how it will be used in the future (Simon P. Frechette and Manufacturing system Integration division, 2011).


23 | P a g e

Chapter3.

Method

All our knowledge has its origins in our perceptions.

‐Leonardo da Vinci

Implementation of model based product realization is a step by step process involving following certain methodologies at each stage of the product development life‐cycle. Individual sections in this chapter will deal with explaining in detail the methods developed or used to achieve the goal. The framework for the thesis method can be illustrated as below,

Figure 12 Thesis method framework

Design

Process planning

Model driven

approach

Verification


24 | P a g e

Current industry standards have defined 6 capability levels of implementing model based enterprise; we have considered level 6 as a reference of implementation in the thesis.

Table 2 depicts the details,

Figure 13 MBE implementation capability levels (Anon., u.d.)

Table 2 Level 6 :Model based enterprise (Anon., u.d.)

Design data (CAD)

Technical data package

Change and configuration

‐ 2D Drawing creation and information content *Presents geometry and part annotations from the model. No information defined in 2D drawing ‐ 3D models creation and information content *Defines all part geometry and annotations ‐Model/Drawing associativity *No 2D drawing used ‐ Supplementary data(Notes, parameters, non‐ geometric data) *Notes are defined and controlled in a PLM system database ‐ Verification and model quality *3D model geometry and part annotations validated‐Semi automation using PLM based tools ‐ eBOM managed in PLM and linked to CAD models

‐ Automated collection of digital TDP data by PLM ‐ Automated digital delivery of TDP by PLM

‐ Model based release and change processes ‐ Element management by only 3D models ‐ Authority: 3D models


25 | P a g e

External and internal manufacturing data exchange

Quality requirements, planning and inspection

code generation

Enterprise collaboration and data exchange

‐ External and internal PLM access to native 3D CAD model for providing PMI data to manufacturing, inspection and any other groups. Also 3D light weight viewable and eBOM ‐ Process plans and work instructions are generated from native 3D CAD models ‐ Manufacturing code generation is associated to model and controlled within PLM system ‐ Manufacturing data management is through same PLM system as designed models and all manufacturing data is derived from models ‐ Manufacturing process associativity is fully to the design models

‐ Quality and inspection code generation using 3D design models to generate NC/CMM programs (Parallel process) ‐ Quality requirements data management is fully in PLM

‐ Design data provided to internal enterprise by providing user based access and will be segregated with respect to attribute data within the model ‐ Design data used by internal and external enterprise in the form of Native 3D CAD model, 3D external PLM access, lightweight viewable and eBOM. Access decided by type of relationship.

The product chosen for the demonstration is a suspension upright belonging to the RCV‐research concept vehicle developed by KTH transport labs. The particular component was chosen to depict the complexity involved in industrializing a prototype using model based product realization.

Figure 14 Research concept vehicle


26 | P a g e

3.1 ProductdesignThe initial design of the prototype upright was an assembly of 4 parts: upright body, upper joint, lower joint and steering arm which was designed by KTH transport labs. For the purpose of thesis demonstration and to instil the hypothetical situation of product industrialization the design of the upright was changed to be a monolith rather than an assembly. Figure 15 illustrates the design changes and are as listed below,

1. Assembly features such as bolt holes and location pin holes were eliminated from upright body, lower joint, upper joint and steering arm

2. Upper and lower joint were integrated with the upright body 3. Steering arm is integrated with lower joint and in turn with upright body 4. The radii on R17 were eliminated on one side of the upper and lower joint 5. The counterbore Φ 28 mm and depth 14 mm was eliminated at the bottom of both joints to

solve the issue of tool accessibility 6. The corner radii of R 15 for the joints were introduced to achieve machinability 7. The pocket on one side of the steering arm was eliminated for solving tool accessibility

issues 8. The fastening holes on the joints were modified from Φ 12mm through hole to M12

threaded holes and were extended by 14mm

All the design changes were implemented with due discussions and consent of KTH transport labs and rest of the dimensions/features were retained as per the earlier design.

Figure 15 Upright design improvements


27 | P a g e

Post implementing design changes the 3D CAD model was translated from Solid edge part file(.par) to UG part file (.prt) and suitable drafting environment was created in Siemens NX 8 CAD modeling software. The particular CAD drafting software application is chosen for annotating the model with 3D information, PMI, model data and other realted TDPs to form model based definition or design as explained in Chapter 2 (Frame of reference). Also a clear definition of requirements expected from a CAD software applications that can be used to develop Model based defition is explained in the Table 1. These requirements can also be adapted for requirements of viewing application used by downstream processes to view the annotated CAD model at later stages of product lifecycle. In addition the viewer application should be able to meet future requirements of dnamiclaly displaying work‐in progress. MBD data viewing can also be converted to light weight non‐CAD file formats for example 3D pdf. The characteristics of light weight formats is limited data, smaller file size, open source, application neutral and with the model as required by each downstream fucntion (Quintana, et al., 2010).

Table 3 CAD application requirements (Frechette, et al., 2011)

Category Functionalities and comments

Model display Able to display the exact solid geometry (boundary representation)

Able to display data from the title and revision history blocks

Able to display general notes and part lists

Able to display the overall geometry context while the user is working on a defined zone

Able to display supplementary geometry

Able to add zoning elements to a view

Model manipulation

Able to rotate, pan and zoom the model

Able to explode and re‐assemble an assembly

Model views Able to access standards views (isometric, front, top, side, etc.)

Able to set up user defined views

Able to add symbols to views

Able to easily cycle through different views

Sectioning Able to create sections

Able to delete sections or turn off sectioning

Measurement Able to make linear and angular measurements on any geometry selected


28 | P a g e

Mark up aspects

Able to add notes/text to a particular view. According to ASME Y14.41‐2003, general notes shall be placed on a single annotation plane that does not rotate with the model and do not require associativity. This annotation plane shall be available for display with the annotated model

Allows changing the colour and the font of mark‐up notes

Allows recording, displaying and managing the person who added the mark up note (day and time)

Allows marking up the parts lists, revision history block, title block, etc.

Allows to display only those views which were annotated

Able to indicate the person who added a comment and even get a report of those comments

Able to add drawing stamps. The stamp must be visible at all times when viewing and be included in printed views

Able to show/hide, edit, delete and manage markups

Allows to approve and to release a marked up model

Dimensions and tolerances

Able to display GD&T data and notes from captures and views

Able to show/hide GD&T data and notes upon user selection

Allows to search for a specific type of tolerance or for a specific value within a dimension (filtering tools)

Able to highlight the geometry elements associated with selected GD&T data

Product tree functionalities

Able to manipulate the product tree structure

Security aspects Able to provide access only to a limited group of users

Able to maintain data integrity

Able to secure files with passwords

Model properties

Able to provide mass properties (volume, surface area, etc.)

Long‐term application

Able to read files throughout the whole product lifecycle by having an open‐published file format

Hence to meet all these requirements and fulfil the concept of 3D model drafting, viewing, editing and translating Siemens NX 8 was chosen as a suitable application.

The prototype design of the upright was very basic and minimalistic. The design data was stored in CAD files developed in Solid edge and the 2D Drawings had basic information about 2D views, critical dimensions, type of material, tolerance standard used and surface roughness requirements.


29 | P a g e

Hence to understand the full potential of model based definition and to convert the proto design to industrialized design, we needed a more detailed CAD model with dimensions, tolerances, GD&T, surface finish, material specification and other 3D annotations (notes). As a first step the model was dimensioned to identify all dimensions with critical dimensions which are important for manufacturing the upright. But the dimensions were added to the model and not by creating a 2D drawing. Each dimension is linked to the respective surface in the model and was attached in the model semantically. The figure below illustrates the way in which diameter dimension Φ80 mm which is one of the critical dimension is linked to the bore surface (See the green highlighted part of the upright in Figure 17).

Similarly all the required dimensions can be added to its respective surfaces using the PMI environment and tools exclusive to Siemens NX. Unlike other CAD applications NX has an extensive set of PMI tools that enables defining the 3D models with ease. As elaborated in section 2.5 Product manufacturing information, PMI can be added to the model in different PMI views in which the

Figure 16 Prototype 2D drawings

Figure 17 Siemens NX PMI


30 | P a g e

feature is visible clearly to the user. We can use the available orthographic views of the CAD model or create custom PMI views.

Figure 18 shows the ‘Back view’ of the upright model with visible surfaces thoroughly dimensioned and each dimension, datum feature symbol or any other PMI will be stacked under the view tab in the part navigator. Hence the PMI is directly related to the model and its view enabling user to create multiple views with PMI depending on the requirements of the downstream processes. Dimensions or annotations are numbers according to the hierarchy of their creation and can be named according to the user requirements.

The tolerances used in the prototype design were based on SS‐ISO 2768‐1m standard which defines tolerances on generic level and is only valid for conceptual designs. For final design the 3D model is toleranced on the basis on various factors such as criticality of dimensions, assembly relations, functionality, method of machining, type of machine and type of tools used.

We can use standards like ASME 14.5 and ISO 1101 as a guide on how to dimension and tolerance a part, but the tolerance value must be based on these factors. Hence the initial stages of thesis concentrated on extensive discussions with KTH transport labs to understand details about critical dimensions and their functions in the Research concept vehicle. Another important tool used in

Figure 18 Annotated view of the upright


31 | P a g e

many industries to decide criticality of design features during converting conceptual design to final is DFMEA‐ Design failure mode and effect analysis.

DFMEA is an analytical methodology to determine the design risk of possible failure, degradation of performance and potential hazards. In real industrial scenarios DFMEA’s are live documents which will be developed by a cross‐functional team providing their valid inputs to predict potential failure modes that can occur due to each design aspect or feature of the product. The team spends several days sometimes weeks to discuss/predict the following,

Potential failure modes of design

Effects of these failures

Respective severity (fatalness of the effects to the product performance and to the customer)

Likely frequency of occurrence

Possible detection methods that can be implemented in the production process and,

RPN‐risk priority number

Risk priority number is a multiple of severity, occurrence and detection ratings which can be decided according to the standard rating charts in the manual provided by AIAG‐automotive industry action group which is an international organization similar to ISO which is a non‐profit association of all the automotive companies. The standard DFMEA template and the rating charts for severity, occurrence and detection can be referred in appendix.

RPN can be expressed as

RPN= severity (S) X occurrence (O) X detection (D)

As we are considering a hypothetical situation of a factory and production process the occurrence and detection values does not make any sense and only severity ratings were decided by discussions with KTH transport labs. Based on the descending order of RPN value the criticality of the feature is established i.e. higher the RPN value higher is the criticality and tighter should be the tolerance values. The completed DFMEA document can be referred in appendix.

As mentioned earlier two standards ASME 14.5 and ISO 1101 can be used to dimension or annotate a part, but these are valid for 2D dimensioning and hence require supporting standards like ASME Y 14.41(Technical product documentation‐Digital product definition data practices) and ISO 16792(Technical product documentation‐ Digital product definition data practices). These standards have been introduced to standardize 3D annotation. 2D drawings contain tolerances that are view or direction‐dependent and 3D models are not confined to orthographic views, the positioning of tolerance indicators often require controlling (Simmons, et al., 2012). In 3D it is necessary to define and fix the orientation of the tolerance set (tolerance frame, leader line and arrow) to have the same expression.

For example if we consider straightness the difference in representations are as below,


32 | P a g e

Some of the important specifications for defining tolerances on 3D models are mentioned further,

3.1.1 Axisormedianfeature

In this method the tolerance frame is connected to the feature by a leader line terminating with an arrowhead pointing directly at the surface, but with the addition of the modifier symbol placed to the right hand end of the second compartment of the tolerance frame.

Figure 20

3.1.2 Projectedtolerancezone

This method applies to blind holes and indicated projected tolerance zone without using supplemental geometry, the length of projection can also be specified by adding the value in the tolerance frame.

Figure 19 Difference in 2D and 3D tolerance representations


33 | P a g e

Figure 21

3.1.3 Tolerancezonebetweentwopoints

To specify extend of tolerance zone between two points the between symbol ‘ ‘is used between two letters identifying the start and end of the considered toleranced zone. This zone includes all segments or areas between the start and end of the identified features. To clearly identify the tolerance zone, the tolerance frame is connected to the compound toleranced feature by leader line, terminating with an arrow head on the outline of the compound toleranced feature.

Figure 22

3.1.4 Unilateralandunequalprofiletolerance

New symbol system has been introduced to reduce the need to use supplemental geometry to indicate unilateral and unequal tolerance.

Figure 24 Unilateral profile toleranceFigure 23 Unequal profile tolerance


34 | P a g e

3.1.5 Directionoftolerancezones

As 3D models are not confined to orthographic projection and as it is vital that the application of tolerances is unambiguous, we can use the indictors shown below after the tolerance frame.

Figure 25 Intersection plane indicators

Figure 26 Orientation plane indicators

The figure below illustrates the 3D model of upright completely dimensioned, toleranced and annoatated according to the standards and specifications discussed previously.


35 | P a g e

Figure 27 3D annotated upright CAD model


36 | P a g e

To summarize the design aspect of 3D model based definition, the below figure illustrates the comparison of two product lifecycle scenarios between Model based definition concept and solid models/drawings.

Figure 28 (Quintana, et al., 2010)


37 | P a g e

3.2 ProcessplanningorproductiondesignProcess planning is an important aspect of product realization process and forms an integral part of the entire production process. The process planner is an important link between design, resource management, manufacturing technology and inspection departments. The information and data flow between these departments has to be seamless and effective for a process planner to design an optimized and efficient production process. A good process plan is subjective to individual organization’s capabilities and capacities. It depends on various factors like range of collaborators, variables and resources. It aims at achieving improved productivity, cost effectiveness, better quality and increased compatibility in systems.

CAPP‐computer aided process planning is an established concept involving computer technology to aid the process planning of a product. CAPP is the link between CAD and CAM systems. Technological advancements in these systems has helped CAPP to evolve for simplifying and improving process planning and achieve more effective use of manufacturing resources. There are two types of CAPP: generative and variant type .The next level in the generative CAPP is model driven process planning. In continuation to our discussion in section 2.9, an elaborate methodology to use 3D models for planning the production process of the upright is defined here. As process planning in general is a very vast topic, it is delimited to fit the purpose of this thesis. So it is restricted to operation planning for machining the upright and depicts the usage of 3D CAD models with annotations and PMI for finished, in‐process and stock models.

