JP7564080B2 - DESIGN SUPPORT DEVICE, DESIGN SUPPORT TOOL, AND DESIGN SUPPORT METHOD - Google Patents

Description

This disclosure relates to a design support device, etc.

In order to prevent defects from occurring during the manufacturing process of parts, etc., it is necessary to satisfy requirements regarding the shape of the part (hereinafter, design requirements) at the design stage of the part. When designing parts with complex shapes such as vehicle parts, a very large number of design requirements must be satisfied. Therefore, as described in Patent Document 1, a design verification system has been proposed that automatically verifies whether a 3D model of a part designed using 3D CAD satisfies the design requirements.

JP 2020-177493 A

However, verification by the design verification system of Patent Document 1 is performed based on the three-dimensional shape of the part shown in the 3D model. For this reason, even if a part is manufactured based on a 3D model that does not satisfy some design requirements, there may be cases where no defects occur. Therefore, for example, it may be necessary to consider whether or not to change the shape of the part that does not satisfy the design requirements based on past development results.

One aspect of the present disclosure aims to make it easier to design parts based on past performance.

One aspect of the present disclosure is a design support device that includes a first notification unit, an extraction unit, and a second notification unit. The first notification unit is configured to notify a geometric feature of the part under design that does not satisfy a requirement based on judgment result data indicating a result of judging whether or not a geometric feature of at least one target part of the part under design satisfies at least one predetermined requirement based on design data of the part under design. The extraction unit is configured to extract a judgment result of a requirement that satisfies a predetermined extraction condition from judgment result data indicating a result of judging whether or not a geometric feature of at least one target part of at least one actual part designed in the past satisfies at least one predetermined requirement based on design data of the at least one actual part. The second notification unit is configured to notify a geometric feature of the target part of at least one actual part related to the judgment result extracted by the extraction unit. A requirement that is not satisfied in the part under design is regarded as an unsatisfied requirement. The extraction condition is that the extracted judgment result is the judgment result of a requirement that is related to the unsatisfied requirement, and is the judgment result that the requirement is not satisfied.

According to the above configuration, the second notification unit notifies the geometric features of the target part that is determined to have the same requirements as the unsatisfied requirements in the part being designed, but that are also not satisfied in the actual part. Therefore, based on the geometric features, it is possible to consider whether or not to change the geometric features of the target part that is determined to have the unsatisfied requirements in the part being designed, and to what extent the geometric features should be changed. Therefore, it is easy to design parts based on past performance.

In one aspect of the present disclosure, the extraction conditions may further include a condition that the extracted judgment result is that the geometric features of the target part for which the requirements have been judged are reflected in the design data of at least one actual part. The extraction unit may extract a judgment result that satisfies all of the extraction conditions.

According to the above configuration, the second notification unit notifies the geometric features of the target part for which a requirement that is the same as an unsatisfied requirement in the part being designed, which is not satisfied in the actual part, but is reflected in the design data of the actual part, is determined. Therefore, based on the geometric features, it is possible to consider whether or not to change the geometric features of the target part for which an unsatisfied requirement in the part being designed is determined, and to what extent the geometric features should be changed. Therefore, it is easy to design parts based on past performance.

In one aspect of the present disclosure, the extraction conditions may further include a condition that the extracted judgment result is a judgment result of requirements performed on at least one proven part that is installed in a product of a type related to the type of the product in which the part under design is installed, or a product of a similar type. The extraction unit may extract judgment results that satisfy all of the extraction conditions.

According to the above configuration, more useful information can be provided when considering changes to the geometric features of a target portion of a component under design for which an unsatisfied requirement has been determined.
In one aspect of the present disclosure, the product may be a vehicle.

According to the above configuration, more useful information can be provided when considering changes to the geometric features of a target portion of a component under design for which an unsatisfied requirement has been determined.
In one aspect of the present disclosure, the extraction conditions may further include a condition that the extracted judgment result is a judgment result of a requirement performed on at least one past part having the same or similar characteristics as the part under design. The extraction unit may extract a judgment result that satisfies all of the extraction conditions.

According to the above configuration, more useful information can be provided when considering changes to the geometric features of a target portion of a component under design for which an unsatisfied requirement has been determined.
In one aspect of the present disclosure, the extraction conditions may further include a condition that the extracted judgment result is a judgment result of a requirement that the shape feature of the target part is a most difficult shape that is the most difficult shape to realize, or a shape feature similar to the most difficult shape. The extraction unit may extract a judgment result that satisfies all of the extraction conditions.

According to the above configuration, more useful information can be provided when considering changes to the geometric features of a target portion of a component under design for which an unsatisfied requirement has been determined.
According to an aspect of the present disclosure, the design system may further include a receiving unit and a generating unit. The receiving unit is configured to receive an input of a design value that defines a shape feature of a target portion of the component under design for which an unsatisfied requirement has been determined. The generating unit is configured to generate data for displaying the design value received by the receiving unit.

According to the above configuration, a document or the like indicating a policy for dealing with unsatisfied requirements in a component under design can be generated based on the data generated by the generation unit.
In one aspect of the present disclosure, the receiving unit may be configured to further receive an input of a comment corresponding to a target portion in the part under design for which an unsatisfied requirement has been determined. The generating unit may be configured to generate data for displaying the design value and the comment received by the receiving unit.

According to the above configuration, a document or the like indicating a policy for dealing with unsatisfied requirements in a component under design can be generated based on the data generated by the generation unit.
In one aspect of the present disclosure, the design data of the part under design may further indicate information regarding a manufacturing process of the part under design. The design support device may further include an execution unit configured to provide the design data to a device performing verification by CAE and to cause the device to perform verification of the design data by CAE.

