JP2780542B2 - Product design evaluation support device - Google Patents

Description

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

[0001]

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION 1. Field of the Invention The present invention relates to a system for supporting product design, and more particularly, to calculating an assembly time based on an assembly concept diagram or the like in an initial stage of design, or evaluating ease of assembly. Alternatively, the present invention relates to a product design evaluation support device for evaluating adjustment time and adjustability related to adjustment work.

[0002]

2. Description of the Related Art Conventionally, as a method of calculating an assembling time of a predetermined product composed of a plurality of parts, a method of observing an assembling time using a prototype machine or a table of man-hours for each assembling element in advance are prepared. A method of analyzing an assembly drawing by using the obtained data and obtaining an assembly time based on the analysis is generally used. However, in the above method, it is not possible to grasp the actual assembly time unless a product is actually prototyped, and it takes time to analyze a product with a large number of parts. There is a problem that even if the assembly time can be estimated, it is not possible to sufficiently grasp what points should be improved.

As a conventional method of calculating and evaluating the adjustment time, since the adjustment operation is affected by various conditions, the adjustment operation is actually observed by using a prototype product and timed. In general, a method of calculating the adjustment time was used. However, in such a method, there is a problem that the adjustment time cannot be grasped unless a product is actually prototyped, and that it takes a considerable time to observe that the product has a large number of parts. Even if the adjustment time is measured, there is a problem that what improvement should be made and a point to be improved cannot be grasped.

On the other hand, even if the assembly time, the adjustment time, and the target cost of the designed product are set, when the design is actually finished, the number of parts is too large, and if the component costs are integrated, the target cost is reduced. In some cases, it may not be possible to reach the target.When comparing design improvement effects, etc., as a result of assembling time, etc., it is possible to grasp the degree of the effect based on the results. However, there is a problem that an absolute comparison regarding assemblability cannot be made between the apparatuses.

[0005]

[0008] The present invention is, follow the above-mentioned
Considering the issues in the existing technology,
From the conceptual design stage to the time required for assembly and adjustment of the product.
Calculation and evaluation of ease of assembly and adjustment can be performed,
And to provide a <br/> off product design evaluation support apparatus be clearly grasped the point to turn improved.

[0006]

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION The present invention basically employs the following technical configuration to achieve the above object. That is, when designing a product, a design database storing information including design data such as a design drawing or the number of parts necessary for the design and a plurality of evaluation elements constituting the design work characteristic evaluation factors are selected. An analysis database in which a plurality of ranks are set for each of a plurality of element items for at least one evaluation element, and a work time and an evaluation point are allocated to each rank; A search means for applying the design data obtained to the analysis database to calculate the work time and the evaluation point in the design data; and a calculation for calculating the total work time and the evaluation point obtained by the search means Processing means, and further calculates the total working time and the evaluation points based on the target values selected from the design database. Is a product design evaluation support device that includes means for comparing the total work time obtained from a product with an evaluation point. As a first aspect, a product design evaluation support device An analysis database for a function defining the target number of parts, a design means for setting necessary functions using the analysis database for the function, and an assembly element item based on an assembly drawing designed based on the work. An evaluation analysis database in which assembly time and evaluation points are set,
Search means for receiving conditions of the evaluation analysis database and searching for assembly time and evaluation points for assembly according to the conditions, means for calculating the assembly time of the entire product by the search means, and the calculation means and the functions A design evaluation support apparatus having evaluation means for obtaining an assemblability evaluation point using the target number of parts obtained by the analysis database, and means for performing an absolute comparison between apparatuses based on these results; Also, as a second aspect, particularly with regard to the adjustment work of the assembly work, the analysis database in which the adjustment time and the evaluation point are set for each adjustment element item and the conditions of the analysis database are received, and each adjustment time and adjustment are performed in accordance with the conditions. Searching means for searching for an evaluation point for calculating the adjustment time of the entire product by the searching means; Difficulty in the adjustment operation with a target number of parts obtained by the analysis database or by a design evaluation support apparatus and a evaluation means for obtaining an evaluation point of ease.