3D CAD models designed in CAD application (Siemens NX) can be translated as neutral files and imported in CAM application by using STEP AP 203 or AP 214 plugins for geometry data exchange. Using these semantic 3D models in a CAM environment requires an application which supports this imported data, generate relevant process data upon this and will be able to transfer these in STEP protocols for downstream processes. Hence MASTERCAM X7 is chosen as the suitable CAM software. Even though process planning is strongly based on expertise and experienced people there is a scientific and engineering background behind process planning which make it possible to capture process planning knowledge within data and knowledge bases (Lundgren, 2013).

Part design

Factory resources

Manufacturing technology

Process planner

Process plan

Methods

Operation sequence

Machining data

Tolerances

Cutting tools

Clamping tools

Measuring strategy

Figure 29 Role of process planner (Bagge, 2014)


38 | P a g e

The great extent of research performed in the field of process planning until focusing on the objective to replace human expertise by automation. But the objective with Model driven process planning is to support human capabilities of skilled process planners by using computer software for information; modelling, creation, visualization and interaction.

Figure 30 Elements of process planning (Lundgren, 2013)

Human capabilities combined with manufacturing experience are a vital asset of a manufacturing company. The biggest barrier for the process planner’s expertise is fragmented data, even with availability of computer systems industries store information in a fragmented manner, mainly document based with the consequence of data duplication requiring comprehensive data management and maintenance. Lack of system interoperability and representation mismatch is one big source to information fragmentation. This causes data duplication as involved systems are unable to share data with each other. Representation mismatch increase information ambiguity and causes interpretation difficulties. When engineers have to spend time fixing problems caused by information fragmentation valuable time is spent on non‐value adding activities. Coherent information is a very important aspects in model driven process planning where the resulting process plan is a digital and computer interpretable model defining what is to be machined and how to machine the product by representation of operations and related machining features, machining precedence, in‐process part and product models and manufacturing resource models etc. (Lundgren, 2013).

Visualization and interaction are also vital along with the availability of interpretable data without fragmentation. Hence continuing in the objective of this thesis the major concentration is on ‘computer software for model’ aspect of the process planning (refer Figure 30). Here we discuss a operation plan created from 3D CAD models and the relevant operation data such as working steps, type of operations, operation sequences, tools used, tool paths, in process model information, clamping information, machining information (Spindle speed, feed rate and depth of cuts etc.) and type of machine is directly transferred through 3D models from CAM environment to CNC environment using STEP application protocols (APs).


39 | P a g e

The machining of the upright is planned in 6 setups starting from a block of aluminium with the details mentioned below,

Dimensions: 430 X 145 X 180 mm (length X width X height)

Material: Aluminium 7075 T6

In industrial scenario a pre‐shaped casting or forging would be used to form the upright and would require 2‐3 setups and would also result in less material wastage/removal. As we could not procure a casted or forged part for the purpose of thesis, the aluminium block will be converted into the pre‐shape in setup setups 1, 2, 3 and 4. To elaborate the entire method of process planning a step by step detailed description of each setup is explained as below,

3.2.1 Setup1

Stock model: Final model:

Tool used‐ 63mm face mill:


40 | P a g e

In setup 1 the aluminium block is shaped to remove maximum amount of material using single tool and minimum number of tool paths. The details of the operation are mentioned below.

Table 4 Setup 1 specificaitons

Specification Value

Number of operations 1

Type of operation Rough pocket milling

Spindle speed 5000 rpm

Feed rate 2250 mm/min

Plunge rate 750 mm/min

Retract rate 150 mm/min

Max. depth of cut 5 mm

Total time of machining

Tool paths and fixture setup:

Figure 31 Setup 1 toolpath


41 | P a g e

3.2.2 Setup2


Tool used‐ 63mm face mill:

In setup 2 the material is machined from the opposite side as in setup 1 and the final model is closer to the basic shape of the upright.

Table 5 Setup 2 specificaitons

Specification Value

Number of operations 1

Type of operation Rough pocket milling

Spindle speed 5000 rpm

Feed rate 2250 mm/min

Plunge rate 750 mm/min

Retract rate 150 mm/min

Max. depth of cut 5 mm



42 | P a g e


3.2.3 Setup3

Stock model: Finished model:


43 | P a g e

Tools used‐ 63 mm face mill, 25 mm end mill and 10 mm end mill:

In Setup 3 the part is rotated +90 deg and the final contour of the upright is achieved by incremental process and ensuring maximum material removal by generating features with optimized tool paths, speeds, feeds and depth of cuts.

Table 6 Setup 3 operation list

OP sequence Tool used Spindle speed

rpm

Feed rate

mm/min

Plunge rate

mm/min

Retract rate

mm/min

Max. depth of cut

mm

Surface roughing 63 Face mill 5000 2500 750

Rapid retract

5

Surface roughing 63 Face mill 5000 2500 750 5

Profile Rough contour

63 Face mill 5000 2500 750 10

Finish contour 63 Face mill 5000 2500 750 25



25 End mill 5000 2500 750 5

Profile Finish contour

25 End mill 5000 2500 750 50

Pocket contour 25 End mill 5000 2000 2000 6.25

Profile rough contour

25 End mill 5000 2500 2000 25

Profile finish contour

25 End mill 5000 2500 2000 50

Pocket 10 End mill 8000 1000 500 5



44 | P a g e


3.2.4 Setup4



45 | P a g e

Tools used: 63 mm face mill, 25 mm end mill and 6 mm drill


OP Sequence Tool used Spindle speed

rpm

Feed rate

mm/min

Plunge rate

mm/min

Retract rate

mm/min

Max. depth of cut

mm

Pocket 63 Face mill 5000 2500 750 5

Surface roughing 63 Face mill 5000 2500 750

Rapid retract

5


63 Face mill 5000 2500 750 10




25 End mill 5000 2500 750 5

Profile Finish contour

25 End mill 5000 2500 750 50

Pocket contour 25 End mill 5000 2000 2000 6.25

Profile rough contour

25 End mill 5000 2500 2000 25

Profile finish contour

25 End mill 5000 2500 2000 50

Contour 25 End mill 5000 2500 750 25

Contour 63 Face mill 5000 2500 750 5

Contour 25 End mill 5000 2500 750 25

Drilling 6 drill 1000 5 6 n.a

Surface roughing 63 Face mill 5000 2500 750 5



46 | P a g e


3.2.5 Setup5



47 | P a g e

Tools used: 25 mm end mill, 12 mm end mill, 10 mm end mill, 8.8 mm drill, 12 mm drill and 25 mm drill



rpm

Feed rate

mm/min

Plunge rate

mm/min

Retract rate

mm/min

Max. depth of cut

mm

Rough Pocket 25 End mill 5000 2500 750

Rapid retract

5

Rough Pocket 25 End mill 5000 2500 750 5

Contour 25 End mill 5000 2500 750 12.5

Contour 25 End mill 5000 2500 750 12.5

Contour 25 End mill 5000 2500 750 5

Pocket 25 End mill 5000 2500 750 5


Pocket 25 End mill 5000 2500 750 5

Contour 25 End mill 5000 2500 750 12.5

Pocket 10 end mill 5000 1250 750 5

Contour 10 end mill 5000 1250 750 5




Pocket 10 end mill 5000 1250 750 2.5

Pocket 10 end mill 5000 1250 750 2.5

Drilling 8.8 drill 1000 5 6 n.a


48 | P a g e

Drilling

25 drill 1000 8 6 n.a





40 minutes



49 | P a g e

3.2.6 Setup6


Tools used: 25 mm end mill, 10 mm end mill, 6.6 mm drill, and 5 mm drill


50 | P a g e



rpm

Feed rate

mm/min

Plunge rate

mm/min

Retract rate

mm/min

Max. depth of cut

mm

Rough Pocket 25 End mill 5000 2500 750

Rapid retract

5

Contour 25 End mill 5000 2500 750 12.5

Contour 25 End mill 5000 2500 750 12.5




Drilling 6.6 drill 4000 9 6 n.a



20 minutes



51 | P a g e

3.3 VerificationVerification or inspection of the product is the final stage of the product realization process in which different standardized methodologies are used to measure/inspect the product against the predetermined specifications and requirements defined during early stages of product life‐cycle. Detecting deviations in the process or product as early as possible in the life‐cycle is very important to

Ensure right products are delivered to the customer

Ensure the products perform according to their defined functions

To avoid assembly failures and stoppage of production lines

To avoid rejections and material wastage

To avoid field failures and loss of life or property

To avoid customer dissatisfaction and loss of business

To avoid loss to time and money

Hence in process or inline inspection is the key for early detection of deviations. Optimized manufacturing processes should be supported by standardized quality verification methods to provide constant and consistent feedback to the process correction/improvement. Model driven product verification focuses on achieving dynamic inline inspection wherein defective products can be detected and corrected on the spot. It also enables to pinpoint the root cause of the defect viz. process, material, tool or any other machining parameter which helps us to avoid line stoppages and immediate rework.

The ISO 10303 standard for the exchange of product model information (STEP) suite, STEP‐NC covers numerical control (NC) of machine tools. One of its applications is to enable integrated on‐machine measurement of machining processes using vision systems, sensors or inline measurement using other integrated external measuring instruments. In this section the manufacturing resource models in STEP‐NC that can be used to enable this type of measurement is discussed. These descriptions include the machine setup so that the configuration of the part can be identified and corrected, the machine kinematics so that the actions of a machine while adding or subtracting material can be verified, and the product tolerances so that the quality of the final part can be predicted and corrected during the machining.

Adhering to the product specifications, dimensional and tolerance requirements is integral part of manufacturing process and depend on its robustness to minimize mistake. CNC machining through programming is a widely accepted method and it uses vector based languages for manufacturing control (Hardwick, et al., 2012).These vector based languages are generally very difficult to control and should be replace with a more dynamic and responsive language which can be customized to the product to be manufactured.


52 | P a g e

Figure 37 Vector based control codes (Hardwick, et al., 2012)

So the alternative for CNC machining can be STEP‐NC machining and STEP tools Inc is an independent organization which is developing a next generation STEP‐NC control. Since 1991 it is helping companies to use the ISO STEP and STEP‐NC standards to exchange CAD, CAM, and CNC data and simplify worldwide design and manufacturing.

STEP‐NC control enables implementation of a new layer for numeric codes that links the control to independent sensor systems. Hence programs can be written to compare the in‐process model of a part with the model predicted by a process planning application and deviations between the two can be used to prevent errors and increase accuracy. STEP‐NC makes machining process more effective by linking product models to process models and resource models according to ISO 10303 –AP238. The STEP programs include CAD GD&T data to enable on‐machine verification and CAM process data to enable on‐machine optimization (Hardwick, et al., 2012).

Figure 38 Vision based control (Hardwick, et al., 2012)

A machining sequence or working step in a STEP‐NC program links an operation to the feature to be machined in that step along with the cutting tool used. A particular operation in a process plan can be characterized as primitive tool paths or as sets of parameters that can be modified by intelligent applications such as ‘STEP‐NC machine’ developed by STEP tools Inc.


53 | P a g e

STEP‐NC Machine is a software application for creating, viewing, and machining with STEP‐NC manufacturing data. It uses a new ISO 10303 standard to create NC machining programs that can be shared between many organizations and reused on many different machines. STEP‐NC Machine replaces the conventional post processor wherein we can modify these programs to meet the requirements of different machines and production schedules. Simulating the execution of a STEP‐NC program on a new machine to ensure its correct execution using the predetermined tooling and fixturing is also possible in this application (STEP tools Inc., 2014).

STEP‐NC Machine integrates CAD design requirement data with CAM process data enabling us to:

Visualize machine programs in context with the raw and finished part models

Compile STEP‐NC machine programs from many sources

Exchange machine programs across organizations or machines

Simulate cutting motion with machine tool models

Adapt programs to match machine, tool, and production constraints

Execute STEP‐NC programs on your machine tool control

STEP‐NC formats of programs are neutral formats for representing machining operations and results (Newman, et al., 2007). It used 3D product geometry defined in CAD models based on ISO 10303 and can also define geometry for the workpiece at various stages in the process, the cutting tools, fixtures and machine tool. Manufacturing operations are stacked as individual workingsteps in the order they were created i.e. according to the operation sequence in the process plan. For example if we consider an operation of pocket milling the tool paths and related machining data such as speed, federate, depth of cut etc. are associated to the feature in the in process model imported in the STEP‐NC machine interface . This workingstep can be described parametrically and as material removal volume. The high level descriptions of machining program make it more resource independent but at the same time require more processing. The low level descriptions are fixed to specific resources that must be available on the machine but allow for more specific error checking (Hardwick, et al., 2012).

Figure 39 Figure 40


54 | P a g e

The operation plans of all six setups of the upright were converted to AP238 STEP formats through a plugin available for MASTERCAM provided by STEP tools Inc. Thereby all the operations were analysed in a STEP‐NC machine interface by importing these converted files. The tools paths , machine kinematics, sequence of operations andtolerances were checked for deviations. All the required information for verificaitons such as raw models, inprocess models, finsih models, fixtures, tool models along with semantically annotated data were improted along with operation data automatically from MASTERCAM where they were created. This is the benefit of using model based definition and process planning in the early stages of life‐cycle i.e. all the required data to verify a particular machining operation is in one interface for the user to analyze , discuss and improve. Figure 39 depicts the STEP‐NC machine interface for Setup 5 and 6 of the upright where all the operations are stacked as individual workingsetps as per the sequence with the tool paths, machining information, co‐ordinate systems and tool data are improted automatically from CAM interface. Subsquently each workingstep is populated with relavant 3D raw piece model and finish model with semantic annotations and GD&T attahced to it. Figure 40 shows the imported inprocess product models and the dimensions attached to them semantically. Dia 80 mm is the diamter of the bore highlighted in the figure and this data was transferred from the CAD application to the STEP‐NC machine to represent the operation in which this feature is mahcined. We can aslo import datum data from CAD or CAM applications required for inspection and fixturing.