According to the above configuration, the CAE can verify whether the geometric characteristics of the target part for which unsatisfied requirements have been determined in the part being designed are appropriate. Then, based on the verification results by the CAE, changes to the geometric characteristics of the target part can be considered.

In another aspect of the present disclosure, a design support tool, which is a program for operating a computer as the design support device, and a design support procedure including a procedure implemented by the design support device may be provided. According to these aspects, it is possible to easily design parts based on past performance, similar to the design support device.

FIG. 2 is a block diagram of a design support device and first and second verification devices. FIG. 2 is a block diagram of a design support device. FIG. 2 is a block diagram of a first verification device. FIG. 4 is a block diagram of a second verification device. 13 is a flowchart of a design verification process. FIG. 13 is an explanatory diagram of a consideration screen. FIG. 13 is an explanatory diagram of a change screen. FIG. 13 is an explanatory diagram of a selection screen. FIG. 13 is an explanatory diagram of a proposal list in a proposal document. FIG. 13 is an explanatory diagram of a details page in a proposal. FIG. 13 is an explanatory diagram of a creation screen.

Embodiments of the present disclosure will be described below with reference to the drawings. Note that the embodiments of the present disclosure are not limited to the following embodiments, and may take various forms as long as they fall within the technical scope of the present disclosure.

[1. Configuration of the design support device]
The design support device 1 of this embodiment is configured to support the design of a metal part (hereinafter, referred to as a part under design) to be mounted on a vehicle (see Figs. 1 and 2). The part under design may be, for example, a part of a vehicle body, a part of an instrument panel, a part of an exhaust part that allows exhaust gas to flow downward, or a part constituting a part of an engine. Of course, the part under design is not limited to this, and may be a part made of a material other than metal (e.g., resin) or a part used in a product other than a vehicle.

The design support device 1 is connected to the first and second verification devices 2 and 3 via the network 5 (see FIG. 1). As an example, the design support device 1 is configured as a PC, and the PC operates as the design support device 1 by operating a design support tool 12B, which is a program installed on the PC (see FIG. 2). The design support device 1 includes a control unit 10, a communication unit 13, a display unit 14, an input unit 15, and a memory unit 16.

The control unit 10 includes a CPU 11 and a memory 12. The CPU 11 executes a program stored in the memory 12, thereby realizing various functions of the design support device 1. Note that the various functions of the design support device 1 are not limited to being realized by executing a program, and some or all of the functions may be realized using one or more pieces of hardware.

The memory 12 includes a semiconductor memory (e.g., ROM, RAM, and flash memory) that is a non-transient physical recording medium. An operating system (hereinafter, OS) program 12A and a design support tool 12B stored in the storage unit 16 are loaded into the memory 12. The OS program 12A is a program that provides the basic functions of the design support device 1, and the design support tool 12B operates by the OS program 12A. It should be noted that the functions of the programs such as the design support tool 12B are realized by the control unit 10 that executes the programs. Furthermore, the operation of the design support tool 12B realizes a design support method corresponding to the design support tool 12B.

The communication unit 13 communicates with other devices via the network 5 .
The display unit 14 is a section that displays various images based on image data generated by the control unit 10, and is configured as a liquid crystal display, for example.

The input unit 15 is a part that accepts operations from a user, and includes, for example, a keyboard, a pointing device, etc. The input unit 15 generates operation information in response to the operation from the user and outputs it to the control unit 10, and the control unit 10 performs processing in response to the operation information from the input unit 15.

The storage unit 16 includes an auxiliary storage device such as an HDD and an SSD, and stores various data. The storage unit 16 stores performance data 16A, which will be described later.
2. Configuration of the first and second verification devices
The first and second verification devices 2 and 3 are also configured as PCs, for example. The PC operates as the first verification device 2 by operating a first verification tool 22B (details of which will be described later) which is a program installed in the PC (see FIG. 3). The first verification device 2 includes a control unit 20, a communication unit 23, a display unit 24, an input unit 25, and a storage unit 26, which are similar to those of the design support device 1. The control unit 20 includes a CPU 21 and a memory 22. An OS program 22A and a first verification tool 22B stored in the storage unit 26 are loaded into the memory 22. The first verification tool 22B operates according to the OS program 22A.

Similarly to the first verification device 2, a PC operates as the second verification device 3 by operating a second verification tool 32B (details of which will be described later), which is a program installed on the PC (see FIG. 4). The second verification device 3 includes a control unit 30, a communication unit 33, a display unit 34, an input unit 35, and a storage unit 36, similar to those of the design support device 1. The control unit 30 includes a CPU 31 and a memory 32. An OS program 32A and a second verification tool 32B stored in the storage unit 36 are loaded into the memory 32. The second verification tool 32B operates according to the OS program 32A.

[3. Design Data]
The design support device 1 supports design based on design data of parts created using a 3D CAD (not shown). In the present embodiment, as an example, design data of vehicle parts including parts under design and actual parts (described later) is used.

The design data indicates the identification information of the vehicle part (e.g., product number and name) and the model of the vehicle on which the vehicle part is to be mounted, and includes a 3D model of the three-dimensional shape of the vehicle part. The design data also indicates the material of the vehicle part (e.g., type of steel), the thickness of the plate material used to manufacture the vehicle part (hereinafter, plate thickness), and information related to the manufacturing process of the vehicle part. Note that, for example, in the case of manufacturing the vehicle part by press molding, the information related to the manufacturing process of the vehicle part may be the pressing direction during press molding, the press processed surface, etc.