[0007]

The product design evaluation support apparatus according to the present invention basically employs the above-described technical configuration. Therefore, when designing a predetermined product and executing an assembling operation, the assembling operation is performed in advance. When designing a product to be manufactured, a design database storing information including design data such as design drawings or the number of parts necessary for the design, and assembling work of individual parts or adjustment work accompanying the assembling work are required. Using an analysis database storing time or / and evaluation points of the workability of each assembly work or adjustment work,
For a product consisting of a predetermined number of parts originally designed by a designer, the time and evaluation points of the individual assembling work or adjustment work are obtained by searching the analysis database, and at the time of manufacturing the product. The overall time of the assembly work or the adjustment work and the evaluation points are calculated and processed, and the result is determined using an appropriate standard.
It is to determine whether or not a certain reference value is satisfied.

In the present invention, if there is a considerable difference between the time of the assembly work or the adjustment work and the evaluation point based on the determination, feedback is performed, and the design work of the product is performed again. As a result, it is possible to make the design result of the product more ideal.

[0009]

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS A specific example of a product design evaluation support apparatus according to the present invention will be described below in detail with reference to the drawings. FIG.
1 is a diagram illustrating the principle of a product design evaluation support device according to the present invention, and is a block diagram illustrating a specific example of a product design evaluation support device according to the present invention.

In FIG. 1, when designing a product,
A design database storing information including design data such as design drawings or the number of parts necessary for the design, and at least one evaluation element selected from a plurality of evaluation elements constituting the design work characteristic evaluation factor An analysis database 3 in which a plurality of ranks are set for each of a plurality of element items, and a work time and an evaluation point are assigned to each of the plurality of ranks; 3, a search means 4 for calculating the work time and the evaluation points in the design data, and a storage means for storing the individual work times and the evaluation points obtained by the search means 4 6. Operation means 5 for calculating individual work times and evaluation points by performing arithmetic processing on individual data stored in the storage means 6; Based on the selected target value is the product design evaluation support apparatus is shown which is composed of comparison means 7 for comparing the evaluation point and the total work time obtained from the analysis database 3.

In the product design evaluation support apparatus according to the present invention shown in FIG. 1, the search means 4, the arithmetic means 5, the storage means 6 and the comparison means 7 are all one central processing means, for example, It may be provided in the CPU 8. Further, in a specific embodiment of the present invention, the product design evaluation support device includes a keyboard means 9 for inputting data necessary for arithmetic processing, a display means 10 for displaying the arithmetic processing result, and printing of the arithmetic processing result. It may have a printer means 11 for displaying.

In the present invention, the design work characteristic evaluation factors are not particularly limited, but are, for example, factors that can be replaced by a time function such as an assemblability evaluation or an adjustability evaluation based on a target number of parts. It is preferred that Therefore, hereinafter, as a first aspect of the present invention, a case in which assembling time and assemblability evaluation of a product defined based on the number of parts used in the product are adopted as the design work characteristic evaluation factors. The product design evaluation support device of the present invention will be described by taking an example.

Usually, when a certain product is designed, the necessary number of components constituting the product is determined by the designer. As described above, the designer, at the stage of designing the product, However, it is not possible to judge how much time it takes to assemble simply by looking at the drawing, or whether the workability in the assembling work is good or bad. Therefore, it is necessary to make a model of the product once and examine it. Time was clearly wasted time, affecting the cost of the product.

Therefore, from the design stage, it is possible to know in advance how much assembling time is required to assemble the designed product or whether the workability in the assembling work is good or bad. For example, the design work can be shortened, and at the same time, the work efficiency in the actual production line can be improved, which contributes to a reduction in product cost.

For this reason, in this specific example, an absolute evaluation is made of the assembly work time and the workability of the assembly work based on the number of parts required for the product. More specifically, the function of a given product in a given product is grasped, and if the product has the given function, a database is used to determine how many necessary parts are appropriate. That is, an analysis database is created in advance for each of a predetermined number of functions, and thereby, the target number of components can be set.