Figure 41 illustrates the deatiled model of the tool and its holder that is linked to workingsteps or operations they are used in along with detailed parameter information and cutting tool classification as per ISO 13399 standard. The 3D model of the cutting tool is designed and annotated according to STEP AP 242 description in Siemens NX. The detailed tool description consists the following parametes.

Tool diameter

Fundtional length

Overall assembly length

Flute count

Flute length

Taper angle

Material, material standard

Figure 41 Figure 42


55 | P a g e

Recommended feedrate

Recommended spindle speed and other realvant tool dimensions

Figure 42 shows the tool along with detailed visullizaiton of the workinstep in which it is used and the tool path it follows to machine the particular feature.

STEP‐NC workingstep execution can be made conditional on the results of geometry measurements. As expressed earlier all geometry in STEP‐NC can be annotated with semantic GD&T and inspection operations can be defined to validate these specifications at various stages of manufacturing. Considering the scenario where Setup 5 and 6 of the upright are executed in real time , the STEP –NC interface can be used as the NC machine interface through which machine operator can visulaize and anlyze all parametric data required to achieve the final product. The user can study all 3D models carefully and deduce the information provided in it by the design and process planning departments to manufacture the product successfully. Also during machining each feature the dimensions and tolerances of the feature can be verified and corrected using either machine compensation of tool compnesation with the data readiy available in the STEP‐NC machine interface enabline in‐line verificaiton and correction.

STEP‐NC machining emphasized on four factors required to achieved optimised manufacturing process ,

Closed loop machining

Feed and speed optimization

Integrated inline Measurement

Dynamic feedback

These features were developed and instilled in STEP‐NC over a period of ten years and the development cycle is illustrated in

Table 10 History of STEP‐NC (Hardwick, et al., 2012)

Period Capabilities shown Purpose

2000 to 2003 Tool path generation from manufacturing features Faster design to manufactured part

2005 CAM to CNC data exchange without post processor CNC interoperabilty

2005‐2007 Integration of STEP CAD GD&T data with CAM process data

Integrated machining and measurement

2007‐2008 Cutting tool modeling as per ISO 13399 and cutting crosssection modeling

Feed and speed optimizaiton

2009‐ 2010 Tool wear modeling and machine modeling Closed‐loop manufacturing


56 | P a g e

3.3.1 Detailed discussion about the data available in STEP‐NC for inspection andverification

As discussed previously in brief in this section we will discuss in detail about the types of data that can be made available through STEP‐NC interface and 3D model based product realization. Their collective advantages and applications can also be overviewed in this section.

STEP‐NC models contain five types of data components useful for inspection and vision applications which can be classified as below (Hardwick, et al., 2012),

1. Geometry: The geometry of the part can be derived from the 3D model at various stages of the process viz. raw, in process and finish.

Figure 43 3D model with annotation in STEP‐NC machine

Detailed product geometry models are required in order for the end user to fully understand the behaviour of the machine. The representations of geometry can be approximate, boundary and parametric.

2. Dimensions and tolerances: The dimensions and tolerances that have to be met are semantically linked to the models at each stage.


57 | P a g e

3. Setups, fixtures and machine: The models of types of fixtures used, the orientation of parts, the placement of fixtures and machine kinematics are all present in the process planning data and kinematic machine models available in STEP‐NC machine.

4. Machine accuracy: Accuracy of machine can be derived from the kinematics built in the machine models available and constantly updated in STEP‐NC machine.

Figure 45 Machine kinematics in STEP‐NC

Figure 44 Fixture and machine representation in STEP‐NC


58 | P a g e

STEP has kinematic resource (ISO 10303‐105) that has been included as one of the main conformance classes in AP‐214 data exchange protocol. The machine tool kinematics model describes the way in which the components of the machine tool must move in order to execute the tool path given by STEP‐NC data. Machining accuracy depends on machine geometric errors and can be studied in direct and indirect methods.

5. Inspection operation: They can be created directly in the STEP‐NC machine with the probing option to select the inspection probe paths and points to measure which can be directly interpreted by any external measuring devices such as CMM‐coordinate measuring machine. The tolerances shown in the Figure 44 Fixture and machine representation in STEP‐NC are called semantic tolerances as they are fully associated with the underlying geometry in the product model. The STEP models support presentation tolerances and semantic tolerances so the information is easily understood by users and by other applications as well. STEP‐NC contains enough information to allow the calculation of the forces on the cutting tool and the semantic tolerances allow an application to deduce if the displayed cut will cause the underlying surface to fail its surface profile tolerance (Hardwick, et al., 2012).

Figure 46 STEP‐NC inspection


59 | P a g e

In conclusion we have explored the possible ways of verifying and inspecting a machining operations and the result product through inline verification methods and using STEP‐NC machine as the CNC machine interface for better visualization and analysis.

Figure 47 Estimating process results using STEP‐NC (Hardwick, et al., 2012)


60 | P a g e

Chapter4.

Results

However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results.

‐Winston Churchill

4.1 UprightmanufacturingUpon the readiness of the 3D product, process, inspection models and a methodology to manufacture a product using model driven approach, the best way to result it is by producing the upright.

As the last stage of the thesis the upright was planned to be manufactured at KTH Maskin lab, Stockholm, Sweden with the 5 axis Hermle C50 CNC machining centre. The C50 offers simultaneous machining of 2000‐kg work pieces in 5 axes. The machining centre has a dynamic NC swivelling rotary table. The NC codes generated in the MASTERCAM application were translated in to STEP AP238 formats and were imported to STEP‐NC interface where they can be analysed and exported to match any post processor for different kinds of NC machines. The Hermle machine uses Siemens 810 post processor and the NC codes were generated according to it in STEP‐NC. Even though Hermle systems are designed to work on NC codes generated in Gibbs CAM application, STEP‐NC made it possible to work with MASTER CAM codes marking the possibility of system neutrality.


61 | P a g e

Figure 48 Hermle C50 machining center

As mentioned in section 3.2 the raw material is an Aluminium block with predetermined dimensions and is,

Figure 49 Raw material: aluminium block

The fixtures used to machine the upright are Hilma machine vices and a customised fixture manufactured at KTH production engineering lab for the purpose of thesis.


62 | P a g e

Figure 50 Machining fixtures

Due to constraints of machine availability in the lab, it was not able to product the completed upright within the time limit of the thesis. The first three setups of the upright were successfully manufactured by model driven approach and the methodology was verified to work successfully.

Setup 1:

Figure 51 Setup 1 machining


63 | P a g e

Setup 2:

Figure 52 Setup 2 machining

Setup 3:

Figure 53 Setup 3 maching


64 | P a g e

Chapter5.

Conclusion

In order to succeed, your desire for success should be greater than your fear of failure.

‐Bill Cosby

Manufacturing a product using model driven product realization method explained in previous sections proved to be possible and also paved us a way to understand the difficulties in its implementation.

This aim of this thesis is to understand the model driven approach as a whole and try to be on par with the technological advancements in the field of digital manufacturing. Though this is not entirely a new topic, the aspects of model driven product development are still nascent and the research is scattered over many organizations and industries around the world. Hence this thesis can be considered as an attempt to consolidate all these aspects and try to demonstrate the technicalities of implementing model driven product realization. Based on this analogy the following research questions and hypothesis were formulated at the beginning of this thesis.

Research questions:

How does model driven product realization differ from conventional methods?

In order to introspect in detail the thesis and answer this question elaborately, we start with referring to Chapter 2 wherein we discuss various topics in relation to model driven product realization that clearly defines the difference between model driven product realization and the conventional methods. Constant demand on manufacturing industries to improve the quality, decrease the cost and reduce the time to market has resulted in extensive research in the field of digital manufacturing and paperless industry. Model driven approach is an agile product development and manufacturing methodology which seamlessly integrates all the individual systems of the organization ensuring optimized information and product flow. It tackles with the problem of data silos or islands of data generated by isolated departments/systems and hamper the communication of product information and data which is very important for achieving optimized production. The illustration below depicts the same,


65 | P a g e

Figure 54 Difference between model driven product realizaiton and conventional methods (Hedlind, 2013)

What are the challenges involved in implementing model driven product realization?

Model driven product realization is an emerging topic and with only few standards on STEP defining its aspects, many industries have developed their own way of handing Models and using them in the production process. Many international organizations are working with industrial forums to formulate a standardized way of implementing model driven approach, but it will take few more years down the line to come into existence. Until that period there will be challenges in adapting this approach thorough the value chain of an individual industry. The challenges can be in the form of usage, interpretation, communication, implementation and training the existing staff to change their ideology of existing conventional product development process. The unavailability of supporting computer aided applications is also a big challenge in implementing product realization. Most of the companies are used to certain kind of CAx systems which are embedded in their production process and practically difficult to change them according to this new method. Also as explained earlier PDM/PLM systems are an integral part of model based enterprise and converting these systems to handle 3D model product and process data is a big task in itself which will require extensive time and cost to company.

During the thesis, I had a chance to interact with international delegation from academics, companies like Sandvik and Scania during a conference. In this conference I presented the thesis briefly and surprisingly drew their interest to model driven product realization. Recalling a long detailed discussion with an industrial representative from Sandvik working in the process development department, he expressed the difficulties in real industrial scenario due to the absence of the link between CAD and CAM systems. He viewed model driven product realization as a wonderful solution to solve this problem.

The interesting findings of the thesis during the process planning stage are a much discussed topic among me and my supervisor Magnus Lundgren. Though not discussed in detail here as it forms a


66 | P a g e

completely new research topic, I would like to quote that the current CAM systems are not yet ready to handle the challenges of model driven product realization. Process planning as explained in section 3.2 depends mostly on human expertise and experience. Designing an optimized process involves and complex iteration process of working with different kinds of operations, tools, in process models, fixtures, machines and tool paths. Absence of automating or compensating this human expertise is creating a huge void in currently available CAM systems for adapting to Model driven product realization.

Hence even though this methodology seems to be an excellent way to achieve desired results in a manufacturing industry, it is obviously with some major challenges.

How can model driven approach be implemented?

Chapter 3 explains the implementation method of model driven approach in detail. Here a step by step approach is discussed to implement the method in all stages of product development and a synchronous way to manufacture a product is also explained. A combination of international standards, methods and applications is required to implement model driven approach in designing, process planning, manufacturing and inspecting a product in an optimized way.

What are the benefits of model driven product realization?

Summarizing the benefits of model driven product realization,

Model driven product realization is faster than conventional process

It is cost effective

Lead to better quality of products

It is less error‐prone

Leads to effective data validation

Improves seamless information exchange

Quickens the change management process

Reduces the gap between production and business aspects

It is system neutral leading to overall integration of an organization

Effective in capturing domain knowledge

In conclusion “Implementation of model driven product realization will simplify, improve and optimize the product/process development in a manufacturing industry with long term impacts”, hence proving the hypothesis formulated in the beginning as true.


67 | P a g e

Chapter6.

Futurework

Excellence is a continuous process and not an accident

‐Dr. A.P.J Abdul Kalam

Full fledge research and effort is being focussed on achieving model driven product realization and moving towards model based enterprise. To support this move below are some recommendations for future work continuing in the essence of this thesis,

Firstly different CAx systems must be explored to analyse the best combination to implement model driven product realization with minimum challenges. Academics and industries alike should work together in pursuing software vendors to develop applications which are meeting the requirements as close as possible.

ASME and ISO are two organizations working closely in developing standards for model based approach. A detailed study is required on these standards and industrial findings or difficulties encountered during implementation of these standards must be provided as feedback to these organizations marking the beginning of continuous improvements in these standards.

The current PDM/PLM systems can be explored to analyse the possibilities of implementing model based enterprise.

A part of future work can concentrate on developing closed loop verification and feedback system for machining with external high precision measuring instruments such as coordinate measuring machine.

Exploring effective change management systems using model based approach is another interesting area which needs further work.

Creation of documents and records such as control plans, FMEA’s, operation plans, work instructions, inspection plans can be made effective, easy and faster with 3D model based approach. Implementing this will also reduce the chances of errors and also helps in easy updating of these important manufacturing documents.


68 | P a g e


69 | P a g e

BibliographyAirbus, n.d. Airbus‐Configuration management. [Online] Available at: http://www.airbus.com/work/why‐join‐airbus/training‐and‐development/configuration‐management/

Anon., n.d. Model based enterprise. [Online] Available at: http://model‐based‐enterprise.org/product‐lifecycle‐management.html

ANSI, 2011. NATIONAL‐CONSENSUS‐STANDARD‐FOR‐CONFIGURATION‐MANAGEMENT ‐ See more at: http://www.geia.org/404Handler.cfm?x=http://www.geia.org/ANSI‐EIA‐649‐A‐Standard‐‐‐‐NATIONAL‐CONSENSUS‐STANDARD‐FOR‐CONFIGURATION‐MANAGEMENT‐#sthash.i5ngKw3r.dpuf. TechAmerica, Issue 649A.

Bagge, M., 2014. Process planning for precision manufacturing, Stockholm: KTH Royal Institute of Technology‐School of Industrial Engineering and Management.

B. & M., 2003. The History of CAD. [Online] Available at: http://mbinfo.mbdesign.net/CAD‐History.html

Carvajal, A., 2005. Quantitative comparison between the use of 3D vs 2D visualization. London, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc.

Department of Defense, n.d. From DoD Replenishment Parts Purchase or Borrow (DoD RPPOB) Program per Department of Defense INSTRUCTION NUMBER 4140.57. [Online] Available at: http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/414057p.pdf [Accessed 30 May 2008].

fcsuper, 2010. Model based definition use. [Online] Available at: http://www.fcsuper.com/swblog/?p=175

Frechette, S., Huang, P. & Carlisle, M., 2011. Model Based Enterprise, U.S: National institute of standards and technology.

guide, P. t., n.d. PLM technology guide. [Online] Available at: http://plmtechnologyguide.com/site/?page_id=435

Hardwick, M., Proctor, F. M., Loffredo, D. & Venkatesh, S., 2012. Enabling machining vision using STEP‐NC. Indiana, USA, ASME.

