Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T06:39:02.510Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Physically feasible decomposition of Engino® toy models: A graph-theoretic approach

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 March 2018

E. N. ANTONIOU ,
A. ARAÚJO ,
M. D. BUSTAMANTE  and
A. GIBALI
E. N. ANTONIOU
Affiliation:
Department of Information Technology, Alexander Technological Educational Institute of Thessaloniki, 57400, Thessaloniki, Greece email: [email protected]
A. ARAÚJO
Affiliation:
CMUC, Department of Mathematics, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal email: [email protected]
M. D. BUSTAMANTE
Affiliation:
Institute for Discovery, School of Mathematics and Statistics, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland email: [email protected]
A. GIBALI
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics, ORT Braude College, P.O. Box 78, Karmiel 2161002, Israel email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

During the 125th European Study Group with Industry held in Limassol, Cyprus, 5–9 December 2016, one of the participating companies, Engino.net Ltd, posed a very interesting challenge to the members of the study group. Engino.net Ltd is a Cypriot company, founded in 2004, that produces a series of toy sets – the Engino® toy sets – consisting of a number of building blocks, which can be assembled by pupils to compose toy models. Depending on the contents of a particular toy set, the company has developed a number of models that can be built utilizing the blocks present in the set; however, the production of a step-by-step assembly manual for each model could only be done manually. The goal of the challenge posed by the company was to implement a procedure to automatically generate the assembly instructions for a given toy. In the present paper, we propose a graph-theoretic approach to model the problem and provide a series of results to solve it by employing modified versions of well-established algorithms in graph theory. An algorithmic procedure to obtain a hierarchical, physically feasible decomposition of a given toy model, from which a series of step-by-step assembly instructions can be recovered, is proposed.

Keywords

05C3805C9068R1094C15
Type
Papers
Information
European Journal of Applied Mathematics , Volume 30 , Issue 2 , April 2019 , pp. 278 - 297
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

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

Footnotes

†MDB acknowledges support from Science Foundation Ireland under research Grant number 12/IP/1491.

References

[1] Agrawala, M. et al. (2003) Designing effective step-by-step assembly instructions. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGGRAPH 2003 ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), Vol. 22, pp. 828–837.Google Scholar
[2] Bang-Jensen, J. & Gutin, G. Z. (2009) Digraphs: Theory, Algorithms and Applications, 2nd ed., Springer-Verlag London.Google Scholar
[3] Bondy, J. A. & Murty, U. S. R. (1976) Graph Theory with Applications. Vol. 290. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
[4] Cormen, T. H., Leiserson, C. E., Rivest, R. L. & Stein, C. (2001) Introduction to Algorithms, 2nd ed., The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, and McGraw-Hill Book Company, Boston.Google Scholar
[5] Dijkstra, E. (1976) A Discipline of Programming, Prentice Hall, NJ.Google Scholar
[6] Hsu, Y.-Y., Tai, P.-H., Wang, M.-W. & Chen, W.-C. (2011) A knowledge-based engineering system for assembly sequence planning. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 55, 763–782.Google Scholar
[7] Kassem, S., Lee, A. T., Leigh, D. A., Marcos, V., Palmer, L. I. & Pisano, S. (2017) Stereodivergent synthesis with a programmable molecular machine. Nature 549, 374–378.Google Scholar
[8] Lambert, A. J. D. (2003) Disassembly sequencing: A survey. Int. J. Prod. Res. 41, 3721–3759.Google Scholar
[9] Li, W., Agrawala, M., Curless, B. & Salesin, D. (2008) Automated generation of interactive 3D exploded view diagrams. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGGRAPH 2008 ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), Vol. 27, p. 101.Google Scholar
[10] Natarajan, B. K. (1988) On planning assemblies. In: Proceedings of the 4th Annual Symposium on Computational Geometry, ACM, pp. 299–308.Google Scholar
[11] Peysakhov, M., Galinskaya, V. & Regli, W. C. (2000) Representation and evolution of lego-based assemblies. In: Proceedings of the AAAI/IAAI, p. 1089.Google Scholar
[12] Sharir, M. (1981) A strong connectivity algorithm and its applications to data flow analysis. Comput. Math. Appl. 7, 67–72.Google Scholar
[13] Snoeyink, J. & Stolfi, J. (1994) Objects that cannot be taken apart with two hands. Discret. Comput. Geom. 12, 367–384.Google Scholar
[14] Tarjan, R. E. (1972) Depth-first search and linear graph algorithms. SIAM J. Comput. 1, 146–160.Google Scholar
[15] Wang, L., Keshavarzmanesh, S., Feng, H. Y. & Buchal, R. O. (2009) Assembly process planning and its future in collaborative manufacturing: A review. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 41, 132–144.Google Scholar
[16] Wilson, R. H. & Latombe, J. C. (1994) Geometric reasoning about mechanical assembly. Artif. Intell. 71, 371–396.Google Scholar