The design data also indicates the characteristics of the vehicle part. The characteristics of the vehicle part may be, for example, the mounting position of the vehicle part on the vehicle or the use of the vehicle part. Specifically, for example, the mounting position of the vehicle part may be a position determined based on a specific part of the vehicle (for example, the right tire). The use of the vehicle part may refer to, for example, a component of the vehicle in which the vehicle part is used (for example, the body, instrument panel, engine, exhaust parts, etc.).

[4. Requirements]
The first verification tool 22B installed in the first verification device 2 performs a determination process to determine whether or not design data of a part such as a vehicle part satisfies requirements. Note that DFM studio (registered trademark) may be used as the first verification tool 22B. The requirements may include, for example, at least one of part design requirements, mold and jig design requirements, and production engineering requirements.

The part design requirements may be, for example, requirements necessary to ensure the function of the part or the performance of a product such as a vehicle in which the part is installed. Specifically, the part design requirements may be, for example, requirements for ensuring the mountability and strength of the part. Furthermore, if the part is installed in a vehicle, the part design requirements may be, for example, requirements for ensuring the crash safety and operability of the vehicle, or requirements for suppressing noise and vibration.

Additionally, mold and jig design requirements may be requirements regarding the strength of parts, for example, to enable the manufacture or mass production of parts using molds and jigs, or to improve the maintainability of molds and jigs during such manufacture or mass production.

Furthermore, production engineering requirements may be requirements for preventing defects such as cracks, wrinkles, and burrs from occurring during the manufacturing process of parts according to design data, or for preventing defects such as insufficient strength in the manufactured parts.

The first verification device 2 performs a determination process to determine whether the geometric characteristics of a specific part of the part (hereinafter, the target part) satisfy requirements, for example, based on the three-dimensional shape of the part indicated by the 3D model included in the design data, and the material and thickness of the part.

Specifically, the target portion may be, for example, a portion including a predetermined component such as a hole, notch, step, protrusion, bent portion, curved portion, etc. in a part. In such a case, the design values that determine the dimensions, angles, positions, R, etc. related to the components define the geometric features of the target portion, so it may be a requirement that the design values fall within a predetermined numerical range. In addition, the target portion may be, for example, the outer edge or cross section of a part. In such a case, the design values that determine the angles of bent portions and R of curved portions included in the outer edge or cross section, etc. define the geometric features of the target portion, so it may be a requirement that the design values fall within a predetermined numerical range.

Note that even if the requirements are for the same geometric feature of the same target part, the criteria for judging the requirement (e.g., the numerical range of the design value) may change depending on, for example, the material of the part, the thickness of the plate material used to manufacture the part, or the application of the part. Each requirement whose criteria have been changed in this way may be considered to be the same requirement or may be considered to be a different requirement.

The first verification device 2 has judgment processing data that indicates the procedure for judgment processing for multiple requirements, and performs judgment processing for each requirement according to the judgment processing data. Note that the judgment processing data may be created by a user who verifies parts using the first verification device 2.

Specifically, the first verification device 2 extracts target parts, which are parts for which judgment processing for each requirement should be performed, from the 3D model of the part included in the design data 26B stored in the storage unit 26. Note that, from the design data 26B of one part, one or more target parts may be extracted for each requirement, and there may also be cases where no target parts are extracted at all.

Then, the first verification device 2 performs a judgment process for each extracted target part to judge whether or not the corresponding requirement is satisfied, generates judgment result data 26A indicating the judgment result, and stores the judgment result data 26A in the storage unit 26. The judgment result data 26A indicates the requirement, target part, and judgment result of each judgment process that was executed.

[5. Performance Data]
The performance data 16A stored in the storage unit 16 of the design support device 1 includes requirement determination result data 16B and design data 16C for one or more past parts that are vehicle parts designed in the past (see FIG. 2). The performance data 16A may be configured as a database.

A proven part may be, for example, a vehicle part whose design has been completed, that is, a vehicle part that satisfies the quality required at a specific stage in the development process. Specifically, a proven part may be, for example, a vehicle part whose development has been completed and which can be distributed in the market, or a vehicle part which can be provided to a customer as a prototype. In addition, the judgment result data 16B included in the proven data 16A is generated by the first verification device 2 based on the design data 16C.

[6. CAE]
The second verification device 3 verifies, by CAE (computer aided engineering), whether or not there is a defect in the manufacturing process of the part according to the design data, and whether or not a defect occurs in the manufactured part (see FIG. 4 ). Specifically, the second verification device 3 may perform the verification by performing a stress analysis using an analysis method such as the finite element method, the finite difference method, or the boundary element method.

The second verification device 3 performs CAE verification based on information about the manufacturing process, such as the 3D model included in the design data, the material and thickness of the parts, and the pressing direction in press molding, and displays the verification results. Note that the CAE verification by the second verification device 3 can determine whether or not a defect will occur in the parts manufactured according to the design data with higher accuracy than the verification by determining requirements by the first verification device 2.

[7. Design Verification Processing]
Next, the design verification process in which the design support device 1 and the first and second verification devices 2 and 3 verify the design data 26B of the part being designed and generate a proposal document proposing changes to the geometric features of the target part that does not satisfy the requirements will be explained using the flowchart of Figure 5.