Hedlind, M., 2013. Model driven process planning for machining: Theory, application and improved information standards for efficient product realization, Sockholm, Sweden: KTH Royal Institute of Technology.

International standards organizaiton, 2008. ISO 9001:2009‐Quality management systems ‐‐ Requirements, Geneva, Switzerland: ISO.

ISO, 2007. ISO product,standards. [Online] Available at: http://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=1147 [Accessed 17 June 2009].


70 | P a g e

Loffredo, David & Hardwick, M., n.d. STEP‐NC: Smart Data for Smart Machining, Troy, New York: STEP Tools, Inc..

Lundgren, M., 2013. Feature based operation planning, Stockholm: FFI.

Miller, J. M. a. E., 2005. Product visulization across the extended enterprise. [Online] Available at: http://www.cimmetry.com/documents/CIMdata_Feb2005.pdf [Accessed 03 August 2008].

Newman, N. A., W, X. X., Jr, R. & S. T., 2007. Toward interoperable CNC manufacturing. International Journal of computer integrated manufacturing, 21(2).

Next‐generation manufacturing technology initiative, 2005. Strategic investment plan for model‐based enterprise, United states: NGMTI.

Nihon Unisys, n.d. PMI / FT&A / GD&T DEMO. [Online] Available at: http://www.meisterplaza.com/deep_e/file/kanagata.pdf [Accessed 17 June 2009].

Pratt, M. J., n.d. Introduction to ISO 10303 ‐ the STEP Standard for Product Data Exchange. Gaithersburg, National Institute of Standards and Technology‐Manufacturing Systems Integration Division.

Quintana, V. et al., 2010. Will Model‐based Definition replace engineering drawings throughout the product lifecycle? A global perspective from aerospace industry. Computers in Industry, Volume 61, pp. 497‐508.

Schenk, D. A. & Wilson, P. R., 1994. Information Modeling: The EXPRESS Way, New York, NY, USA: Oxford University Press.

Siemens, 2007. Siemens PLM software. [Online] Available at: http://www.plm.automation.siemens.com/en_us/Images/9645_tcm1023‐4581.pdf [Accessed 17 June 2009].

Simmons, C. H., Maguire, D. E. & Phelps, N., 2012. 3D annotation. In: Elsevier, ed. Manual of Engineeirng drawing. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann, pp. 199‐203.

Simon P. Frechette and Manufacturing system Integration division, E. l., 2011. Model based enterprise for manufacturing. National institute of standards and technology, Gaithersburg, Maryland, July.

Springer‐Verlag, 2011. Model‐based definition design in the product lifecycle management scenario. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology , 52(1‐4), pp. 1‐14 .

STEP tools Inc., 2014. STEP tools. [Online] Available at: http://www.steptools.com/products/stepncmachine/ [Accessed 17 June 2014].

Stollerman, W., 1999. The Product Realization Process. Cambridge, s.n., pp. 189‐197.

systems, D., 2013. 3D MASTER‐DRIVE ACCURACY INTO YOUR BUSINESS, France: Dassault systems.

US Department of defence, 2004. Product life‐cycle management. [Online] Available at: http://www.product‐lifecycle‐management.com/download/MIL‐STD‐31000.pdf

Zeid, J. C. a. I., 2006. Development of a prototype for transfer of drawing annotations into the ASME Y14.41 standard. Chicago, International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition.


71 | P a g e

Appendix

AIAG DFMEA template:


72 | P a g e

DFMEA for the upright:

Item: FMEA number:

Model: Page :

Core Team: FMEA Date (Orig):01/02/2014

Actions

Taken

S

e

v

O

c

c

D

e

t

R

P

N

Upper JointConnecting to

suspension A‐rod

The cutout distance

26 mm is oversize

Joint will not have enough

material to be structurally

stable

0 0

Adds to the overall weight of

the part

Leads to assembly problem

with A‐arm

Increases the overall weight

of the part

Lead to bad asthetics and

design

Counter bore operation will

not have enough material on

the circumfrence

Affects assembly with A‐arm

Height of the joint 52

mm is oversize

Bolt length falls short and

lead to poor fastening

Blot will protrude out of

threaded hole Leads to assembly problem

with A‐arm

Radius R17 is oversize

Radius R17 is

undersize

Lower Joint Connecting to

suspension A‐rod

The cutout width 26

mm & height 36 mm

is oversize

Joint will not have enough

material to be structurally

stable

0 0

Adds to the overall weight of

the part


with A‐arm

Increases the overall weight

of the part

Lead to bad asthetics and

design

Counter bore operation will

not have enough material on

the circumfrence

Affects assembly with A‐arm

Height of the joint

56mm is oversize

Bolt length falls short and

lead to poor fastening

Blot will protrude out of

threaded hole


with A‐arm

Corner radius is

oversize

Corner radius is

undersize

Steering arm

Connecting to

actuating arm and

respond to

actuation

Dia 6 is oversize 0 0

Dia 6 is undersize

Dia6 hole is out of

position

Total length of the

arm is oversize

Total length of the

arm is undersize

The angle of the arm

is acute or obtuse

The height of the arm

is higher or lower

Centre bore

To accommodate

the motor and

bearing

Dia 80 is overzise 0 0

Dia 80 is undersize

Dia 80 is out of

position

Attaching arm To accommodate

brake disc

Dia 8.8 holes are

oversize0 0

Dia 8.8 holeas are

undersize

Thickness 10 is

oversize

Thickness 10 is

undersize

Radius R27 is oversize

Radius R27 is

undersize

8.8mm hole out of

position

Center to center

distance 65 mm of dia

8.8 hole is over or

undersize.

Bore center to dia 8.8

hole distance 114 mm

is over or undersize.

Raius R 27 out of

tolerance

Angle 30 deg is acute

or obtuse

Fastening holes

on joints

To accommodate

fastners

Fastening holes are

oversize0 0

Fastening holes are

undersize

Counter bores

on joints

To accommodate

bolt heads and to

avoid clash with

other parts

Counter bore dia is

oversize0 0

Counter bore dia is

undersize

Depth is oversize

Depth is undersize

Counterbore is out of

position

Threaded holes

on joints

To apply torque to

the fastners

Threaded holes are

tapered

Threaded holes are

oversize

Threaded holes are

undersize

Threads have worn

out

Threads are not

tapped efficiently

Thread depth and

pitch are varying

Corner Radii

To avoid sharp

edges and

asthetics

Corner radii are

oversize

Corner radii are

undersize

Entry chamfersTo ease entry of

fastnersChamfer are oversize

Chamfers are

undersize

Chamfer angle is

varying

Profile holes To accommodate

motor hubDia 6.6 is oversize

Dia 6.6 is undersize

Pitch angle 36 deg is

not maintained

Holes are out of

poisiton

Concentricity of the

holes with center

bore is out of

tolerance

Pockets

To save material

and decrease the

weight of the part

Pockets are large in

critical areas

Pockets are of

irregular shape and

size

Pockets are small

Basic profile of

the upright

To maintain

stability of the

upright and ease

assembly

Deviating from

defined profile0 0

Width of the joint 40

mm is undersize


mm is undersize

The cutout width 26

mm & height 36 mm

mm is undersize


mm is oversize

DESIGN FAILURE MODE AND EFFECTS ANALYSIS

Wishbone upright Responsibility: Arjun KN

1 of 1

Responsibility

and Target

Completion

Date

Rev: 1

C

l

a

s

s

Potential

Cause(s)/

Mechanis

m(s) of

Failure

Action ResultsO

c

c

u

r

Current

Process

Controls

D

e

t

e

c

R

P

N

Potential Effect(s) of Failure

S

e

v

Recommended

Action(s)

Current Prepared by: Arjun KN


mm is undersize

Feature Feature FunctionPotential Failure

Mode

The cutout distance

26 mm is undersize


mm is oversize


mm is undersize


73 | P a g e

Severity scale for DFMEA:

Occurrence scale for DFMEA:


74 | P a g e

Detection scale for DFMEA:

RPN scale characteristics:


75 | P a g e

STEP‐NC Code for Setup 1: ; STEP‐NC AP‐238 PROGRAM ; STEP‐NC File: uprightsetup12105.stpnc ; Generated: 2014‐05‐21T10:09:19+02:00 DEF INT LOG DELETE(LOG,"MLM") $AC_TIMER[1]=0 G17 G40 G90 ; work offset: use offset 1 N1 G54 N2 G71 G64 ; Workingstep: Surface Rough Pocket WRITE(LOG,"MLM","SURFACE ROUGH POCKET@"<<$AC_TIMER[1]) ; TOOL CHANGE: TOOL="FACEMILL63" ; diameter: 63in ; length: 88in N3 T="FACEMILL63" M6 N4 M3S5000 N5 M08 N6 G0X‐465.005494Y0Z50 N7 Z0 N8 G1Z‐5F750 N9 X‐430.005494Y1F2250 N10 Y179 N11 X‐429.98628Y179.19509 N12 X‐429.929374Y179.382683 N13 X‐429.836964Y179.55557 N14 X‐429.712601Y179.707107 N15 X‐429.561065Y179.83147 N16 X‐429.388178Y179.92388 N17 X‐429.200585Y179.980785 N18 X‐429.005494Y180 N19 X‐124.027755 N20 X‐123.832664Y179.980785 N21 X‐123.645071Y179.92388 N22 X‐123.472185Y179.83147 N23 X‐123.320648Y179.707107 N24 X‐123.196285Y179.55557 N25 X‐123.103875Y179.382683 N26 X‐123.046969Y179.19509 N27 X‐123.027755Y179 N28 Y1 N29 X‐123.046969Y0.80491 N30 X‐123.103875Y0.617317 N31 X‐123.196285Y0.44443 N32 X‐123.320648Y0.292893 N33 X‐123.472185Y0.16853 N34 X‐123.645071Y0.07612 N35 X‐123.832664Y0.019215 N36 X‐124.027755Y0 N37 X‐429.005494 N38 X‐429.200585Y0.019215 N39 X‐429.388178Y0.07612 N40 X‐429.561065Y0.16853 N41 X‐429.712601Y0.292893 N42 X‐429.836964Y0.44443 N43 X‐429.929374Y0.617317 N44 X‐429.98628Y0.80491 N45 X‐430.005494Y1 N46 X‐382.462601Y47.542893 N47 X‐382.586964Y47.69443 N48 X‐382.679374Y47.867317 N49 X‐382.73628Y48.05491 N50 X‐382.755494Y48.25 N51 Y131.75 N52 X‐382.73628Y131.94509 N53 X‐382.679374Y132.132683 N54 X‐382.586964Y132.30557


76 | P a g e

N55 X‐382.462601Y132.457107 N56 X‐382.311065Y132.58147 N57 X‐382.138178Y132.67388 N58 X‐381.950585Y132.730785 N59 X‐381.755494Y132.75 N60 X‐171.277755 N61 X‐171.082664Y132.730785 N62 X‐170.895071Y132.67388 N63 X‐170.722185Y132.58147 N64 X‐170.570648Y132.457107 N65 X‐170.446285Y132.30557 N66 X‐170.353875Y132.132683 N67 X‐170.296969Y131.94509 N68 X‐170.277755Y131.75 N69 Y48.25 N70 X‐170.296969Y48.05491 N71 X‐170.353875Y47.867317 N72 X‐170.446285Y47.69443 N73 X‐170.570648Y47.542893 N74 X‐170.722185Y47.41853 N75 X‐170.895071Y47.32612 N76 X‐171.082664Y47.269215 N77 X‐171.277755Y47.25 N78 X‐381.755494 N79 X‐381.950585Y47.269215 N80 X‐382.138178Y47.32612 N81 X‐382.311065Y47.41853 N82 X‐382.462601Y47.542893 N83 G2X‐377.606977Y63.232656Z‐5CR=8.868124 N84 G1X‐357.604073Y64.976628 N85 G3X‐351.109048Y78.896447Z‐5CR=8.868124 N86 G1X‐351.175023Y78.990706 N87 X‐351.217685Y79.118221 N88 X‐351.242004Y79.283961 N89 X‐351.25295Y79.492897 N90 X‐351.255494Y79.75 N91 Y100.25 N92 X‐351.25295Y100.507103 N93 X‐351.242004Y100.716039 N94 X‐351.217685Y100.881779 N95 X‐351.175023Y101.009294 N96 X‐351.109048Y101.103553 N97 X‐351.014788Y101.169529 N98 X‐350.887273Y101.212191 N99 X‐350.721533Y101.23651 N100 X‐350.512597Y101.247456 N101 X‐350.255494Y101.25 N102 X‐202.777755 N103 X‐202.520652Y101.247456 N104 X‐202.311716Y101.23651 N105 X‐202.145976Y101.212191 N106 X‐202.018461Y101.169529 N107 X‐201.924201Y101.103553 N108 X‐201.858226Y101.009294 N109 X‐201.815564Y100.881779 N110 X‐201.791245Y100.716039 N111 X‐201.780299Y100.507103 N112 X‐201.777755Y100.25 N113 Y79.75 N114 X‐201.780299Y79.492897 N115 X‐201.791245Y79.283961 N116 X‐201.815564Y79.118221 N117 X‐201.858226Y78.990706 N118 X‐201.924201Y78.896447 N119 X‐202.018461Y78.830471 N120 X‐202.145976Y78.787809 N121 X‐202.311716Y78.76349 N122 X‐202.520652Y78.752544 N123 X‐202.777755Y78.75 N124 X‐350.255494 N125 X‐350.512597Y78.752544