That is, if the function is the same, the greater the number of parts, the longer the work time, and this is used to show that the design is not good. By using such a database, it is possible to make an absolute evaluation regarding the above-described evaluation between products having different numbers of parts in product design. Also, what the designer designs is not always the optimal design, and there may be cases where over-design is performed.Therefore, it is necessary to use the number of parts for the product designed by the designer. By applying the product design evaluation support device of the present invention, the assembly work time and workability of the assembly work can be obtained for the designed product.

On the other hand, with respect to a predetermined product designed by a designer, a target number of target parts, assembling work time, and a target value relating to workability of assembling work are obtained in advance from the function thereof.
By collecting the results, a target design database, that is, a design database including design data related to the target value of the design work characteristic evaluation factor is created. Then, data relating to the assembly work time and workability of the assembly work calculated based on the number of parts designed by the designer, and the target calculated and processed based on the data from the target design database for the product related to the design. The assembly work time is compared with the data on the workability of the target assembly work, and if the difference is not significant, the design is judged to be appropriate.If the difference is significant, the design is considered basic. The re-design is executed, and the comparison process is executed again.

Therefore, in the present invention, it is possible to complete a better design easily and in a short time. The above aspect according to the present invention will be described in detail with reference to FIGS. FIG. 1 is a configuration diagram showing an example of an apparatus for executing a design evaluation support apparatus according to an embodiment of the present invention based on FIGS. An apparatus 1 for executing this system is composed of a control unit 8 including a CPU or the like which performs arithmetic processing of the entire system, a keyboard 9, a display 10, a printer 11, an analysis database 3 and a design database 2. As described above, in this specific example, the analysis data includes three types of target number of parts per functional module, man-hour per assembly element item, and assemblability evaluation point standard. The analysis database is provided with a target component number database DB35 for each functional module, a manhour database DB36 for each assembly element item, and an assemblability evaluation point reference database DB37 which adopt evaluation items and store predetermined data corresponding to each of them. It is a thing.

The control unit 8 of the apparatus according to the present invention has a function of controlling the entire evaluation system. The keyboard 9 is a means for inputting specifications of parts and selecting necessary information from an analysis table for each assembly element item or a method table for each function module. The display 10 displays a design drawing or a conceptual drawing, the contents of an analysis table, and the evaluation results in an appropriate form.

The printer 11 prints the evaluation result on a print medium. The design database DB2 used in this specific example includes, for each predetermined product,
The number of parts constituting the product, a parts table, a design drawing, an assembly drawing, and the like are stored. In addition, an analysis database relating to a function, which is one of the analysis databases used in this specific example (hereinafter simply referred to as a function database), is provided by a designer for functions considered necessary for each part used in the product. This defines the target number of parts.

That is, the function database used in this embodiment is shown in FIG. 1 as a target number-of-components database DB35 for each function module.
An example of the contents is shown in FIG. In other words, the target component count database DB35 for each functional module includes, for example,
A printer section is designated as a function module, and a printer. Divided into a platen function section, a spacing function section, etc., and each function section is further divided into a platen function, a retraction / jam prevention function, a print blur prevention function,
The functions are divided into a plurality of predetermined methods.

That is, the platen function is subdivided into a plate system and a rubber roller system, and the retraction / jam prevention function is subdivided into a motor control system, a magnet system, a manual system, and the like. Then, a target number of parts is specified for each method.

That is, in the functional module of this specific example, the target number of parts is stored for each functional module / method. On the other hand, the assembly element item man-hour database DB36 and the assemblability evaluation point reference database DB37 used in the present embodiment have an assembling work analysis table as illustrated in FIG. Assembling man-hours and assemblability evaluation points (deduction values) are separately configured and set. For example, in the assemblability evaluation point reference database DB37, a plurality of elements such as a handling element indicating the degree of operability related to handling, a direction element indicating in which direction to move, and the like are provided. Multiple ranks are assigned.

