JPH0679318B2 - Design evaluation device - Google Patents

Description

Description: TECHNICAL FIELD The present invention relates to a system for evaluating design data having a dependency relationship, for example, when designing routes and supports for plant piping, trays, and ducts. The present invention relates to a suitable design evaluation device.

[Prior art]

Along with the progress of computer technology, a design support system has been developed that supports the problem solving that was conventionally performed manually by using a computer. For example, as a system that supports stress analysis of design results of plant piping and evaluates design results,
Nippon CDC Co., Ltd.
BERNET NEWS) Vol.2, No.4, TRIFLEX, a pipe stress analysis program shown in July 1983, is an example. In this type of system, stress analysis is performed by inputting design results such as piping routes and support positions.

[Problems to be solved by the invention]

In the above-mentioned conventional technique, the creation of the input data depends on the human being, and the first design result (for example, the design result of the route of the duct) and the second design result depending on the first design result ( For example, in the case of checking that there is a correspondence with the support design result), the check related to the second design result is also performed manually.

An object of the present invention is to automate the check regarding the design result B that depends on the design result A and improve the operability of the computer system that supports the design.

[Means for solving problems]

The above-mentioned object is to store the route design result of designing each arrangement route of a plurality of pipes and the support design result corresponding to each route of the support supporting each pipe, and the support design result. Judgment means for judging whether or not it matches the corresponding route design result, and each route and each support as a graphic on the screen based on the route design result and the support design result stored in the storage means. The reason why the route and the route which are not suitable by the determining means and the graphic display of the support of the route are forcibly displayed in the same color on the screen in a different color from the other unsuitable routes and the reason for the determination is not suitable It is achieved by providing a display control means for displaying.

[Action]

The design evaluation device judges the compatibility between the route design result and the support design result, and displays the design result which is judged as non-conforming. Since the design evaluation device automatically makes the judgment, the burden on the operator is reduced, and in this display,
Since the non-conforming route and the support graphic are displayed in the same color, it is possible to know which route is supported by the non-conforming support simply by looking at the screen. Moreover, when there are a plurality of incompatible routes, each route is displayed in a different color, which facilitates understanding of the screen. Further, since the reason for the nonconformity is also displayed on the screen, the support design result can be corrected quickly and easily.

Example 1 An example of the present invention will be described below with reference to the drawings.

FIG. 1 is a block diagram of a design evaluation apparatus according to the present invention. In FIG. 1, reference numeral 1 denotes a database that stores route design results, which may be a database on a computer. Reference numeral 2 denotes a database that stores the design result of the support, which may also be a computer database. Reference numeral 3 is a judgment device for verifying the support design result, which may be a computer running an appropriate program. Reference numeral 4 is a display control device for displaying the route support for which the determination result is unsuitable, which may be a computer on which an appropriate program operates. Further, the determination device 3 and the display control device 4 may share the same computer. A display device 5 may be a computer terminal.

Table 1 shows an example of the design result stored as the route design result A.

In the example shown in Table 1, the pipe R1
It was designed on June 4, 1986, the version number is 2, and the coordinates of the middle point of the pipe are (0,0,0) and (0,
0,10) and (50,0,10), and it is stored that the type of piping is the type a.

Table 2 shows an example of the design result stored as the support design result B.

In the example shown in Table 2, the support for the pipe R1 named S1 is designed on June 3, 1986,
The version number is 1 and the support coordinates are (90,
0,0) and the format is format 1 is stored.

Next, the operation of the design evaluation system using the device of the present invention will be described using an example.

2 (a), (b), and (c) are explanatory views of the flow of processing of the determination device 3 (FIG. 1) of the design evaluation system according to the present invention.

First, as preprocessing 6 (see FIG. 2 (a)), information on the route design result A and the support design result B is retrieved, and the route and support design results are predetermined on the display device 5 (FIG. 1). Graphically display in a color (green, etc.) other than the highlighted colors (red, pink, etc.). At this time, the display control device 4 (FIG. 1) stores the display color for each route.