77 | P a g e

N126 X‐350.721533Y78.76349 N127 X‐350.887273Y78.787809 N128 X‐351.014788Y78.830471 N129 X‐351.109048Y78.896447 N130 G0Z0 N131 Z50 N132 X‐465.005494Y0 N133 Z‐4.94559 N134 G1Z‐9.94559F750 N135 X‐430.005494Y1F2250 N136 Y179 N137 X‐429.98628Y179.19509 N138 X‐429.929374Y179.382683 N139 X‐429.836964Y179.55557 N140 X‐429.712601Y179.707107 N141 X‐429.561065Y179.83147 N142 X‐429.388178Y179.92388 N143 X‐429.200585Y179.980785 N144 X‐429.005494Y180 N145 X‐136.962375 N146 X‐136.767285Y179.980785 N147 X‐136.579691Y179.92388 N148 X‐136.406805Y179.83147 N149 X‐136.255268Y179.707107 N150 X‐136.130905Y179.55557 N151 X‐136.038495Y179.382683 N152 X‐135.98159Y179.19509 N153 X‐135.962375Y179 N154 Y1 N155 X‐135.98159Y0.80491 N156 X‐136.038495Y0.617317 N157 X‐136.130905Y0.44443 N158 X‐136.255268Y0.292893 N159 X‐136.406805Y0.16853 N160 X‐136.579691Y0.07612 N161 X‐136.767285Y0.019215 N162 X‐136.962375Y0 N163 X‐429.005494 N164 X‐429.200585Y0.019215 N165 X‐429.388178Y0.07612 N166 X‐429.561065Y0.16853 N167 X‐429.712601Y0.292893 N168 X‐429.836964Y0.44443 N169 X‐429.929374Y0.617317 N170 X‐429.98628Y0.80491 N171 X‐430.005494Y1 N172 X‐382.462601Y47.542893 N173 X‐382.586964Y47.69443 N174 X‐382.679374Y47.867317 N175 X‐382.73628Y48.05491 N176 X‐382.755494Y48.25 N177 Y131.75 N178 X‐382.73628Y131.94509 N179 X‐382.679374Y132.132683 N180 X‐382.586964Y132.30557 N181 X‐382.462601Y132.457107 N182 X‐382.311065Y132.58147 N183 X‐382.138178Y132.67388 N184 X‐381.950585Y132.730785 N185 X‐381.755494Y132.75 N186 X‐184.212375 N187 X‐184.017285Y132.730785 N188 X‐183.829691Y132.67388 N189 X‐183.656805Y132.58147 N190 X‐183.505268Y132.457107 N191 X‐183.380905Y132.30557 N192 X‐183.288495Y132.132683 N193 X‐183.23159Y131.94509 N194 X‐183.212375Y131.75 N195 Y48.25 N196 X‐183.23159Y48.05491


78 | P a g e

N197 X‐183.288495Y47.867317 N198 X‐183.380905Y47.69443 N199 X‐183.505268Y47.542893 N200 X‐183.656805Y47.41853 N201 X‐183.829691Y47.32612 N202 X‐184.017285Y47.269215 N203 X‐184.212375Y47.25 N204 X‐381.755494 N205 X‐381.950585Y47.269215 N206 X‐382.138178Y47.32612 N207 X‐382.311065Y47.41853 N208 X‐382.462601Y47.542893 N209 G2X‐377.606977Y63.232656Z‐9.94559CR=8.868124 N210 G1X‐357.604073Y64.976628 N211 G3X‐351.109048Y78.896447Z‐9.94559CR=8.868124 N212 G1X‐351.175023Y78.990706 N213 X‐351.217685Y79.118221 N214 X‐351.242004Y79.283961 N215 X‐351.25295Y79.492897 N216 X‐351.255494Y79.75 N217 Y100.25 N218 X‐351.25295Y100.507103 N219 X‐351.242004Y100.716039 N220 X‐351.217685Y100.881779 N221 X‐351.175023Y101.009294 N222 X‐351.109048Y101.103553 N223 X‐351.014788Y101.169529 N224 X‐350.887273Y101.212191 N225 X‐350.721533Y101.23651 N226 X‐350.512597Y101.247456 N227 X‐350.255494Y101.25 N228 X‐215.712375 N229 X‐215.455272Y101.247456 N230 X‐215.246336Y101.23651 N231 X‐215.080596Y101.212191 N232 X‐214.953081Y101.169529 N233 X‐214.858822Y101.103553 N234 X‐214.792846Y101.009294 N235 X‐214.750184Y100.881779 N236 X‐214.725865Y100.716039 N237 X‐214.714919Y100.507103 N238 X‐214.712375Y100.25 N239 Y79.75 N240 X‐214.714919Y79.492897 N241 X‐214.725865Y79.283961 N242 X‐214.750184Y79.118221 N243 X‐214.792846Y78.990706 N244 X‐214.858822Y78.896447 N245 X‐214.953081Y78.830471 N246 X‐215.080596Y78.787809 N247 X‐215.246336Y78.76349 N248 X‐215.455272Y78.752544 N249 X‐215.712375Y78.75 N250 X‐350.255494 N251 X‐350.512597Y78.752544 N252 X‐350.721533Y78.76349 N253 X‐350.887273Y78.787809 N254 X‐351.014788Y78.830471 N255 X‐351.109048Y78.896447 N256 G0Z‐4.94559 N257 Z50 N258 X‐465.005494Y0 N259 Z‐9.89118 N260 G1Z‐14.89118F750 N261 X‐430.005494Y1F2250 N262 Y179 N263 X‐429.98628Y179.19509 N264 X‐429.929374Y179.382683 N265 X‐429.836964Y179.55557 N266 X‐429.712601Y179.707107 N267 X‐429.561065Y179.83147


79 | P a g e

N268 X‐429.388178Y179.92388 N269 X‐429.200585Y179.980785 N270 X‐429.005494Y180 N271 X‐149.896995 N272 X‐149.701905Y179.980785 N273 X‐149.514312Y179.92388 N274 X‐149.341425Y179.83147 N275 X‐149.189888Y179.707107 N276 X‐149.065525Y179.55557 N277 X‐148.973116Y179.382683 N278 X‐148.91621Y179.19509 N279 X‐148.896995Y179 N280 Y1 N281 X‐148.91621Y0.80491 N282 X‐148.973116Y0.617317 N283 X‐149.065525Y0.44443 N284 X‐149.189888Y0.292893 N285 X‐149.341425Y0.16853 N286 X‐149.514312Y0.07612 N287 X‐149.701905Y0.019215 N288 X‐149.896995Y0 N289 X‐429.005494 N290 X‐429.200585Y0.019215 N291 X‐429.388178Y0.07612 N292 X‐429.561065Y0.16853 N293 X‐429.712601Y0.292893 N294 X‐429.836964Y0.44443 N295 X‐429.929374Y0.617317 N296 X‐429.98628Y0.80491 N297 X‐430.005494Y1 N298 X‐382.462601Y47.542893 N299 X‐382.586964Y47.69443 N300 X‐382.679374Y47.867317 N301 X‐382.73628Y48.05491 N302 X‐382.755494Y48.25 N303 Y131.75 N304 X‐382.73628Y131.94509 N305 X‐382.679374Y132.132683 N306 X‐382.586964Y132.30557 N307 X‐382.462601Y132.457107 N308 X‐382.311065Y132.58147 N309 X‐382.138178Y132.67388 N310 X‐381.950585Y132.730785 N311 X‐381.755494Y132.75 N312 X‐197.146995 N313 X‐196.951905Y132.730785 N314 X‐196.764312Y132.67388 N315 X‐196.591425Y132.58147 N316 X‐196.439888Y132.457107 N317 X‐196.315525Y132.30557 N318 X‐196.223116Y132.132683 N319 X‐196.16621Y131.94509 N320 X‐196.146995Y131.75 N321 Y48.25 N322 X‐196.16621Y48.05491 N323 X‐196.223116Y47.867317 N324 X‐196.315525Y47.69443 N325 X‐196.439888Y47.542893 N326 X‐196.591425Y47.41853 N327 X‐196.764312Y47.32612 N328 X‐196.951905Y47.269215 N329 X‐197.146995Y47.25 N330 X‐381.755494 N331 X‐381.950585Y47.269215 N332 X‐382.138178Y47.32612 N333 X‐382.311065Y47.41853 N334 X‐382.462601Y47.542893 N335 G2X‐377.606977Y63.232656Z‐14.89118CR=8.868124 N336 G1X‐357.604073Y64.976628 N337 G3X‐351.109048Y78.896447Z‐14.89118CR=8.868124 N338 G1X‐351.175023Y78.990706


80 | P a g e

N339 X‐351.217685Y79.118221 N340 X‐351.242004Y79.283961 N341 X‐351.25295Y79.492897 N342 X‐351.255494Y79.75 N343 Y100.25 N344 X‐351.25295Y100.507103 N345 X‐351.242004Y100.716039 N346 X‐351.217685Y100.881779 N347 X‐351.175023Y101.009294 N348 X‐351.109048Y101.103553 N349 X‐351.014788Y101.169529 N350 X‐350.887273Y101.212191 N351 X‐350.721533Y101.23651 N352 X‐350.512597Y101.247456 N353 X‐350.255494Y101.25 N354 X‐228.646995 N355 X‐228.389892Y101.247456 N356 X‐228.180956Y101.23651 N357 X‐228.015216Y101.212191 N358 X‐227.887702Y101.169529 N359 X‐227.793442Y101.103553 N360 X‐227.727466Y101.009294 N361 X‐227.684804Y100.881779 N362 X‐227.660485Y100.716039 N363 X‐227.649539Y100.507103 N364 X‐227.646995Y100.25 N365 Y79.75 N366 X‐227.649539Y79.492897 N367 X‐227.660485Y79.283961 N368 X‐227.684804Y79.118221 N369 X‐227.727466Y78.990706 N370 X‐227.793442Y78.896447 N371 X‐227.887702Y78.830471 N372 X‐228.015216Y78.787809 N373 X‐228.180956Y78.76349 N374 X‐228.389892Y78.752544 N375 X‐228.646995Y78.75 N376 X‐350.255494 N377 X‐350.512597Y78.752544 N378 X‐350.721533Y78.76349 N379 X‐350.887273Y78.787809 N380 X‐351.014788Y78.830471 N381 X‐351.109048Y78.896447 N382 G0Z‐9.89118 N383 Z50 N384 X‐465.005494Y0 N385 Z‐14.83677 N386 G1Z‐19.83677F750 N387 X‐430.005494Y1F2250 N388 Y179 N389 X‐429.98628Y179.19509 N390 X‐429.929374Y179.382683 N391 X‐429.836964Y179.55557 N392 X‐429.712601Y179.707107 N393 X‐429.561065Y179.83147 N394 X‐429.388178Y179.92388 N395 X‐429.200585Y179.980785 N396 X‐429.005494Y180 N397 X‐162.831615 N398 X‐162.636525Y179.980785 N399 X‐162.448932Y179.92388 N400 X‐162.276045Y179.83147 N401 X‐162.124508Y179.707107 N402 X‐162.000146Y179.55557 N403 X‐161.907736Y179.382683 N404 X‐161.85083Y179.19509 N405 X‐161.831615Y179 N406 Y1 N407 X‐161.85083Y0.80491 N408 X‐161.907736Y0.617317 N409 X‐162.000146Y0.44443


81 | P a g e

N410 X‐162.124508Y0.292893 N411 X‐162.276045Y0.16853 N412 X‐162.448932Y0.07612 N413 X‐162.636525Y0.019215 N414 X‐162.831615Y0 N415 X‐429.005494 N416 X‐429.200585Y0.019215 N417 X‐429.388178Y0.07612 N418 X‐429.561065Y0.16853 N419 X‐429.712601Y0.292893 N420 X‐429.836964Y0.44443 N421 X‐429.929374Y0.617317 N422 X‐429.98628Y0.80491 N423 X‐430.005494Y1 N424 X‐382.462601Y47.542893 N425 X‐382.586964Y47.69443 N426 X‐382.679374Y47.867317 N427 X‐382.73628Y48.05491 N428 X‐382.755494Y48.25 N429 Y131.75 N430 X‐382.73628Y131.94509 N431 X‐382.679374Y132.132683 N432 X‐382.586964Y132.30557 N433 X‐382.462601Y132.457107 N434 X‐382.311065Y132.58147 N435 X‐382.138178Y132.67388 N436 X‐381.950585Y132.730785 N437 X‐381.755494Y132.75 N438 X‐210.081615 N439 X‐209.886525Y132.730785 N440 X‐209.698932Y132.67388 N441 X‐209.526045Y132.58147 N442 X‐209.374508Y132.457107 N443 X‐209.250146Y132.30557 N444 X‐209.157736Y132.132683 N445 X‐209.10083Y131.94509 N446 X‐209.081615Y131.75 N447 Y48.25 N448 X‐209.10083Y48.05491 N449 X‐209.157736Y47.867317 N450 X‐209.250146Y47.69443 N451 X‐209.374508Y47.542893 N452 X‐209.526045Y47.41853 N453 X‐209.698932Y47.32612 N454 X‐209.886525Y47.269215 N455 X‐210.081615Y47.25 N456 X‐381.755494 N457 X‐381.950585Y47.269215 N458 X‐382.138178Y47.32612 N459 X‐382.311065Y47.41853 N460 X‐382.462601Y47.542893 N461 G2X‐377.606977Y63.232656Z‐19.83677CR=8.868124 N462 G1X‐357.604073Y64.976628 N463 G3X‐351.109048Y78.896447Z‐19.83677CR=8.868124 N464 G1X‐351.175023Y78.990706 N465 X‐351.217685Y79.118221 N466 X‐351.242004Y79.283961 N467 X‐351.25295Y79.492897 N468 X‐351.255494Y79.75 N469 Y100.25 N470 X‐351.25295Y100.507103 N471 X‐351.242004Y100.716039 N472 X‐351.217685Y100.881779 N473 X‐351.175023Y101.009294 N474 X‐351.109048Y101.103553 N475 X‐351.014788Y101.169529 N476 X‐350.887273Y101.212191 N477 X‐350.721533Y101.23651 N478 X‐350.512597Y101.247456 N479 X‐350.255494Y101.25 N480 X‐241.581615