For example, ranks are provided for handling elements such as "easy" (rank 1), "medium" (rank 2), and "difficult" (rank 3), and For elements, "left" (rank 1),
Ranks are provided such as “right” (rank 2), “up” (rank 3), and “lower” (rank 4). The ranks in the database are designed so that, as going to the right, the direction of time or the direction in which work becomes difficult, the data stored in the ranks are It is an evaluation point and a deduction value, and includes a factor related to time.

The analysis table for each assembly element item in the present invention may be the one shown in FIG. 8 in which the items shown in FIG. 3 are set in more detail. That is, in FIG. 8, in addition to the man-hours and the deduction points, the evaluation items are divided according to the rank of good / bad assemblability, and a flag is given to each item. The man-hour man-hour database DB36 used in this specific example stores the man-hours required for each assembly element item individually.

The man-hour is also considered to be a function of time and is used together with the deduction value. In other words, the product design evaluation support apparatus of the present invention employs an evaluation system as shown in FIG. 4. For each element and man-hour, for example, for the handling element A, each rank A
1, A2, and A3, each rank is given a time value a11 and a deduction value a12 for the A1 rank, a time value a21 and a deduction value a22 for the A2 rank, and a time value a31 and a deduction point for the A3 rank. It is configured such that a value a32 is given.

This relationship is the same for the direction element B and other elements. The assemblability evaluation points in the present invention are obtained by converting the data described in the rank table from 100 points into points by deducting points by the deduction method. (Assemblability evaluation points for each component) For each component, the total point of the assembly time and the evaluation point for each predetermined assembly element is calculated by calculation, and the result can be visually observed by a display device or printed display. It can be expressed in a form and absolutely evaluated with other design results.

The display method in the present invention is not particularly limited. For example, as shown in FIG. 5, assembling time for each component is represented by each element, and data such as evaluation points are displayed in a radar chart system. May be compared with other design results by the area, and if any of the evaluation items in the corresponding radar chart is less than a predetermined value, the design May not be appropriate,
If all the evaluation items exceed a predetermined value, for example, 60%, the design may be determined to be appropriate, and the determination criteria may be set arbitrarily.

Further, as shown in FIG. 6, the evaluation result may be expressed in a bar graph for each item. Next, an execution example of the product design evaluation support device according to the present invention will be described with reference to FIG. First, when a designer inputs a product name (or unit name) to be designed from the keyboard 9, data necessary for the design of the product is called from the design database DB <b> 2 and displayed on a display or the like.

Next, in order to set what kind of function is to be realized for each part of the product to be designed and in what manner, the keyboard 9 is operated to set the function module set for each function module. The data relating to the target number of components for each functional module stored in the database DB 35, that is, the required functions and methods for calling the realization method table as shown in FIG. 2 are input to the display.
(Step (a)) Thereby, the target number of parts for each functional module / method is automatically set, and the target number of parts Gi for the entire product is automatically calculated. (Step (b)) (Step (c)) The designer proceeds with the design based on the target number of parts in the future. The assemblability evaluation, which will be described later, is also calculated using this reference value.

In the present invention, the ease of assembling (assembly evaluation points) of the entire product is determined by assembling characteristic values using the target number of parts so that absolute comparison between devices can be made. The target number of parts of the product is calculated by the following equation (1).

[0032]

(Equation 1)

Thereafter, the designer terminates the method setting screen and starts studying a design plan. (Step (d)) In the design evaluation step, based on the target number of parts obtained as described above, an evaluation is made on the assembly work time of the product and the workability of the assembly work. In the meantime, a corresponding rank is selected for the assembling work of the individual parts by the assembling element item analysis database DB35 (FIG. 3). (Step (e)) The assembling element item analysis database is a database in which element items related to the assembling work are ranked as described above. As shown in FIG. 3, the rank of each element of the analysis database is linked to a DB in which the number of assembling steps for each work item and the ease of assembling work are represented by evaluation points (points deducted).

By selecting the rank, the assembly time for each component is calculated in accordance with the selection. (Step (f)) The assembling time t _j of the part j can be obtained by the equation (2).