In S100, the design data 26B of the part under design is stored in the memory unit 26 of the first verification device 2. In the following S105, the control unit 20 of the first verification device 2 executes a requirement judgment process based on the design data 26B of the part under design in accordance with instructions received from the user via the input unit 25, generates judgment result data 26A indicating the judgment result, and stores it in the memory unit 26. Hereafter, not satisfying a requirement is described as unsatisfied, a judgment result of unsatisfiedness for the part under design is described as an unsatisfied judgment result, and a requirement of the part under design for which an unsatisfied judgment result has been obtained is described as an unsatisfied requirement.

In S110, the control unit 10 of the design support device 1 acquires the design data 26B and judgment result data 26A of the part being designed from the first verification device 2 via the network 5, and stores them in the memory unit 16. The control unit 10 then extracts non-satisfactory judgment results from the judgment results indicated by the judgment result data 26A.

In S115, the control unit 10 accesses the performance data 16A and extracts a comparison judgment result that satisfies the extraction condition from the judgment results indicated by the performance part judgment result data 16B corresponding to each unsatisfied judgment result.

Specifically, the extraction condition is a combination of the following conditions (A) to (C), and the extraction condition is satisfied when all of these conditions are satisfied.
(A) The comparative judgment result is a judgment result for a requirement that is related to the unsatisfied requirement for which the unsatisfied judgment result corresponding to the comparative judgment result was obtained. Note that the requirement that is related to the unsatisfied requirement may be the same requirement as the unsatisfied requirement, or may be the same or similar requirement as the unsatisfied requirement.

In addition, when there are different production engineering requirements that determine the dimensions of different types of holes (e.g., round holes, long holes, square holes), the requirements that are similar to the unsatisfied requirements may be the similar requirements. In addition, the similar requirements may be registered in a table in advance by a user, for example, and the control unit 10 may refer to the table to identify the requirements that are similar to the unsatisfied requirements.

For example, in the production engineering requirements that determine whether the bending angle of the target part is within a numerical range, it is assumed that the numerical range of the bending angle changes depending on the material and plate thickness of the part. In such cases, these production engineering requirements with changed numerical ranges may be considered to be the same requirements or similar requirements. Similarly, in the mold jig design requirements that determine whether the distance between the end and the hole in the target part is within a numerical range, it is assumed that the numerical range changes, but these mold jig design requirements with changed numerical ranges may be considered to be the same requirements or similar requirements.

(B) The comparative judgment result indicates a judgment result of unsatisfactory.
(C) In the comparison judgment result, the shape characteristics of the target part in the judgment of the requirement for which the comparison judgment result was obtained are reflected in the design data 16C of the proven part including the target part. In other words, the shape characteristics of the target part of the proven part indicated by the design data 16C are determined by the design values for which the requirement for which the comparison judgment result of "unsatisfied" was obtained was judged.

The above conditions (A) and (B) may be used as extraction conditions. The extraction conditions may further include all or part of the first to third conditions shown below, and the control unit 10 may extract a judgment result that satisfies all of the extraction conditions as a comparison judgment result.

That is, the first condition is that the judgment of the requirement for which the comparative judgment result was obtained was performed on a proven part installed in a vehicle of a model related to or similar to the vehicle on which the part under design is installed (hereinafter also referred to as the target vehicle). The model with a relationship may mean the same model, or a different model set for a vehicle with different specifications sold as the same series. In addition, a vehicle of a model similar to the target vehicle may be, for example, a vehicle of a model that is the same or similar to the target vehicle in at least some of the size, weight, displacement, use, etc., and a vehicle of a model related to the target vehicle is included in a vehicle of a model similar to the target vehicle. The control unit 10 judges whether the first condition is satisfied based on the model of the target vehicle indicated by the design data 26B of the part under design and the model of the vehicle on which the proven part indicated by the design data 16C included in the performance data 16A is installed.

The second condition is that the judgment of the requirement for which the comparative judgment result was obtained was performed on a past part that has the same or similar characteristics as the characteristics of the part under design. Specifically, for example, the second condition may be that the use of the part under design and the use of the past part are the same, or that the mounting position of the part under design and the mounting position of the past part are the same or the difference between these mounting positions is equal to or less than a predetermined value.

Also, for example, the second condition may be that the shape of the part being designed and the shape of the actual part are the same or similar. Specifically, for example, if the difference between at least one of the depth, cross-sectional width, cross-sectional bending angle, ridgeline curvature, and dimensions of the mounting part of another part (for example, the length and/or width of the continuous flange part) based on the press-processed surface set in the 3D model between a component of the part being designed and a component of the actual part corresponding to the component is within a predetermined numerical range, the shape of the part being designed and the shape of the actual part may be considered to be the same or similar.

The control unit 10 determines whether the second condition is satisfied based on the characteristics of the part being designed indicated by the design data 26B and the characteristics of the actual part indicated by the design data 16C included in the actual data 16A.

The third condition is a condition that the result of the judgment of the requirement that the shape characteristic of the target part is the most difficult shape that is the most difficult to realize, or the shape characteristic close to the most difficult shape, is set as the judgment result for comparison. The most difficult shape may be, for example, the shape characteristic of the target part having the most difficult design value to realize. More specifically, for example, it is assumed that the dimensions of the target part, including holes, notches, steps, protrusions, bent parts, curved parts, etc., are set as design values, and the requirement is that the design values are within a predetermined numerical range. In this case, the shape characteristic of the target part having the maximum or minimum design value among the target parts for which the requirement is judged may be set as the most difficult shape. In this case, the shape characteristic close to the most difficult shape may be the shape characteristic of the target part having a design value whose difference from the most difficult design value is equal to or less than a predetermined value. The control unit 10 judges whether the third condition is satisfied based on the design data 16C included in the performance data 16A.