Next, as route evaluation processing 7 (see FIG. 2 (a)),
The route design result A is searched, and the following processing is repeated for all registered routes.

First, the support design result B is searched, and of all registered supports, the support evaluation process 8 is performed for the support whose corresponding route name is the route under evaluation process.
The following processing is repeated (see FIG. 2 (b)).

In this process, the design result of the selected support is judged from the design result of the route to determine whether it is correct. Judgment of the design result of the support is performed by storing the check information together with the design result, or by using the relationship that the design result should hold to satisfy the purpose of the design. Any of the methods of determining from itself may be used. For example, (i) If the creation date of the support searched from the support design result B is older than the creation date of the route searched from the rule design result A, the design result is determined to be incorrect.

(Ii) A method of determining that the design result is incorrect if the support version number retrieved from the support design result B is smaller than the route version number retrieved from the route design result A.

(Iii) A method of determining that the position is incorrect when there is no place where the support position retrieved from the support design result B and the midpoint of the route retrieved from the route design result A match.

(Iv) A method of determining that the support format determined from the route format retrieved from the route design result A and the support format retrieved from the support design result B do not correspond to each other.

(V) A method of determining that the distance from the adjacent support retrieved from the support design result B is not correct when it is more than the design reference value.

and so on.

The above (i) and (ii) are the methods of storing and checking the information for check together with the design result, and (iii) (iv)
(V) is a method of judging from the design result itself by using the relationship that the design result should hold in order to satisfy the design purpose.

If the support design result is not correct, the display controller 4
The root name and the support name are transferred to (Fig. 1).

FIG. 3 shows a processing procedure of the display control device 4 (FIG. 1).
When the route and support information is sent from the determination device 3 (FIG. 1), the display control device 4 described above causes the display device 5 to operate.
Examine the display color (stored) of the corresponding route displayed in (FIG. 1). If the stored color is a predetermined highlighting color (red, pink, etc.), the support is displayed again in that color. If it is not a highlight color (such as green), select an unused highlight color (such as red or pink), redisplay the route and support with the selected highlight color, remember the route display color, and select. The fact that the highlighted color is used is remembered.

Finally, at the appropriate place on the screen, the fact that the support design result is incorrect and the reason for the judgment are displayed.

FIG. 4 shows a display example on the display device 5. In this display example, it is displayed that the design result of support for two routes is incorrect.

That is, first, the route and support design results are displayed in a color other than green (dotted line in FIG. 4), that is, an emphasized color, in accordance with the procedure shown in FIG. 2 (a). At this time, green is stored as a display color for all routes. Next, the route R1 is selected according to the procedure shown in FIG. 2 (b), and the design result of the corresponding support is checked according to the procedure shown in FIG. 2 (c). In the case of the design results shown in Tables 1 and 2, it is determined that the design result is incorrect according to the data of creation date, support position, and version number by the procedure shown in FIG. Device 4 (first
(Fig.) Is highlighted. According to the procedure shown in FIG. 3, the display control device 4 first selects red as an emphasis color to display route 1, stores that red has been used, displays support 1 in red, Display the reason for the judgment.

Similarly, if it is determined that the support 2 of the route 2 is not correct, the support 2 of the route 2 is displayed in an unused highlight color pink by the same process.

As a result of the above processing, support for routes R1 and R1 (S
1) is displayed in red color (indicated by a solid line in FIG. 4), and support (S2) for routes R2 and R2 is also displayed in pink color (indicated by a broken line in FIG. 4). Root supports that are not determined to be unsuitable for the design result are displayed in a color other than the highlight color, green (shown by the dotted line in FIG. 4).

[Effects of Embodiment 1] The point to be noted here is that the route whose design result is determined to be unsuitable and the support are displayed in the same color, and the route whose design result is not determined to be unsuitable It is easy to distinguish from support. It is also important to change the display color for each route so that the related routes and support can be seen at a glance.