[0035]

(Equation 2)

J: assembling process number n: number of assembling work items a _i , ₁ : assembling time of assembling work items A _i Next, using the assemblability evaluation point reference database DB37 as shown in FIG. Deduction value ai1 for each assembly element,
bil, cil, etc. are calculated. (Step (g)) After that, in step (h), an evaluation point (deduction value) corresponding to ease of assembly is set in each rank of the analysis database in addition to the number of assembly steps. As the assembling work becomes more difficult, the deduction point value becomes higher, so that the assembling easiness (assembly evaluation point) p _j of each part is _calculated as (3)
It is obtained by the 100-point perfect score method using the equation. The 100-point perfect score method has the merit of intuitively determining whether it is good or bad.

[0037]

(Equation 3)

J: Number of parts a _i , ₂ : Deduction value of assembly element item A _i Next, in step (i), the assemblability flag fj is counted, and in step (j), It is determined whether or not the evaluation has been performed on the component, and if NO, the process returns to step (e) and repeats the above steps.
If YES in step (j), the flow advances to step (l), and the assemblability characteristic value F (x) for each assembly element is obtained by integrating the assemblability data for each part obtained in step (i). Is calculated.

By analyzing the assembling work of the parts for each assembling work item, each of the assemblability flags f _j is integrated to obtain the number of flags as a whole product, and this is converted into a point per target number of parts. And assemblability flag F for each assembly element
(X) (for example, an assembly characteristic value).

[0040]

(Equation 4)

J: number of parts l: number of functional modules
x: an assembly number of elements the assembly characteristic value F (x), a target value of the assembling property characteristic value set in advance (F _{ma x)} and examining the relationship between the limit value (F _min) corresponding F (x ) Is converted into a score by the 100-point perfect score method to obtain P (x). In step (m), the assemblability evaluation point P (x) for each assembly element item is subjected to arithmetic processing, and the calculated result is used by the control unit. Store in memory.

The product assemblability evaluation points are represented by, for example, a radar chart for each of the assembling elements, so that design features can be grasped more accurately. As described above, the designer proceeds with the design while analyzing / evaluating the design and assembly work in an interactive manner. When the design and analysis of the assembling work of all parts are completed in this way, the assembling time of the entire product can be calculated by equation (5). (Step (n))

[0043]

(Equation 5)

M: Number of parts Finally, in step (0), the evaluation result is displayed on the display 3 as the assembling time and assemblability evaluation points for each assembling operation, the total assembling time, and the product assembling evaluation points. The designer looks at these results, finds weak points in the design, and changes the design if necessary. (Step (p)) In step (p), if the design evaluation is NO, the process returns to step (d), and the above steps are repeated to complete an ideal product design. I can do it.

Also, since the characteristic value of the assemblability per target part is converted into a score, an absolute evaluation can be made and comparison between apparatuses can be easily performed. In this way, the number of parts to be targeted can be defined at the drawing stage in the past, and the assembly work is also analyzed, so that design changes can be made easily, and the assemblability that previously relied on the intuition of the designer Can now be evaluated quantitatively. Furthermore, since the evaluation points can be calculated for each assembly work item, it is easy to obtain a point for design improvement, and this is a very effective tool for product design.

That is, in the above embodiment of the present invention,
By inputting the realization method for the function using the means described above, the target number of parts is set from the target number of parts registered in the function database, and the assembly-related conditions are input for the assembly work of individual parts. By doing so, an assembly time and an assemblability evaluation point meeting these conditions are calculated from a database on assemblability, and the assembling time and assemblability evaluation point of the entire product are obtained based on the results of the above-mentioned two items. .

Next, in the present invention, when there are various kinds of adjustment work in the assembling process as factors for evaluating the design work characteristics, a specific example of evaluating the product design by using the adjustment time and adjustability evaluation. Will be described below as a second embodiment. Second
The configuration of the product design evaluation support device used in the specific example of
Although it is substantially the same as FIG. 1, various databases constituting the analysis database 3 are different from those in FIG. 1. Specifically, the database DB 35 is, for example, an adjustment work item content database, Database D
B36 is set as an adjustment element item analysis database, and the database DB37 is set as an adjustment element item man-hour evaluation point reference database.