Note that, in response to one unsatisfactory judgment result, one or more comparison judgment results may be extracted, or no comparison judgment result may be extracted.
In S120, the control unit 10 displays a review screen 200 (see FIG. 6 ) (described later in detail) on the display unit 14 based on the design data 26B and judgment result data 26A of the part under design and the performance data 16A (details will be described later). The review screen 200 notifies, in association with each other, design values (hereinafter also referred to as required values) that determine the geometric characteristics of a target part for which a non-satisfied judgment result has been obtained, and design values (hereinafter also referred to as performance values) that determine the geometric characteristics of a target part for which at least one comparative judgment result corresponding to the non-satisfied judgment result has been obtained.

Based on the actual values of the target parts for which a comparative judgment result was obtained, which are notified on the consideration screen 200, the user considers whether to change the design values of the target parts for which an unsatisfactory judgment result was obtained, and considers new design values (hereinafter also referred to as change values) for the target parts. Then, in S125, the control unit 10 displays a change screen 250 (see FIG. 7) described later on the display unit 14, and accepts input of change values for the target parts for which an unsatisfactory judgment result was obtained, and input of comments corresponding to the unsatisfactory judgment result, via the input unit 15. At this time, the control unit 10 may update the design data of the part being designed so that the input change values are reflected as geometric features of the part being designed.

In S130, the control unit 10 sequentially displays a selection screen 300 and a creation screen 350 (described later) on the display unit 14 (see FIGS. 8 and 11). Then, in response to the operation received via the input unit 15, the control unit 10 generates proposal data for generating a proposal proposing changes to design values for the target part for which a non-satisfied judgment result was obtained (details will be described later). The control unit 10 also stores the proposal data in the memory unit 16 in association with the judgment result data for the part under design.

In S135, the control unit 10 transmits design data 26B of the part being designed to the second verification device 3 via the network 5 in response to the operation received via the input unit 15, and instructs the second verification device 3 to verify the part being designed by the CAE based on the design data 26B. In response to the instruction, the control unit 30 of the second verification device 3 verifies the part being designed by the CAE based on the received design data 26B. Then, when the verification by the second verification device 3 is completed, the control unit 10 obtains verification result data indicating the verification result by the CAE from the second verification device 3 via the network 5.

Then, the control unit 10 may display the verification result on the display unit 14 based on the verification result data, and may execute a process similar to S125 to accept input of change values and comments for the target part for which a non-satisfied judgment result was obtained. Furthermore, the control unit 10 may execute a process similar to S130 to update the proposal data so that the newly input change values and comments are reflected in the proposal.

[8. Review screen]
A first non-satisfaction list 201 and a comparison list 202 are displayed on the upper side of a review screen 200 (see FIG. 6) displayed in S120 of the design verification process. In addition, a part-under-design area 203 in which a three-dimensional shape 220 of a part under design is displayed, and a past part area 204 in which a three-dimensional shape 230 of a past part is displayed are provided on the lower side of the review screen 200.

The first non-satisfied list 201 is a list of non-satisfied judgment results. In other words, the first non-satisfied list 201 is a list that shows the non-satisfied requirements in the part under design and the design values (hereinafter also referred to as required values) of the target parts for which the non-satisfied requirements have been judged to be non-satisfied.

Each row of the first non-satisfaction list 201 corresponds to a non-satisfaction determination result, and each column of the first non-satisfaction list 201 corresponds to a "requirement" and a "request value".
The column corresponding to "requirement" indicates identification information of the unsatisfied requirement for which a non-satisfied judgment result was obtained. As an example, the first unsatisfied list 201 indicates two unsatisfied judgment results obtained by judging unsatisfied requirements A and C, respectively, and also indicates two unsatisfied judgment results obtained by unsatisfied requirement B for a different target part.

The column corresponding to "required value" indicates the required value of the target portion for which a non-satisfied result was obtained.
Furthermore, the control unit 10 of the design support device 1 moves the cursor 210 in response to an operation received via the input unit 15, and selects one of the unsatisfied judgment results in the first unsatisfied list 201. Then, the control unit 10 displays an emphasis image 221 on a target portion in the three-dimensional shape 220 of the part under design, for which the selected unsatisfied judgment result has been obtained.

On the other hand, the comparison list 202 is a list of comparison judgment results extracted corresponding to the unsatisfied judgment result being selected by the cursor 210. As an example, the comparison list 202 shows the comparison judgment results corresponding to the unsatisfied judgment result obtained by judging unsatisfied requirement A.

Each row in the comparison list 202 corresponds to a comparison judgment result, and each column in the comparison list 202 corresponds to "identification information," "required value," "actual value," "material," "plate thickness," "comment," and "result."

The field corresponding to "identification information" indicates the identification information of the past part for which the requirement for which the comparative judgment result was obtained was judged.
The column corresponding to "required value" indicates the design value of the target portion for which the requirement for which the comparative judgment result was obtained was judged.

The column corresponding to "Actual Value" shows the design value of the target part for which the comparative judgment result was obtained at the stage after the comparative judgment result was obtained. In other words, the actual value is the design value adopted for the target part of the actual part for which the comparative judgment result was obtained, and the actual value is reflected in the shape characteristics of the target part as understood from the design data of the actual part. It should be noted that the actual value is a design value that does not satisfy the requirements.