82 | P a g e

N481 X‐241.324513Y101.247456 N482 X‐241.115577Y101.23651 N483 X‐240.949836Y101.212191 N484 X‐240.822322Y101.169529 N485 X‐240.728062Y101.103553 N486 X‐240.662086Y101.009294 N487 X‐240.619424Y100.881779 N488 X‐240.595106Y100.716039 N489 X‐240.584159Y100.507103 N490 X‐240.581615Y100.25 N491 Y79.75 N492 X‐240.584159Y79.492897 N493 X‐240.595106Y79.283961 N494 X‐240.619424Y79.118221 N495 X‐240.662086Y78.990706 N496 X‐240.728062Y78.896447 N497 X‐240.822322Y78.830471 N498 X‐240.949836Y78.787809 N499 X‐241.115577Y78.76349 N500 X‐241.324513Y78.752544 N501 X‐241.581615Y78.75 N502 X‐350.255494 N503 X‐350.512597Y78.752544 N504 X‐350.721533Y78.76349 N505 X‐350.887273Y78.787809 N506 X‐351.014788Y78.830471 N507 X‐351.109048Y78.896447 N508 G0Z‐14.83677 N509 Z50 N510 X‐465.005494Y0 N511 Z‐19.78236 N512 G1Z‐24.78236F750 N513 X‐430.005494Y1F2250 N514 Y179 N515 X‐429.98628Y179.19509 N516 X‐429.929374Y179.382683 N517 X‐429.836964Y179.55557 N518 X‐429.712601Y179.707107 N519 X‐429.561065Y179.83147 N520 X‐429.388178Y179.92388 N521 X‐429.200585Y179.980785 N522 X‐429.005494Y180 N523 X‐175.766235 N524 X‐175.571145Y179.980785 N525 X‐175.383552Y179.92388 N526 X‐175.210665Y179.83147 N527 X‐175.059129Y179.707107 N528 X‐174.934766Y179.55557 N529 X‐174.842356Y179.382683 N530 X‐174.78545Y179.19509 N531 X‐174.766235Y179 N532 Y1 N533 X‐174.78545Y0.80491 N534 X‐174.842356Y0.617317 N535 X‐174.934766Y0.44443 N536 X‐175.059129Y0.292893 N537 X‐175.210665Y0.16853 N538 X‐175.383552Y0.07612 N539 X‐175.571145Y0.019215 N540 X‐175.766235Y0 N541 X‐429.005494 N542 X‐429.200585Y0.019215 N543 X‐429.388178Y0.07612 N544 X‐429.561065Y0.16853 N545 X‐429.712601Y0.292893 N546 X‐429.836964Y0.44443 N547 X‐429.929374Y0.617317 N548 X‐429.98628Y0.80491 N549 X‐430.005494Y1 N550 X‐382.462601Y47.542893 N551 X‐382.586964Y47.69443


83 | P a g e

N552 X‐382.679374Y47.867317 N553 X‐382.73628Y48.05491 N554 X‐382.755494Y48.25 N555 Y131.75 N556 X‐382.73628Y131.94509 N557 X‐382.679374Y132.132683 N558 X‐382.586964Y132.30557 N559 X‐382.462601Y132.457107 N560 X‐382.311065Y132.58147 N561 X‐382.138178Y132.67388 N562 X‐381.950585Y132.730785 N563 X‐381.755494Y132.75 N564 X‐223.016235 N565 X‐222.821145Y132.730785 N566 X‐222.633552Y132.67388 N567 X‐222.460665Y132.58147 N568 X‐222.309129Y132.457107 N569 X‐222.184766Y132.30557 N570 X‐222.092356Y132.132683 N571 X‐222.03545Y131.94509 N572 X‐222.016235Y131.75 N573 Y48.25 N574 X‐222.03545Y48.05491 N575 X‐222.092356Y47.867317 N576 X‐222.184766Y47.69443 N577 X‐222.309129Y47.542893 N578 X‐222.460665Y47.41853 N579 X‐222.633552Y47.32612 N580 X‐222.821145Y47.269215 N581 X‐223.016235Y47.25 N582 X‐381.755494 N583 X‐381.950585Y47.269215 N584 X‐382.138178Y47.32612 N585 X‐382.311065Y47.41853 N586 X‐382.462601Y47.542893 N587 G2X‐377.606977Y63.232656Z‐24.78236CR=8.868124 N588 G1X‐357.604073Y64.976628 N589 G3X‐351.109048Y78.896447Z‐24.78236CR=8.868124 N590 G1X‐351.175023Y78.990706 N591 X‐351.217685Y79.118221 N592 X‐351.242004Y79.283961 N593 X‐351.25295Y79.492897 N594 X‐351.255494Y79.75 N595 Y100.25 N596 X‐351.25295Y100.507103 N597 X‐351.242004Y100.716039 N598 X‐351.217685Y100.881779 N599 X‐351.175023Y101.009294 N600 X‐351.109048Y101.103553 N601 X‐351.014788Y101.169529 N602 X‐350.887273Y101.212191 N603 X‐350.721533Y101.23651 N604 X‐350.512597Y101.247456 N605 X‐350.255494Y101.25 N606 X‐254.516235 N607 X‐254.259133Y101.247456 N608 X‐254.050197Y101.23651 N609 X‐253.884457Y101.212191 N610 X‐253.756942Y101.169529 N611 X‐253.662682Y101.103553 N612 X‐253.596706Y101.009294 N613 X‐253.554045Y100.881779 N614 X‐253.529726Y100.716039 N615 X‐253.51878Y100.507103 N616 X‐253.516235Y100.25 N617 Y79.75 N618 X‐253.51878Y79.492897 N619 X‐253.529726Y79.283961 N620 X‐253.554045Y79.118221 N621 X‐253.596706Y78.990706 N622 X‐253.662682Y78.896447


84 | P a g e

N623 X‐253.756942Y78.830471 N624 X‐253.884457Y78.787809 N625 X‐254.050197Y78.76349 N626 X‐254.259133Y78.752544 N627 X‐254.516235Y78.75 N628 X‐350.255494 N629 X‐350.512597Y78.752544 N630 X‐350.721533Y78.76349 N631 X‐350.887273Y78.787809 N632 X‐351.014788Y78.830471 N633 X‐351.109048Y78.896447 N634 G0Z‐19.78236 N635 Z50 N636 X‐465.005494Y0 N637 Z‐24.72795 N638 G1Z‐29.72795F750 N639 X‐430.005494Y1F2250 N640 Y179 N641 X‐429.98628Y179.19509 N642 X‐429.929374Y179.382683 N643 X‐429.836964Y179.55557 N644 X‐429.712601Y179.707107 N645 X‐429.561065Y179.83147 N646 X‐429.388178Y179.92388 N647 X‐429.200585Y179.980785 N648 X‐429.005494Y180 N649 X‐188.700856 N650 X‐188.505765Y179.980785 N651 X‐188.318172Y179.92388 N652 X‐188.145285Y179.83147 N653 X‐187.993749Y179.707107 N654 X‐187.869386Y179.55557 N655 X‐187.776976Y179.382683 N656 X‐187.72007Y179.19509 N657 X‐187.700856Y179 N658 Y1 N659 X‐187.72007Y0.80491 N660 X‐187.776976Y0.617317 N661 X‐187.869386Y0.44443 N662 X‐187.993749Y0.292893 N663 X‐188.145285Y0.16853 N664 X‐188.318172Y0.07612 N665 X‐188.505765Y0.019215 N666 X‐188.700856Y0 N667 X‐429.005494 N668 X‐429.200585Y0.019215 N669 X‐429.388178Y0.07612 N670 X‐429.561065Y0.16853 N671 X‐429.712601Y0.292893 N672 X‐429.836964Y0.44443 N673 X‐429.929374Y0.617317 N674 X‐429.98628Y0.80491 N675 X‐430.005494Y1 N676 X‐382.462601Y47.542893 N677 X‐382.586964Y47.69443 N678 X‐382.679374Y47.867317 N679 X‐382.73628Y48.05491 N680 X‐382.755494Y48.25 N681 Y131.75 N682 X‐382.73628Y131.94509 N683 X‐382.679374Y132.132683 N684 X‐382.586964Y132.30557 N685 X‐382.462601Y132.457107 N686 X‐382.311065Y132.58147 N687 X‐382.138178Y132.67388 N688 X‐381.950585Y132.730785 N689 X‐381.755494Y132.75 N690 X‐235.950856 N691 X‐235.755765Y132.730785 N692 X‐235.568172Y132.67388 N693 X‐235.395285Y132.58147


85 | P a g e

N694 X‐235.243749Y132.457107 N695 X‐235.119386Y132.30557 N696 X‐235.026976Y132.132683 N697 X‐234.97007Y131.94509 N698 X‐234.950856Y131.75 N699 Y48.25 N700 X‐234.97007Y48.05491 N701 X‐235.026976Y47.867317 N702 X‐235.119386Y47.69443 N703 X‐235.243749Y47.542893 N704 X‐235.395285Y47.41853 N705 X‐235.568172Y47.32612 N706 X‐235.755765Y47.269215 N707 X‐235.950856Y47.25 N708 X‐381.755494 N709 X‐381.950585Y47.269215 N710 X‐382.138178Y47.32612 N711 X‐382.311065Y47.41853 N712 X‐382.462601Y47.542893 N713 G2X‐377.606977Y63.232656Z‐29.72795CR=8.868124 N714 G1X‐357.604073Y64.976628 N715 G3X‐351.109048Y78.896447Z‐29.72795CR=8.868124 N716 G1X‐351.175023Y78.990706 N717 X‐351.217685Y79.118221 N718 X‐351.242004Y79.283961 N719 X‐351.25295Y79.492897 N720 X‐351.255494Y79.75 N721 Y100.25 N722 X‐351.25295Y100.507103 N723 X‐351.242004Y100.716039 N724 X‐351.217685Y100.881779 N725 X‐351.175023Y101.009294 N726 X‐351.109048Y101.103553 N727 X‐351.014788Y101.169529 N728 X‐350.887273Y101.212191 N729 X‐350.721533Y101.23651 N730 X‐350.512597Y101.247456 N731 X‐350.255494Y101.25 N732 X‐267.450856 N733 X‐267.193753Y101.247456 N734 X‐266.984817Y101.23651 N735 X‐266.819077Y101.212191 N736 X‐266.691562Y101.169529 N737 X‐266.597302Y101.103553 N738 X‐266.531327Y101.009294 N739 X‐266.488665Y100.881779 N740 X‐266.464346Y100.716039 N741 X‐266.4534Y100.507103 N742 X‐266.450856Y100.25 N743 Y79.75 N744 X‐266.4534Y79.492897 N745 X‐266.464346Y79.283961 N746 X‐266.488665Y79.118221 N747 X‐266.531327Y78.990706 N748 X‐266.597302Y78.896447 N749 X‐266.691562Y78.830471 N750 X‐266.819077Y78.787809 N751 X‐266.984817Y78.76349 N752 X‐267.193753Y78.752544 N753 X‐267.450856Y78.75 N754 X‐350.255494 N755 X‐350.512597Y78.752544 N756 X‐350.721533Y78.76349 N757 X‐350.887273Y78.787809 N758 X‐351.014788Y78.830471 N759 X‐351.109048Y78.896447 N760 G0Z‐24.72795 N761 Z50 N762 X‐465.005494Y0 N763 Z‐29.67354 N764 G1Z‐34.67354F750


86 | P a g e

N765 X‐430.005494Y1F2250 N766 Y179 N767 X‐429.98628Y179.19509 N768 X‐429.929374Y179.382683 N769 X‐429.836964Y179.55557 N770 X‐429.712601Y179.707107 N771 X‐429.561065Y179.83147 N772 X‐429.388178Y179.92388 N773 X‐429.200585Y179.980785 N774 X‐429.005494Y180 N775 X‐201.635476 N776 X‐201.440385Y179.980785 N777 X‐201.252792Y179.92388 N778 X‐201.079906Y179.83147 N779 X‐200.928369Y179.707107 N780 X‐200.804006Y179.55557 N781 X‐200.711596Y179.382683 N782 X‐200.65469Y179.19509 N783 X‐200.635476Y179 N784 Y1 N785 X‐200.65469Y0.80491 N786 X‐200.711596Y0.617317 N787 X‐200.804006Y0.44443 N788 X‐200.928369Y0.292893 N789 X‐201.079906Y0.16853 N790 X‐201.252792Y0.07612 N791 X‐201.440385Y0.019215 N792 X‐201.635476Y0 N793 X‐429.005494 N794 X‐429.200585Y0.019215 N795 X‐429.388178Y0.07612 N796 X‐429.561065Y0.16853 N797 X‐429.712601Y0.292893 N798 X‐429.836964Y0.44443 N799 X‐429.929374Y0.617317 N800 X‐429.98628Y0.80491 N801 X‐430.005494Y1 N802 X‐382.462601Y47.542893 N803 X‐382.586964Y47.69443 N804 X‐382.679374Y47.867317 N805 X‐382.73628Y48.05491 N806 X‐382.755494Y48.25 N807 Y131.75 N808 X‐382.73628Y131.94509 N809 X‐382.679374Y132.132683 N810 X‐382.586964Y132.30557 N811 X‐382.462601Y132.457107 N812 X‐382.311065Y132.58147 N813 X‐382.138178Y132.67388 N814 X‐381.950585Y132.730785 N815 X‐381.755494Y132.75 N816 X‐248.885476 N817 X‐248.690385Y132.730785 N818 X‐248.502792Y132.67388 N819 X‐248.329906Y132.58147 N820 X‐248.178369Y132.457107 N821 X‐248.054006Y132.30557 N822 X‐247.961596Y132.132683 N823 X‐247.90469Y131.94509 N824 X‐247.885476Y131.75 N825 Y48.25 N826 X‐247.90469Y48.05491 N827 X‐247.961596Y47.867317 N828 X‐248.054006Y47.69443 N829 X‐248.178369Y47.542893 N830 X‐248.329906Y47.41853 N831 X‐248.502792Y47.32612 N832 X‐248.690385Y47.269215 N833 X‐248.885476Y47.25 N834 X‐381.755494 N835 X‐381.950585Y47.269215