In this specific example, in FIG. 1, the control unit 8 has a function of controlling the entire evaluation device. The keyboard 9 is used for inputting the specification of parts, and an analysis database DB3 including an analysis database for each adjustment element item.
5 means for selecting necessary information from the DB 37. The adjustment work item content DB 35 is a database in which a list of adjustment works is registered. The analysis database DB36 for each adjustment element item and the man-hour / evaluation point reference database DB7 for each adjustment element item include an analysis table as shown in FIG.
The deduction value is stored. For example, the adjustment jig A has ranks from level A1 to level An, and a time and an evaluation point (deduction value) for each adjustment element item are registered for each level.

The operation of a specific example according to the second aspect of the present invention will be described below with reference to FIG. First, when a product name to be analyzed is input from the keyboard 9 (step (a)), the design database DB
The parts table and the assembly drawing of the parts constituting the corresponding product are read from step 2 (step (b)) and displayed on the display 10, for example.

The designer sets the mode for performing the adjustment evaluation while looking at this screen, and refers to the adjustment work item content database DB 35 while looking at the assembly drawing, and
The names of adjustment work that will occur thereafter are selected and registered. (Step (c)) When the registration of all the adjustment work is completed, the detailed contents of the adjustment work are analyzed for each adjustment work. First, in step (d), the first adjustment work is selected, and then, an analysis table as shown in FIG. 9 is stored in the memory unit from the adjustment element item analysis database DB35. After that, a level is selected for each element item of the analysis table. The analysis table is linked to a database in which the adjustment time and the difficulty of the adjustment work are expressed by deduction values as shown in FIG.

In step (e), individual adjustments are made using the database containing the deduction values for each adjustment element item and the time reference database for each adjustment element item in accordance with the level selected in the above step. The adjustment time for the work is calculated. The database including the deduction values for each adjustment element item used in this specific example has data as shown in FIG. Further, the calculation of the adjustment time t _{j in} the specific example according to the present invention is obtained by a calculation formula as shown in Expression (6).

[0052]

(Equation 6)

Here, β1, β2, and ───── are elements that increase the adjustment time non-linearly according to the combination of the element items of the adjustment work. β1 = β (v, w, ─) v: work space β2 = β (s, t, u) s: number of measurement points, t: adjustment accuracy, u: state of measurement points βj =. After the adjustment time for each adjustment work is calculated, it is determined in step (f) whether or not the adjustment work for all parts has been completed. If NO, the process returns to step (c). Then, the subsequent steps are repeated. If YES, the process proceeds to step (g), and the arithmetic processing of the total adjustment time and the overall evaluation point is executed.

For example, in calculating the total adjustment time, the adjustment time of the entire product is calculated using Expression 7.

[0055]

(Equation 7)

As to the evaluation of the adjustment work, as described above, as shown in FIG. 11, a deduction value corresponding to each level is set in each analysis database. This deduction value is set in accordance with the difficulty of the adjustment work, and the more difficult the adjustment work, the higher the deduction value. Then, the easiness of adjustment for each adjustment work can be obtained by the deduction method from 100 points using Equation 8.

[0057]

(Equation 8)

Further, the total adjustment evaluation point as a product can be obtained by Expression 9 when the average value method is adopted, for example.

[0059]

(Equation 9)

Further, an evaluation point for each adjustment work item viewed from the whole product can be calculated. The evaluation points for each adjustment work item are shown in FIG.
It can be calculated from a format like 1. For example, in the case of the work items A and B, since the total deduction value aa of the element item A and the total deduction value bb of the element item B are obtained by the arithmetic processing means from the following Expressions 10 and 11, for example, the average value method is used. The evaluation score for each adjustment element item in the case of adopting can be calculated using Expressions 10 and 11 shown below. For example, for work items A and B,

[0061]

(Equation 10)

[0062]

[Equation 11]

Adjustment work A evaluation point a = 100-aa / m Adjustment work B evaluation point b = 100-bb / mm m: Total adjustment step number The result calculated in the above steps is stored in the memory of the control unit.