The column corresponding to "Material" indicates the material of the proven part for which a comparative judgment result was obtained.
The column corresponding to "plate thickness" indicates the plate thickness of the proven part for which a comparative judgment result was obtained.
The column corresponding to "comments" indicates comments that were input when examining the design data of the proven part for which a comparative judgment result was obtained.

The column corresponding to "Result" indicates whether the quality of the target part for which the comparative judgment result was obtained in the actual part was good or not. "O" indicates that the quality was good, and "X" indicates that the quality was not good.

The control unit 10 may scroll the first unsatisfied list 201 and the comparison list 202 in response to an operation received via the input unit 15 .
Furthermore, the control unit 10 moves the cursor 211 in response to an operation received via the input unit 15, and selects one of the comparison judgment results in the comparison list 202. Then, the control unit 10 displays in the past part area 204 the three-dimensional shape 230 of the past part for which the selected comparison judgment result was obtained, and displays an emphasis image 231 in the target portion of the three-dimensional shape 230 for which the comparison judgment result was obtained.

The control unit 10 may also display the unsatisfied judgment result in association with the comparison judgment result extracted in association with the unsatisfied judgment result in various ways. Specifically, for example, the control unit 10 may display the unsatisfied judgment result in association with any one of the comparison judgment results corresponding to the unsatisfied judgment result. Specifically, each row of the first unsatisfied list 201 and each row of the comparison list 202 aligned with the row may display the unsatisfied judgment result and one comparison judgment result corresponding to the unsatisfied judgment result. Then, when any of the unsatisfied judgment results is selected with the cursor or the like, the control unit 10 may display a list of multiple comparison judgment results corresponding to the selected unsatisfied judgment result in another display area on the display unit 14.

Then, when the control unit 10 receives an operation on the change value input button 212 provided on the consideration screen 200 via the input unit 15, it ends the display of the consideration screen 200 and proceeds to S125.

[8. Change screen]
A second non-satisfaction list 251 is displayed at the top of a change screen 250 (see FIG. 7) displayed in S125 of the design verification process, and a part under design area 252 is provided at the bottom in which the three-dimensional shape 220 of the part under design is displayed.

Each row of the second non-satisfaction list 251 corresponds to a non-satisfaction judgment result, and each column of the second non-satisfaction list 251 corresponds to a "requirement" and "required value" similar to the first non-satisfaction list 201, as well as a "changed value" and "comment."

The column corresponding to "change value" is entered with the change value of the target part for which a non-satisfied judgment result was obtained. Note that the change value may be the same design value as the required value, or it may be a different design value.

In the field corresponding to "Comments", comments corresponding to the target part for which a non-satisfied judgment result was obtained are input. Specifically, for example, the reason for changing the design value of the target part for which a non-satisfied judgment result was obtained, or the reason for maintaining the design value may be input.

The control unit 10 of the design support device 1 also displays an emphasis image 221 on the target portion of the three-dimensional shape 220 displayed in the part under design area 252 where a non-satisfaction judgment result corresponding to the change value or comment being input has been obtained. When the control unit 10 receives an operation on the output button 260 of the change screen 250 via the input unit 15, it ends the display of the change screen 250 and proceeds to S130.

[9. Selection Screen]
When the process proceeds to S130, the control unit 10 of the design support device 1 first displays a selection screen 300 (see FIG. 8 ). A second unsatisfied list 301 and a part-under-design area 302, similar to those of the change screen 250, are provided on the upper and lower sides of the selection screen 300, respectively.

The columns corresponding to “change value” and “comment” in the second non-satisfaction list 301 respectively display the change value and comment input via the change screen 250 .
Furthermore, selection buttons 311 are displayed to the side of each horizontal row in the second unsatisfied list 301. When the control unit 10 accepts an operation on each selection button 311 via the input unit 15, it selects the unsatisfied judgment result corresponding to the horizontal row located to the side of the operated selection button 311 as an unsatisfied judgment result proposing a change in the design value of the target part in the proposal. Furthermore, the control unit 10 displays an emphasis image 221 on the target part in the three-dimensional shape 220 displayed in the part under design area 302, for which an unsatisfied judgment result selected via the selection button 311 has been obtained.

Then, when the control unit 10 receives an operation on the OK button 310 on the selection screen 300 via the input unit 15, it ends the display of the selection screen 300 and displays the proposal creation screen 350 (see FIG. 11).

10. Proposal
The proposal is a document proposing changes to design values of target parts of the part under design for which unsatisfied requirements have been determined, and includes a proposal list 400 and a details page 450 (see FIGS. 9 and 10). When the control unit 10 of the design support device 1 accepts an operation on the OK button 310 on the selection screen 300, it generates proposal list data that is data for generating the proposal list 400.

The proposal list 400 is a list of change proposals for the design values of the target parts for which each unsatisfied requirement was found. Each row of the proposal list 400 corresponds to the unsatisfied judgment result selected on the selection screen 300, and shows the required value and the change value of the target part for which the corresponding unsatisfied judgment result was found. Note that the change value corresponds to the change value entered via the change screen 250.

As an example, each row of the proposal list 400 has a column corresponding to a "proposal comment," in which a proposal comment is entered proposing to change the design value of the target part for which a corresponding non-satisfied judgment result was obtained from the required value to a changed value. The proposal comment is automatically generated by the control unit 10. The proposal comment also includes a comment about the non-satisfied judgment result corresponding to the proposal comment, which is input via the change screen 250.

A detail page 450 is provided corresponding to each change proposal (in other words, each non-satisfied judgment result) in the proposal list 400, and shows the detailed content of the corresponding change proposal. As an example, the detail page 450 includes a proposal comment about the corresponding change proposal, and a three-dimensional shape 451 that is an enlarged view of the target portion for which the corresponding non-satisfied judgment result was obtained.

[11. Creation screen]
In a creation screen 350 (see FIG. 11 ) displayed subsequent to the selection screen 300, a second unsatisfied list 351 similar to that of the selection screen 300 is displayed in the upper portion. Also, a details button 361 is displayed to the side of each row of the second unsatisfied list 351. Also, in a lower portion of the creation screen 350, a preview area 353 in which a preview of the proposal is displayed, and a parts under design area 352 similar to that of the selection screen 300 are provided.

Each row of the second non-satisfaction list 351 corresponds to a non-satisfaction judgment result selected on the selection screen 300. In other words, each of these rows corresponds to a non-satisfaction judgment result obtained by judging the requirements of the target part for which a change in the design value is proposed in the proposal list 400.

The control unit 10 of the design support device 1 accepts operation of each detail button 361 via the input unit 15. Then, when the detail button 361 is operated, the control unit 10 generates detailed data for generating a detail page 450 for the non-satisfaction judgment result corresponding to the horizontal row of the second non-satisfaction list 351 located to the side of the detail button 361.

Specifically, when the details button 361 is operated, the control unit 10 accepts the selection of a portion 222 (more specifically, a portion including the target portion) to be enlarged and displayed on the details page 450 via the three-dimensional shape 220 of the part under design displayed in the part under design area 352. The control unit 10 then generates detailed data for the details page 450 that displays the selected portion 222.

In addition, a preview 370 of the proposal list 400 and a preview 371 of the details page 450 are displayed in the preview area 353. Note that the control unit 10 may scroll the previews 370 and 371 displayed in the preview area 353 in response to an operation received via the input unit 15.

[12. Effects]
(1) According to the above embodiment, each row of the comparison list 202 on the consideration screen 200 shows the performance values of the target parts for which the requirements that are the same as the unsatisfied requirements of the part under design, that are not satisfied in the past part, but are reflected in the design data of the past part, have been determined. Therefore, based on the comparison list 202, it is possible to consider whether or not to change the design values of the target parts for which the unsatisfied requirements of the part under design have been determined, and to what extent the design values should be changed. Therefore, it is easy to design parts based on past performance.

(2) In addition, in response to a non-satisfied judgment result, a comparative judgment result obtained by judging the requirements for a proven part that is installed in a vehicle model that is related to or similar to the model of the vehicle in which the part under design is installed can be extracted. In addition, in response to a non-satisfied judgment result, a comparative judgment result performed on a proven part that has characteristics that are the same as or similar to the characteristics of the part under design can be extracted. In addition, in response to a non-satisfied judgment result, a comparative judgment result in which the geometric characteristics of the judged target part are the most difficult shape or geometric characteristics close to the most difficult shape can be extracted. Therefore, more useful information can be provided when considering changes to the design values of a target part in the part under design that is judged to have unsatisfied requirements.

(3) In addition, proposal data is generated for generating a proposal indicating the required values and changed values of the target parts for which a non-satisfied result was obtained in the part under design, and the comments corresponding to the target parts. Therefore, based on the results of the review performed with reference to the review screen 200, a document can be generated that proposes a response policy for the non-satisfied requirements in the part under design.

(4) Furthermore, based on the design data for which requirements have been determined by the first verification device 2, verification by CAE is performed by the second verification device 3. Therefore, while taking into account the results of the verification by CAE, it is possible to consider changing the design values of target parts of the part being designed for which unsatisfied requirements have been determined.

13. Other embodiments
(1) In the above embodiment, the design support device 1 and the first and second verification devices 2 and 3 are configured as separate devices. However, at least some of these devices may be configured as one device. In addition, the judgment result data 26A and design data 26B of the part under design, or the performance data 16A, may be provided to the design support device 1 in various forms, not limited to those exemplified in the above embodiment. Specifically, for example, the design support device 1 may access the judgment result data 26A and design data 26B of the part under design, or the performance data 16A, stored in another device via the network 5, and extract the non-satisfactory judgment result or the comparison judgment result.

(2) In S115 of the design verification process, the design support device 1 may use a neural network to extract a comparison judgment result from the judgment results indicated by the judgment result data 16B of the actual parts in response to the non-satisfied judgment result. That is, the design support device 1 may have a learning model for identifying a comparison judgment result that is useful for changing the design value of the target part for which an non-satisfied judgment result has been obtained, and may use the learning model to extract a comparison judgment result in response to the non-satisfied judgment result. In addition, the design support device 1 may receive input from the user of a judgment as to whether the extracted comparison judgment result is appropriate or inappropriate, and update the learning model using the input judgment as teaching data.

(3) In the above embodiment, the parts under design and the actual parts are configured as vehicle parts, but the parts under design and the actual parts may be parts to be installed in products other than vehicles. Even in such a case, the design verification process can be performed in the same manner as in the above embodiment.

(4) Multiple functions possessed by one component in the above embodiments may be realized by multiple components, or one function possessed by one component may be realized by multiple components. Also, multiple functions possessed by multiple components may be realized by one component, or one function realized by multiple components may be realized by one component. Also, part of the configuration of the above embodiments may be omitted. Also, at least part of the configuration of the above embodiments may be added to or substituted for the configuration of another of the above embodiments.

(5) In addition to the above-described design support device 1, design support tool 12B, and design support method, the present disclosure can also be realized in various forms, such as a non-transitive physical recording medium such as a semiconductor memory that stores the design support tool 12B.

[14. Correspondence of Wording]
S120 of the design verification process corresponds to an example of a first and second notification unit, S115 corresponds to an example of an extraction unit, S125 corresponds to an example of a reception unit, S130 corresponds to an example of a generation unit, and S135 corresponds to an example of an execution unit.

1...design support device, 12B...design support tool, 16A...performance data, 16B...judgment result data, 16C...design data, 2...first verification device, 22B...first verification tool, 26A...judgment result data, 26B...design data, 3...second verification device, 32B...second verification tool.

Claims (11)

A design support device, comprising:
a first notification unit configured to notify a geometric feature of at least one target portion of a component under design that does not satisfy at least one predetermined requirement based on determination result data indicating a result of determining whether or not a geometric feature of the component under design satisfies at least one predetermined requirement based on design data of the component under design;
an extraction unit configured to extract a judgment result of a requirement that satisfies a predetermined extraction condition from judgment result data indicating a result of judging whether or not a shape feature of at least one target portion in at least one past part designed in the past satisfies at least one predetermined requirement based on design data of the at least one past part;
a second notification unit configured to notify a shape feature of a target portion of the at least one used part related to the judgment result extracted by the extraction unit,
The requirements that are not satisfied by the part under design are regarded as unsatisfied requirements;
The extraction condition is a condition that the extracted judgment result is a judgment result of a requirement that is related to the unsatisfied requirement, and is a judgment result that the requirement that is related to the unsatisfied requirement is not satisfied. The design support device according to claim 1 ,
the extraction conditions further include a condition that the extracted judgment result is that a shape feature of the target part for which the requirement is judged is reflected in design data of the at least one past part;
The extraction unit extracts a determination result that satisfies all of the extraction conditions. The design support device according to claim 1 or 2,
the extraction conditions further include a condition that the extracted judgment result is a judgment result of a requirement performed on the at least one proven part that is mounted on a product of a type related to or similar to a type of a product in which the part under design is mounted;
The extraction unit extracts a determination result that satisfies all of the extraction conditions. The design support device according to claim 3,
The product is a vehicle. The design support device according to any one of claims 1 to 4,
the extraction conditions further include a condition that the extracted judgment result is a judgment result of a requirement performed on the at least one past part having the same or similar characteristics as the part under design;
The extraction unit extracts a determination result that satisfies all of the extraction conditions. The design support device according to any one of claims 1 to 5,
The extraction conditions further include a condition that the extracted judgment result is a judgment result of a requirement that the shape feature of the target part is a most difficult shape that is the most difficult shape to realize, or a shape feature similar to the most difficult shape;
The extraction unit extracts a determination result that satisfies all of the extraction conditions. The design support device according to any one of claims 1 to 6,
a receiving unit configured to receive an input of a design value that defines a shape characteristic of a target portion of the component under design for which the unsatisfied requirement has been determined;
a generating unit configured to generate data for displaying the design value received by the receiving unit;
The design support device further comprises: The design support device according to claim 7,
the receiving unit is configured to further receive an input of a comment corresponding to a target portion in the component under design for which the unsatisfied requirement has been determined;
The design support device, wherein the generation unit is configured to generate the data for displaying the design value and the comment accepted by the acceptance unit. The design support device according to any one of claims 1 to 8,
The design data of the part under design further indicates information regarding a manufacturing process of the part under design;
an execution unit configured to provide the design data to a device that performs verification by CAE, and to cause the device to perform verification of the design data by CAE;
The design support device further comprises: A design support tool for operating a computer as a design support device, comprising:
a first notification unit configured to notify a geometric feature of at least one target portion of a component under design that does not satisfy at least one predetermined requirement based on determination result data indicating a result of determining whether or not a geometric feature of the component under design satisfies at least one predetermined requirement based on design data of the component under design;
an extraction unit configured to extract a judgment result of a requirement that satisfies a predetermined extraction condition from judgment result data indicating a result of judging whether or not a shape feature of at least one target portion in at least one past part designed in the past satisfies at least one predetermined requirement based on design data of the at least one past part;
operating a computer as a second notification unit configured to notify a shape feature of a target portion of the at least one used part related to the judgment result extracted by the extraction unit;
The requirements that are not satisfied by the part under design are regarded as unsatisfied requirements;
The extraction condition is a condition that the extracted judgment result is a judgment result of a requirement that is related to the unsatisfied requirement, and is a judgment result that the requirement that is related to the unsatisfied requirement is not satisfied. A design support method executed by a design support apparatus having a control unit ,
notifying a geometric feature of at least one target portion of the component under design that does not satisfy at least one predetermined requirement based on determination result data indicating a result of determining whether or not the geometric feature of the at least one target portion of the component under design satisfies at least one predetermined requirement based on design data of the component under design;
extracting a judgment result of a requirement that satisfies a predetermined extraction condition from judgment result data indicating a result of judging whether or not a shape feature of at least one target portion in at least one past part designed in the past satisfies at least one predetermined requirement based on design data of the at least one past part;
and notifying a shape feature of a target portion of the at least one past part related to the extracted judgment result,
The requirements that are not satisfied by the part under design are regarded as unsatisfied requirements;
The extraction condition of the design support method is a condition that the extracted judgment result is a judgment result of a requirement that is related to the unsatisfied requirement, and is a judgment result that the requirement that is related to the unsatisfied requirement is not satisfied.

Images