87 | P a g e

N836 X‐382.138178Y47.32612 N837 X‐382.311065Y47.41853 N838 X‐382.462601Y47.542893 N839 G2X‐377.606977Y63.232656Z‐34.67354CR=8.868124 N840 G1X‐357.604073Y64.976628 N841 G3X‐351.109048Y78.896447Z‐34.67354CR=8.868124 N842 G1X‐351.175023Y78.990706 N843 X‐351.217685Y79.118221 N844 X‐351.242004Y79.283961 N845 X‐351.25295Y79.492897 N846 X‐351.255494Y79.75 N847 Y100.25 N848 X‐351.25295Y100.507103 N849 X‐351.242004Y100.716039 N850 X‐351.217685Y100.881779 N851 X‐351.175023Y101.009294 N852 X‐351.109048Y101.103553 N853 X‐351.014788Y101.169529 N854 X‐350.887273Y101.212191 N855 X‐350.721533Y101.23651 N856 X‐350.512597Y101.247456 N857 X‐350.255494Y101.25 N858 X‐280.385476 N859 X‐280.128373Y101.247456 N860 X‐279.919437Y101.23651 N861 X‐279.753697Y101.212191 N862 X‐279.626182Y101.169529 N863 X‐279.531922Y101.103553 N864 X‐279.465947Y101.009294 N865 X‐279.423285Y100.881779 N866 X‐279.398966Y100.716039 N867 X‐279.38802Y100.507103 N868 X‐279.385476Y100.25 N869 Y79.75 N870 X‐279.38802Y79.492897 N871 X‐279.398966Y79.283961 N872 X‐279.423285Y79.118221 N873 X‐279.465947Y78.990706 N874 X‐279.531922Y78.896447 N875 X‐279.626182Y78.830471 N876 X‐279.753697Y78.787809 N877 X‐279.919437Y78.76349 N878 X‐280.128373Y78.752544 N879 X‐280.385476Y78.75 N880 X‐350.255494 N881 X‐350.512597Y78.752544 N882 X‐350.721533Y78.76349 N883 X‐350.887273Y78.787809 N884 X‐351.014788Y78.830471 N885 X‐351.109048Y78.896447 N886 G0Z‐29.67354 N887 Z50 N888 X‐465.005494Y0 N889 Z‐34.61913 N890 G1Z‐39.61913F750 N891 X‐430.005494Y1F2250 N892 Y179 N893 X‐429.98628Y179.19509 N894 X‐429.929374Y179.382683 N895 X‐429.836964Y179.55557 N896 X‐429.712601Y179.707107 N897 X‐429.561065Y179.83147 N898 X‐429.388178Y179.92388 N899 X‐429.200585Y179.980785 N900 X‐429.005494Y180 N901 X‐214.570096 N902 X‐214.375006Y179.980785 N903 X‐214.187412Y179.92388 N904 X‐214.014526Y179.83147 N905 X‐213.862989Y179.707107 N906 X‐213.738626Y179.55557


88 | P a g e

N907 X‐213.646216Y179.382683 N908 X‐213.589311Y179.19509 N909 X‐213.570096Y179 N910 Y1 N911 X‐213.589311Y0.80491 N912 X‐213.646216Y0.617317 N913 X‐213.738626Y0.44443 N914 X‐213.862989Y0.292893 N915 X‐214.014526Y0.16853 N916 X‐214.187412Y0.07612 N917 X‐214.375006Y0.019215 N918 X‐214.570096Y0 N919 X‐429.005494 N920 X‐429.200585Y0.019215 N921 X‐429.388178Y0.07612 N922 X‐429.561065Y0.16853 N923 X‐429.712601Y0.292893 N924 X‐429.836964Y0.44443 N925 X‐429.929374Y0.617317 N926 X‐429.98628Y0.80491 N927 X‐430.005494Y1 N928 X‐382.462601Y47.542893 N929 X‐382.586964Y47.69443 N930 X‐382.679374Y47.867317 N931 X‐382.73628Y48.05491 N932 X‐382.755494Y48.25 N933 Y131.75 N934 X‐382.73628Y131.94509 N935 X‐382.679374Y132.132683 N936 X‐382.586964Y132.30557 N937 X‐382.462601Y132.457107 N938 X‐382.311065Y132.58147 N939 X‐382.138178Y132.67388 N940 X‐381.950585Y132.730785 N941 X‐381.755494Y132.75 N942 X‐261.820096 N943 X‐261.625006Y132.730785 N944 X‐261.437412Y132.67388 N945 X‐261.264526Y132.58147 N946 X‐261.112989Y132.457107 N947 X‐260.988626Y132.30557 N948 X‐260.896216Y132.132683 N949 X‐260.839311Y131.94509 N950 X‐260.820096Y131.75 N951 Y48.25 N952 X‐260.839311Y48.05491 N953 X‐260.896216Y47.867317 N954 X‐260.988626Y47.69443 N955 X‐261.112989Y47.542893 N956 X‐261.264526Y47.41853 N957 X‐261.437412Y47.32612 N958 X‐261.625006Y47.269215 N959 X‐261.820096Y47.25 N960 X‐381.755494 N961 X‐381.950585Y47.269215 N962 X‐382.138178Y47.32612 N963 X‐382.311065Y47.41853 N964 X‐382.462601Y47.542893 N965 G2X‐377.606977Y63.232656Z‐39.61913CR=8.868124 N966 G1X‐357.604073Y64.976628 N967 G3X‐351.109048Y78.896447Z‐39.61913CR=8.868124 N968 G1X‐351.175023Y78.990706 N969 X‐351.217685Y79.118221 N970 X‐351.242004Y79.283961 N971 X‐351.25295Y79.492897 N972 X‐351.255494Y79.75 N973 Y100.25 N974 X‐351.25295Y100.507103 N975 X‐351.242004Y100.716039 N976 X‐351.217685Y100.881779 N977 X‐351.175023Y101.009294


89 | P a g e

N978 X‐351.109048Y101.103553 N979 X‐351.014788Y101.169529 N980 X‐350.887273Y101.212191 N981 X‐350.721533Y101.23651 N982 X‐350.512597Y101.247456 N983 X‐350.255494Y101.25 N984 X‐293.320096 N985 X‐293.062993Y101.247456 N986 X‐292.854057Y101.23651 N987 X‐292.688317Y101.212191 N988 X‐292.560802Y101.169529 N989 X‐292.466543Y101.103553 N990 X‐292.400567Y101.009294 N991 X‐292.357905Y100.881779 N992 X‐292.333586Y100.716039 N993 X‐292.32264Y100.507103 N994 X‐292.320096Y100.25 N995 Y79.75 N996 X‐292.32264Y79.492897 N997 X‐292.333586Y79.283961 N998 X‐292.357905Y79.118221 N999 X‐292.400567Y78.990706 N1000 X‐292.466543Y78.896447 N1001 X‐292.560802Y78.830471 N1002 X‐292.688317Y78.787809 N1003 X‐292.854057Y78.76349 N1004 X‐293.062993Y78.752544 N1005 X‐293.320096Y78.75 N1006 X‐350.255494 N1007 X‐350.512597Y78.752544 N1008 X‐350.721533Y78.76349 N1009 X‐350.887273Y78.787809 N1010 X‐351.014788Y78.830471 N1011 X‐351.109048Y78.896447 N1012 G0Z‐34.61913 N1013 Z50 N1014 X‐278.505337Y‐63 N1015 Z‐39.56472 N1016 G1Z‐44.56472F750 N1017 Y0F2250 N1018 X‐330.505958Y0.999996 N1019 X‐330.506747Y178.999996 N1020 X‐330.487533Y179.195087 N1021 X‐330.430628Y179.38268 N1022 X‐330.338219Y179.555568 N1023 X‐330.213856Y179.707105 N1024 X‐330.062319Y179.831469 N1025 X‐329.889432Y179.923879 N1026 X‐329.701838Y179.980785 N1027 X‐329.506747Y180 N1028 X‐227.504716 N1029 X‐227.309626Y179.980785 N1030 X‐227.122033Y179.92388 N1031 X‐226.949146Y179.83147 N1032 X‐226.797609Y179.707107 N1033 X‐226.673246Y179.55557 N1034 X‐226.580837Y179.382683 N1035 X‐226.523931Y179.19509 N1036 X‐226.504716Y179 N1037 Y1 N1038 X‐226.523931Y0.80491 N1039 X‐226.580837Y0.617317 N1040 X‐226.673246Y0.44443 N1041 X‐226.797609Y0.292893 N1042 X‐226.949146Y0.16853 N1043 X‐227.122033Y0.07612 N1044 X‐227.309626Y0.019215 N1045 X‐227.504716Y0 N1046 X‐329.505958 N1047 X‐329.701048Y0.019215 N1048 X‐329.888641Y0.07612


90 | P a g e

N1049 X‐330.061527Y0.168529 N1050 X‐330.213063Y0.292892 N1051 X‐330.337426Y0.444427 N1052 X‐330.429836Y0.617313 N1053 X‐330.486743Y0.804906 N1054 X‐330.505958Y0.999996 N1055 X‐282.963273Y47.542892 N1056 X‐283.087636Y47.694427 N1057 X‐283.180046Y47.867313 N1058 X‐283.236952Y48.054906 N1059 X‐283.256168Y48.249996 N1060 X‐283.256538Y131.749996 N1061 X‐283.237324Y131.945087 N1062 X‐283.180419Y132.13268 N1063 X‐283.088009Y132.305568 N1064 X‐282.963646Y132.457105 N1065 X‐282.81211Y132.581469 N1066 X‐282.639222Y132.673879 N1067 X‐282.451629Y132.730785 N1068 X‐282.256538Y132.75 N1069 X‐274.754716 N1070 X‐274.559626Y132.730785 N1071 X‐274.372033Y132.67388 N1072 X‐274.199146Y132.58147 N1073 X‐274.047609Y132.457107 N1074 X‐273.923246Y132.30557 N1075 X‐273.830837Y132.132683 N1076 X‐273.773931Y131.94509 N1077 X‐273.754716Y131.75 N1078 Y48.25 N1079 X‐273.773931Y48.05491 N1080 X‐273.830837Y47.867317 N1081 X‐273.923246Y47.69443 N1082 X‐274.047609Y47.542893 N1083 X‐274.199146Y47.41853 N1084 X‐274.372033Y47.32612 N1085 X‐274.559626Y47.269215 N1086 X‐274.754716Y47.25 N1087 X‐282.256168 N1088 X‐282.451257Y47.269215 N1089 X‐282.63885Y47.32612 N1090 X‐282.811737Y47.418529 N1091 X‐282.963273Y47.542892 N1092 G0Z‐39.56472 N1093 Z50 N1094 X‐284.972645Y‐63 N1095 Z‐44.51031 N1096 G1Z‐49.51031F750 N1097 Y0F2250 N1098 X‐330.505954Y1 N1099 Y178.999999 N1100 X‐330.486739Y179.195089 N1101 X‐330.429833Y179.382682 N1102 X‐330.337423Y179.555569 N1103 X‐330.21306Y179.707106 N1104 X‐330.061524Y179.831469 N1105 X‐329.888637Y179.923879 N1106 X‐329.701044Y179.980784 N1107 X‐329.505954Y179.999999 N1108 X‐240.439336Y180 N1109 X‐240.244246Y179.980785 N1110 X‐240.056653Y179.92388 N1111 X‐239.883766Y179.83147 N1112 X‐239.732229Y179.707107 N1113 X‐239.607867Y179.55557 N1114 X‐239.515457Y179.382683 N1115 X‐239.458551Y179.19509 N1116 X‐239.439336Y179 N1117 Y1 N1118 X‐239.458551Y0.80491 N1119 X‐239.515457Y0.617317


91 | P a g e

N1120 X‐239.607867Y0.44443 N1121 X‐239.732229Y0.292893 N1122 X‐239.883766Y0.16853 N1123 X‐240.056653Y0.07612 N1124 X‐240.244246Y0.019215 N1125 X‐240.439336Y0 N1126 X‐329.505954 N1127 X‐329.701044Y0.019215 N1128 X‐329.888637Y0.07612 N1129 X‐330.061524Y0.16853 N1130 X‐330.21306Y0.292893 N1131 X‐330.337423Y0.44443 N1132 X‐330.429833Y0.617317 N1133 X‐330.486739Y0.80491 N1134 X‐330.505954Y1 N1135 X‐298.859507Y31.646447 N1136 X‐298.925483Y31.740706 N1137 X‐298.968145Y31.868221 N1138 X‐298.992463Y32.033961 N1139 X‐299.003409Y32.242897 N1140 X‐299.005954Y32.5 N1141 Y147.499999 N1142 X‐299.00341Y147.757102 N1143 X‐298.992463Y147.966038 N1144 X‐298.968145Y148.131778 N1145 X‐298.925483Y148.259293 N1146 X‐298.859507Y148.353553 N1147 X‐298.765247Y148.419528 N1148 X‐298.637732Y148.46219 N1149 X‐298.471992Y148.486509 N1150 X‐298.263056Y148.497455 N1151 X‐298.005954Y148.499999 N1152 X‐271.939336Y148.5 N1153 X‐271.682234Y148.497456 N1154 X‐271.473298Y148.486509 N1155 X‐271.307557Y148.462191 N1156 X‐271.180043Y148.419529 N1157 X‐271.085783Y148.353553 N1158 X‐271.019807Y148.259293 N1159 X‐270.977145Y148.131778 N1160 X‐270.952827Y147.966038 N1161 X‐270.94188Y147.757102 N1162 X‐270.939336Y147.5 N1163 Y32.5 N1164 X‐270.94188Y32.242897 N1165 X‐270.952827Y32.033961 N1166 X‐270.977145Y31.868221 N1167 X‐271.019807Y31.740706 N1168 X‐271.085783Y31.646447 N1169 X‐271.180043Y31.580471 N1170 X‐271.307557Y31.537809 N1171 X‐271.473298Y31.51349 N1172 X‐271.682234Y31.502544 N1173 X‐271.939336Y31.5 N1174 X‐298.005954 N1175 X‐298.263056Y31.502544 N1176 X‐298.471992Y31.51349 N1177 X‐298.637732Y31.537809 N1178 X‐298.765247Y31.580471 N1179 X‐298.859507Y31.646447 N1180 G0Z‐44.51031 N1181 Z50 N1182 X‐291.439955Y‐63 N1183 Z‐49.4559 N1184 G1Z‐54.4559F750 N1185 Y0F2250 N1186 X‐330.505954Y1 N1187 Y178.999999 N1188 X‐330.486739Y179.195089 N1189 X‐330.429833Y179.382682 N1190 X‐330.337423Y179.555569


92 | P a g e

N1191 X‐330.21306Y179.707106 N1192 X‐330.061524Y179.831469 N1193 X‐329.888637Y179.923879 N1194 X‐329.701044Y179.980784 N1195 X‐329.505954Y179.999999 N1196 X‐253.373956Y180 N1197 X‐253.178866Y179.980785 N1198 X‐252.991273Y179.92388 N1199 X‐252.818386Y179.83147 N1200 X‐252.66685Y179.707107 N1201 X‐252.542487Y179.55557 N1202 X‐252.450077Y179.382683 N1203 X‐252.393171Y179.19509 N1204 X‐252.373956Y179 N1205 Y1 N1206 X‐252.393171Y0.80491 N1207 X‐252.450077Y0.617317 N1208 X‐252.542487Y0.44443 N1209 X‐252.66685Y0.292893 N1210 X‐252.818386Y0.16853 N1211 X‐252.991273Y0.07612 N1212 X‐253.178866Y0.019215 N1213 X‐253.373956Y0 N1214 X‐329.505954 N1215 X‐329.701044Y0.019215 N1216 X‐329.888637Y0.07612 N1217 X‐330.061524Y0.16853 N1218 X‐330.21306Y0.292893 N1219 X‐330.337423Y0.44443 N1220 X‐330.429833Y0.617317 N1221 X‐330.486739Y0.80491 N1222 X‐330.505954Y1 N1223 X‐298.859507Y31.646447 N1224 X‐298.925483Y31.740706 N1225 X‐298.968144Y31.868221 N1226 X‐298.992463Y32.033961 N1227 X‐299.003409Y32.242897 N1228 X‐299.005954Y32.5 N1229 Y147.499999 N1230 X‐299.003409Y147.757102 N1231 X‐298.992463Y147.966038 N1232 X‐298.968145Y148.131778 N1233 X‐298.925483Y148.259293 N1234 X‐298.859507Y148.353553 N1235 X‐298.765247Y148.419528 N1236 X‐298.637732Y148.46219 N1237 X‐298.471992Y148.486509 N1238 X‐298.263056Y148.497455 N1239 X‐298.005954Y148.499999 N1240 X‐284.873956Y148.5 N1241 X‐284.616854Y148.497455 N1242 X‐284.407918Y148.486509 N1243 X‐284.242178Y148.462191 N1244 X‐284.114663Y148.419529 N1245 X‐284.020403Y148.353553 N1246 X‐283.954427Y148.259293 N1247 X‐283.911766Y148.131778 N1248 X‐283.887447Y147.966038 N1249 X‐283.876501Y147.757102 N1250 X‐283.873956Y147.5 N1251 Y32.5 N1252 X‐283.876501Y32.242897 N1253 X‐283.887447Y32.033961 N1254 X‐283.911766Y31.868221 N1255 X‐283.954427Y31.740706 N1256 X‐284.020403Y31.646447 N1257 X‐284.114663Y31.580471 N1258 X‐284.242178Y31.537809 N1259 X‐284.407918Y31.51349 N1260 X‐284.616854Y31.502544 N1261 X‐284.873956Y31.5


93 | P a g e

N1262 X‐298.005954 N1263 X‐298.263056Y31.502544 N1264 X‐298.471992Y31.51349 N1265 X‐298.637732Y31.537809 N1266 X‐298.765247Y31.580471 N1267 X‐298.859507Y31.646447 N1268 G0Z‐49.4559 N1269 Z50 N1270 X‐297.907265Y‐63 N1271 Z‐54.40149 N1272 G1Z‐59.40149F750 N1273 Y0F2250 N1274 X‐330.505954Y1 N1275 Y178.999999 N1276 X‐330.486739Y179.195089 N1277 X‐330.429833Y179.382682 N1278 X‐330.337423Y179.555569 N1279 X‐330.21306Y179.707106 N1280 X‐330.061524Y179.831469 N1281 X‐329.888637Y179.923879 N1282 X‐329.701044Y179.980784 N1283 X‐329.505954Y179.999999 N1284 X‐266.308577Y180 N1285 X‐266.113486Y179.980785 N1286 X‐265.925893Y179.92388 N1287 X‐265.753006Y179.83147 N1288 X‐265.60147Y179.707107 N1289 X‐265.477107Y179.55557 N1290 X‐265.384697Y179.382683 N1291 X‐265.327791Y179.19509 N1292 X‐265.308577Y179 N1293 Y1 N1294 X‐265.327791Y0.80491 N1295 X‐265.384697Y0.617317 N1296 X‐265.477107Y0.44443 N1297 X‐265.60147Y0.292893 N1298 X‐265.753006Y0.16853 N1299 X‐265.925893Y0.07612 N1300 X‐266.113486Y0.019215 N1301 X‐266.308577Y0 N1302 X‐329.505954 N1303 X‐329.701044Y0.019215 N1304 X‐329.888637Y0.07612 N1305 X‐330.061524Y0.16853 N1306 X‐330.21306Y0.292893 N1307 X‐330.337423Y0.44443 N1308 X‐330.429833Y0.617317 N1309 X‐330.486739Y0.80491 N1310 X‐330.505954Y1 N1311 X‐298.859507Y31.646447 N1312 X‐298.925483Y31.740706 N1313 X‐298.968144Y31.868221 N1314 X‐298.992463Y32.033961 N1315 X‐299.003409Y32.242897 N1316 X‐299.005954Y32.5 N1317 Y147.5 N1318 X‐299.003409Y147.757102 N1319 X‐298.992463Y147.966038 N1320 X‐298.968144Y148.131778 N1321 X‐298.925483Y148.259293 N1322 X‐298.859507Y148.353553 N1323 X‐298.765247Y148.419529 N1324 X‐298.637732Y148.46219 N1325 X‐298.471992Y148.486509 N1326 X‐298.263056Y148.497455 N1327 X‐298.005954Y148.5 N1328 X‐297.808577 N1329 X‐297.551474Y148.497455 N1330 X‐297.342538Y148.486509 N1331 X‐297.176798Y148.46219 N1332 X‐297.049283Y148.419529


94 | P a g e

N1333 X‐296.955023Y148.353553 N1334 X‐296.889048Y148.259293 N1335 X‐296.846386Y148.131778 N1336 X‐296.822067Y147.966038 N1337 X‐296.811121Y147.757102 N1338 X‐296.808577Y147.5 N1339 Y32.5 N1340 X‐296.811121Y32.242897 N1341 X‐296.822067Y32.033961 N1342 X‐296.846386Y31.868221 N1343 X‐296.889048Y31.740706 N1344 X‐296.955023Y31.646447 N1345 X‐297.049283Y31.580471 N1346 X‐297.176798Y31.537809 N1347 X‐297.342538Y31.51349 N1348 X‐297.551474Y31.502544 N1349 X‐297.808577Y31.5 N1350 X‐298.005954 N1351 X‐298.263056Y31.502544 N1352 X‐298.471992Y31.51349 N1353 X‐298.637732Y31.537809 N1354 X‐298.765247Y31.580471 N1355 X‐298.859507Y31.646447 N1356 G0Z‐54.40149 N1357 Z50 N1358 X‐304.374575Y‐63 N1359 Z‐59.34708 N1360 G1Z‐64.34708F750 N1361 Y0F2250 N1362 X‐330.505953Y1 N1363 Y178.999999 N1364 X‐330.486739Y179.195089 N1365 X‐330.429833Y179.382682 N1366 X‐330.337423Y179.555569 N1367 X‐330.21306Y179.707106 N1368 X‐330.061524Y179.831469 N1369 X‐329.888637Y179.923879 N1370 X‐329.701044Y179.980784 N1371 X‐329.505953Y179.999999 N1372 X‐279.243197Y180 N1373 X‐279.048106Y179.980785 N1374 X‐278.860513Y179.92388 N1375 X‐278.687627Y179.83147 N1376 X‐278.53609Y179.707107 N1377 X‐278.411727Y179.55557 N1378 X‐278.319317Y179.382683 N1379 X‐278.262411Y179.19509 N1380 X‐278.243197Y179 N1381 Y1 N1382 X‐278.262411Y0.80491 N1383 X‐278.319317Y0.617317 N1384 X‐278.411727Y0.44443 N1385 X‐278.53609Y0.292893 N1386 X‐278.687627Y0.16853 N1387 X‐278.860513Y0.07612 N1388 X‐279.048106Y0.019215 N1389 X‐279.243197Y0 N1390 X‐329.505953 N1391 X‐329.701044Y0.019215 N1392 X‐329.888637Y0.07612 N1393 X‐330.061524Y0.16853 N1394 X‐330.21306Y0.292893 N1395 X‐330.337423Y0.44443 N1396 X‐330.429833Y0.617317 N1397 X‐330.486739Y0.80491 N1398 X‐330.505953Y1 N1399 G0Z‐59.34708 N1400 Z50 N1401 X‐310.841885Y‐63 N1402 Z‐64.29267 N1403 G1Z‐69.29267F750


95 | P a g e

N1404 Y0F2250 N1405 X‐330.505953Y1 N1406 Y178.999999 N1407 X‐330.486739Y179.195089 N1408 X‐330.429833Y179.382682 N1409 X‐330.337423Y179.555569 N1410 X‐330.21306Y179.707106 N1411 X‐330.061524Y179.831469 N1412 X‐329.888637Y179.923879 N1413 X‐329.701044Y179.980784 N1414 X‐329.505953Y179.999999 N1415 X‐292.177817Y180 N1416 X‐291.982727Y179.980785 N1417 X‐291.795134Y179.92388 N1418 X‐291.622247Y179.83147 N1419 X‐291.47071Y179.707107 N1420 X‐291.346347Y179.55557 N1421 X‐291.253937Y179.382683 N1422 X‐291.197032Y179.19509 N1423 X‐291.177817Y179 N1424 Y1 N1425 X‐291.197032Y0.80491 N1426 X‐291.253937Y0.617317 N1427 X‐291.346347Y0.44443 N1428 X‐291.47071Y0.292893 N1429 X‐291.622247Y0.16853 N1430 X‐291.795133Y0.07612 N1431 X‐291.982727Y0.019215 N1432 X‐292.177817Y0 N1433 X‐329.505953 N1434 X‐329.701044Y0.019215 N1435 X‐329.888637Y0.07612 N1436 X‐330.061524Y0.16853 N1437 X‐330.21306Y0.292893 N1438 X‐330.337423Y0.44443 N1439 X‐330.429833Y0.617317 N1440 X‐330.486739Y0.80491 N1441 X‐330.505953Y1 N1442 G0Z‐64.29267 N1443 Z50 N1444 X‐317.309195Y‐63 N1445 Z‐69.23826 N1446 G1Z‐74.23826F750 N1447 Y0F2250 N1448 X‐330.505953Y1 N1449 Y178.999999 N1450 X‐330.486739Y179.195089 N1451 X‐330.429833Y179.382683 N1452 X‐330.337423Y179.555569 N1453 X‐330.21306Y179.707106 N1454 X‐330.061524Y179.831469 N1455 X‐329.888637Y179.923879 N1456 X‐329.701044Y179.980784 N1457 X‐329.505953Y179.999999 N1458 X‐305.112437Y180 N1459 X‐304.917347Y179.980785 N1460 X‐304.729754Y179.92388 N1461 X‐304.556867Y179.83147 N1462 X‐304.40533Y179.707107 N1463 X‐304.280967Y179.55557 N1464 X‐304.188558Y179.382683 N1465 X‐304.131652Y179.19509 N1466 X‐304.112437Y179 N1467 Y1 N1468 X‐304.131652Y0.80491 N1469 X‐304.188558Y0.617317 N1470 X‐304.280967Y0.44443 N1471 X‐304.40533Y0.292893 N1472 X‐304.556867Y0.16853 N1473 X‐304.729754Y0.07612 N1474 X‐304.917347Y0.019215


96 | P a g e

N1475 X‐305.112437Y0 N1476 X‐329.505953 N1477 X‐329.701044Y0.019215 N1478 X‐329.888637Y0.07612 N1479 X‐330.061524Y0.16853 N1480 X‐330.21306Y0.292893 N1481 X‐330.337423Y0.44443 N1482 X‐330.429833Y0.617317 N1483 X‐330.486739Y0.80491 N1484 X‐330.505953Y1 N1485 G0Z‐69.23826 N1486 Z50 N1487 X‐323.776505Y‐63 N1488 Z‐74.18385 N1489 G1Z‐79.18385F750 N1490 Y0F2250 N1491 X‐330.505953Y1 N1492 Y178.999999 N1493 X‐330.486739Y179.195089 N1494 X‐330.429833Y179.382683 N1495 X‐330.337423Y179.555569 N1496 X‐330.21306Y179.707106 N1497 X‐330.061524Y179.831469 N1498 X‐329.888637Y179.923879 N1499 X‐329.701044Y179.980784 N1500 X‐329.505953Y179.999999 N1501 X‐318.047057Y180 N1502 X‐317.851967Y179.980785 N1503 X‐317.664374Y179.923879 N1504 X‐317.491487Y179.83147 N1505 X‐317.33995Y179.707107 N1506 X‐317.215588Y179.55557 N1507 X‐317.123178Y179.382683 N1508 X‐317.066272Y179.19509 N1509 X‐317.047057Y179 N1510 Y1 N1511 X‐317.066272Y0.80491 N1512 X‐317.123178Y0.617317 N1513 X‐317.215588Y0.44443 N1514 X‐317.33995Y0.292893 N1515 X‐317.491487Y0.16853 N1516 X‐317.664374Y0.07612 N1517 X‐317.851967Y0.019215 N1518 X‐318.047057Y0 N1519 X‐329.505953 N1520 X‐329.701044Y0.019215 N1521 X‐329.888637Y0.07612 N1522 X‐330.061523Y0.16853 N1523 X‐330.21306Y0.292893 N1524 X‐330.337423Y0.44443 N1525 X‐330.429833Y0.617317 N1526 X‐330.486739Y0.80491 N1527 X‐330.505953Y1 N1528 G0Z‐74.18385 N1529 Z50 N1530 M5 N1531 M09 WRITE(LOG,"MLM","END@"<<$AC_TIMER[1]) N1532 M2

model driven product realization - diva portal747228/fulltext01.pdf · model driven product...

Documents