Patent Application
20070255673
Referring now to the drawing in detail,
Workpieces for manufacturing mechanisms of a large quantity or of many types are sampled, and the parameters of the samples are thereby recorded, as per Step S1. The parameters mainly include, for example, frequency of use of the workpieces, cost of the workpieces, standardization difficulty of the workpieces, etc. These parameters are transformed into a standardization grade S for evaluating standardization order of the workpieces. Standardization grade S is usefully calculated according to a use-frequency grade X, a cost grade Y, and a difficulty grade Z.
The use-frequency grade X of the workpieces is represented by a percentage of the total number of workpieces, constituted by each kind of the workpieces. Therefore, number of each kind of workpieces is input into a processor, such as a computer or a memory chip, and a percentage of workpieces formed by each kind is calculated and recorded as the use-frequency grade X, as per Step S2.
The cost grade Y of the workpieces is represented by a price of the workpieces. The price of each kind of workpiece is input into the processor and is recorded as the cost grade Y (Step S3).
Calculating difficulty grade Z of workpieces (Step S4). The difficulty grade Z represents a standardization difficulty of the workpiece. The lower the standardization difficulty of a kind of workpiece, the higher the difficulty grade Z of this kind of workpiece is assigned. The difficulty grade Z for a standardization difficulty of given workpiece or group of workpieces is calculated by evaluating any of a variety of characteristics, such as shape, size, particular surface features, and apertures, etc., of each kind of workpiece, and transforming these characteristics into the difficulty grade Z. Each kind of configuration characteristic is represented by the difficulty grade Z calculated, according to these steps, as follows:
Firstly, shape of the workpiece is reviewed to evaluate a shape grade A. A workpiece having a more regular shape has less standardization difficulty and a higher standardization grade. For example, the shape grade A of a regular cuboid (i.e., approximately cube) workpiece is 1.0; the shape grade A of a cuboid workpiece that includes a L-shaped gap is 0.7; the shape grade A of a cuboid workpiece that includes a U-shaped gap is 0.5; the shape grade A of a cuboid workpiece that includes a L-shaped gap and a U-shaped gap is 0.7*0.5=0.35; and the rest may be deduced by analogy. In this way, the shape grade A of each workpiece can be calculated according to its configuration characteristics.
Secondly, a precision of the workpiece is reviewed to evaluate a precision grade B thereof. A workpiece requiring a higher level of precision has greater standardization difficulty and therefore a lower standardization grade. Precision can be evaluated according to nominal size of the workpiece. A workpiece having a nominal size to decimal places requires a higher level of precision and lower precision grade B. For example, the precision grade B of a workpiece having an integer-scale size is 1.0; the precision grade B of a workpiece having a size requiring accuracy to one decimal place is 0.5; and the precision grade B of a workpiece having a size requiring accuracy to two decimal places is 0.1. If a workpiece has n different kinds of accuracy requirements, a size accuracy N1 of the workpiece corresponds to a precision grade B1, a size accuracy N2 of the workpiece corresponds to a precision grade B2, a size accuracy N3 of the workpiece corresponds to a precision grade B3, and the rest may be deduced by analogy. For example, a size accuracy Nn of the workpiece corresponds to a precision grade Bn. The precision grade B is a triple of an average of the precision grades from B1 to Bn. That is to say, the formula for calculating the precision grade B of the workpiece is B=(B1+B2+B3+ . . . +Bn)*3/N. Additionally, according to different demands of standardization, the coefficient 3 of the formula can be replaced by other constants.
Thirdly, apertures formed in the workpiece are reviewed to evaluate an aperture grade C. The more apertures a workpiece has, the higher its standardization difficulty and the lower its assigned standardization grade. For example, the aperture grade C of a workpiece having three or less than three apertures is 1.0; the aperture grade C of a workpiece having N (N is larger than three) apertures is 3/N. Additionally, according to different demands of standardization, the coefficient 3 can be replaced by other constants.
Fourthly, reviewing special configuration formed in the workpiece and evaluate a correcting coefficient F. Specifically the more special configurations a workpiece has, the larger the correcting coefficient F. For example, the correcting coefficient F of a workpiece having a simple configuration (i.e., one with plain faces in all three-dimensions) is 0.9; the correcting coefficient F of a workpiece having a surface variance of less than 20 mm2 is 0.1; the correcting coefficient F of a workpiece having a surface variance of more than 20 mm2 and less than 120 mm2 is 0.2; the correcting coefficient F of a workpiece having a overflow larger than 120 mm2 is 0.3; and the rest may be deduced by analogy.
After evaluating the shape grade A, the precision grade B, the aperture grade C, and the correcting coefficient F, the difficulty grade Z can be calculated. The formula for calculating the difficulty grade Z is Z=(A+B+C)*(1−F). In this way, the processor can calculate the difficulty grade Z of workpieces after the configuration information of the workpieces and a calculating program are input into the processor.
Calculating the standardization grade S of the workpiece according to the use-frequency grade X, the cost grade Y and the difficulty grade Z is illustrated as Step S5. The formula for calculating the standardization grade S is S=XYZ.
The standardization grade S of each kind/type of workpiece is evaluated, and the respective standardization grades S of the workpieces are arranged into a standardization order, as provided in Step S6. A workpiece having a higher standardization grade S is standardized before those with lower standardization grades. In this way, workpieces requiring the most urgent standardization and workpieces that are easiest to standardize are given priority. Accordingly, standardization efficiency is improved, and standardization cost is decreased.
Understandably, the order of the Steps S2, S3 and S4 can be changed, with the standardization grade S of each kind of workpiece remaining unchanged by the order in which Steps S2-S4 are performed. Additionally, as the standardization grade S is located in a range that can be recorded and compared, the formula for calculating the standardization grade S can also be S=MXYZ. In this case, M is a constant with the order of standardization remaining unchanged. The judging method can also be made into a computer program and input into a processor, thus allowing the processor to automatically judge a standardization order of workpieces.
It is to be further understood that even though numerous characteristics and advantages of the present embodiments have been set forth in the foregoing description, together with details of structures and functions of various embodiments, the disclosure is illustrative only, and changes may be made in detail, especially in matters of shape, size, and arrangement of parts within the principles of the present invention to the full extent indicated by the broad general meaning of the terms in which the appended claims are expressed.
| Number | Date | Country | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 200610060523.0 | Apr 2006 | CN | national |