As can be seen from the first embodiment described above, according to the present invention, it is possible to automate the check concerning support such that the route and the support design result correspond to each other. This can reduce the time required for design verification. Further, the design quality is improved by performing the design verification without exception.

Second Embodiment Next, a description will be given of an embodiment when applied to the design result input system of the present invention. The structure is shown in FIG. Correction device 16
With the display device 5, the designer registers the route and support design results in the route design result 1 and the support design result 2. The determination device 3 constantly checks the contents of the route design result 1 and the support design result 2, and when the design result registration work causes an incorrect support design result to be displayed on the display device 5.

[Effect of Embodiment 2] The effect of this embodiment is that when a new route is registered, it is displayed that the support is unprocessed, the support can be designed, and the route design result is corrected. Sometimes you may be prompted to fix support. Further, since the correction device 16 and the determination device 3 share the same display device 5, the check result of the support design result can be acquired on the same screen during the registration of the design result.

Third Embodiment Next, a case where the present invention is applied to an input data creation system for stress analysis will be described. The structure is shown in FIG. Design results of routes and supports by the stress analysis input creation device 17
The stress analysis input data 18 is created from 2. At this time, before actually creating the stress analysis input data 18, the determination device 3
Checks the contents of the route design result 1 and the support design result 2, and displays on the display device 5 when the support design result is incorrect.

[Effects of Third Embodiment] The effects of this embodiment are that the contents of the support design result 2 can be checked before actual stress analysis to prevent the unnecessary stress analysis from being performed, and that the input data of the stress analysis is It can be created automatically.

Fourth Embodiment Although the verification result is displayed on the color graphic terminal in the above embodiments, the list may be output on a character terminal or printer paper in a table format arranged by route.

〔The invention's effect〕

According to the present invention, the first design result A and the second design result B
It is possible to automate the check regarding the second design result B such as that and correspond. This can reduce the time required for design verification. Further, the design quality is improved by the fact that the design is verified without exception.

[Brief description of drawings]

FIG. 1 is a system diagram showing a first embodiment of the design evaluation apparatus of the present invention, FIG. 2 is an explanatory view of a processing procedure of the judging means in the above embodiment, and FIG. 3 is a processing procedure of the display control means. Explanatory drawing and FIG. 4 are explanatory views of a display example of the display means, and FIG.
FIG. 6 is a system diagram of the second embodiment of the present invention, and FIG. 6 is a system diagram of the third embodiment. 1 ... Route design result, 2 ... Support design result, 3 ...
... Judgment device, 4 ... Display control device, 5 ... Display device, 6
…… Preprocessing, 7 …… Route evaluation processing, 8 …… Support evaluation processing, 9 …… Information transfer processing, 10 …… Display color search processing,
11 …… Display color judgment processing, 12 …… Highlight color selection processing, 13 ……
Route display processing, 14 …… Support display processing, 15 …… Comment display processing, 16 …… Correction device, 17 …… Stress analysis input creation processing, 18 …… Stress analysis input data.

 ─────────────────────────────────────────────────── ─── Continuation of the front page (72) Inventor Yu Wada 1168 Moriyama-cho, Hitachi, Hitachi, Ibaraki Energy Research Institute, Hiritsu Manufacturing Co., Ltd. (72) Naoto Yoshida 3-1-1, Saicho-cho, Hitachi, Ibaraki Hitachi, Ltd., Hitachi Plant (56) References JP-A-61-213969 (JP, A)

Claims (1)

[Claims] 1. A storage means for storing a route design result of designing each arrangement route of a plurality of pipes and a support design result corresponding to each route of a support for supporting each pipe, and each of the support design results. Judgment means for judging whether or not it matches the corresponding route design result, and each route and each support as a graphic on the screen based on the route design result and the support design result stored in the storage means. The reason why the route and the route which are not suitable by the determining means and the graphic display of the support of the route are forcibly displayed in the same color on the screen in a different color from the other unsuitable routes and the reason for the determination is not suitable And a display control means for displaying.