In the analysis result, the adjustment time for each adjustment work, the adjustment evaluation points and the total adjustment time, the product adjustment evaluation points, and the evaluation points for each adjustment element item are displayed on the display 3 in step (h). In this way, for adjustment work that could not be analyzed at the drawing stage in the past, just select the appropriate level while looking at the display and automatically evaluate the adjustment time and ease of adjustment quantitatively become able to.
Furthermore, since the evaluation points can be calculated for each adjustment element item, it is easy to obtain a point for design improvement, and this is a very effective tool for product design.

In this specific example, by using such means, by inputting conditions relating to the adjustment work, an adjustment time and an evaluation point which meet these conditions are calculated from the adjustment work analysis table. On the basis of these results, an adjustment evaluation point expressing the adjustment time and ease of adjustment of the entire product by a score is obtained.

[0066]

According to the present invention, it is possible to provide a design evaluation support device which can easily analyze a product assembling work at a drawing stage, and can support a lower cost design. Thus, it is possible to provide a product design evaluation system that can easily analyze product adjustment work at the drawing stage.

[Brief description of the drawings]

FIG. 1 is a block diagram showing a configuration example of an apparatus for realizing a product design evaluation support system according to the present invention.

FIG. 2 is a conceptual diagram of a functional component-specific target component analysis database DB used in the present invention.

FIG. 3 is a conceptual diagram of an assembly element item-specific analysis database DB used in the present invention.

FIG. 4 is a diagram showing the relationship between rank, man-hours, and deduction values in an analysis table for assemblability element items used in the present invention.

FIG. 5 shows an example in which a radar chart is used as an assemblability evaluation point display method used in the present invention.

FIG. 6 shows an example using a bar graph as an assemblability evaluation point display method used in the present invention.

FIG. 7 is a flowchart showing a procedure for performing an assemblability analysis in the present invention.

FIG. 8 is a diagram showing details of an assemblability element item-by-item analysis table used in the present invention.

FIG. 9 is a conceptual diagram of an adjustment element item analysis database DB used in the present invention.

FIG. 10 is a flowchart showing a procedure at the time of analysis of adjustment work in the present invention.

FIG. 11 is a diagram showing a concept of calculating an evaluation point for each adjustment element item in the entire product used in the present invention.

[Explanation of symbols]

DESCRIPTION OF SYMBOLS 1 ... Product design evaluation support apparatus 2 ... Design database 3 ... Analysis database 35 ... Target part number database by function module, adjustment work item content database 36 ... Man-hour database by assembly element item, analysis database by adjustment element item 37 ... Assemblability evaluation Point reference database, man-hour / evaluation point reference database for each adjustment element item 4 ... Search means 5 ... Calculation processing means 6 ... Storage means 7 ... Comparison means 8 ... Central calculation processing means, CPU 89 ... Keyboard 10 ... Display 11 ... Printer

Continuation of the front page (56) References Proceedings of the 1991 Spring Meeting of the Japan Society of Precision Engineering, 537-538 Shoji Arimoto "Hitachi's Workability Evaluation Method (1st Report)-Workability Evaluation Method" Development Policy-”Mechanical Design, Vol. 33, No. 7, pp. 39-47“ Masaya Miyagawa et al. “Production Design Evaluation Method“ PEM ”Considering Assemblability and Processing Method” Design and Drafting, Vol. 26, No. 1, pp. 9-17 Masatake Miyagawa et al. "Design Improvement Based on Assemblability Evaluation Method" (58) Fields investigated (Int. Cl. ⁶ , DB name) G06F 17/50 G06F 17/60 JICST file (JOIS)

Claims (1)

(57) [Claims] (1) When designing a product, assembling the product
An analysis database in which adjustment time and evaluation points are set for each adjustment element item for adjustment work associated with
Search means for searching the evaluation points for each adjustment time and adjusted according to the conditions of the database was searched by the search means
Calculating means for calculating a total adjustment time of the product based on the result ; and evaluating means for obtaining an evaluation point regarding ease of adjustment work using the result calculated by the calculating means. A product design evaluation support device characterized in that: