REDESIGN CASE OF A JIGSAW

TECHNICAL PAPERS

ACADEMIC JOURNAL OF MANUFACTURING ENGINEERING, VOL. 6, ISSUE 1/2008 18

REDESIGN CASE OF A JIGSAW

Felicia BANCIU1, Ion GROZAV

1 and George DRAGHICI

1

ABSTRACT: The paper’s aim is to present the work flow that we followed and the approaches used in a collaborative working task meaning the redesign of an existing jigsaw. This task is foreseen in VRL-KCiP program, JRA-WP4-T300. In this task our team managed the conceptual design phase for a jigsaw and using the axiomatic and systematic approaches we proposed a number of solutions for mechanical transmission of the jigsaw. We analyzed the possible constructive solutions to improve the actual model of the jigsaw and in a further work we will take into account all the presentations and discussions that we have with other participants regarding the constraints this task and use them like guidance for the conceptual design phase. KEY WORDS: axiomatic approach, systematic approach, conceptual design, redesign.

1 INTRODUCTION

In this paper is presented the work done until

now by UPT team regarding the redesign of a

jigsaw in VRL-KCiP program, foreseen as task

JRA-WP4-T300 managed by professor Lionel

Roucuoles from Université de Technologie de

Troyes, France. The task’s idea is “to run a design

case based on VRL partners’ competencies with

respect to “Virtual Prototyping”. This task’s aim is

to emphasis the possible ways to redesign this

product and obtain an improved solution via a

collaborative work developed by a number of teams

from different universities Greece, Italy, France,

Romania, and Poland. The aim of the “design case”

proposed is to “set and/or improve the design

process of that product, provide a maximum of

information with respect to its development (i.e.

Virtual Prototyping) and “virtually” assess the

whole life cycle of the product”. The collaboration

between teams has to lead to an improved

constructive solution for the jigsaw. Our team is

working to conceptual design phase for the jigsaw.

Using the axiomatic and systematic approaches

(design method, functional analysis tools, Pahl &

Beitz approach), we tried to find and propose a new

solution for the jigsaw. Starting from its main

functionality and using the functional analysis we

analyzed the possible constructive solutions to

improve the actual model of the jigsaw. Next we

built the design matrix for the jigsaw, module-

junction diagram and flow chart diagrams. In a

future work we will take into account for the

conceptual design phase the constraints and

discussions we had with other teams and refine the

conceptual design phase. 1 Universitatea Politehnica din Timi�oara, Centrul de

Cercetare Inginerie Integrat�, Mihai Viteazu 1, 300222 Timi�oara, România

E-mail: {fbanciu, igrozav, gdraghici}@eng.upt.ro

2 ICOM BOX FOR UPT TEAM

This design case is governed by the hypothesis

that “virtual prototyping represents all activity and

information that concerns the development of a

product in a “Virtual World”. The rules established

for this design case are to apply our own research

even it is not 100% formalized, to be proactive,

namely to provide aspects that has not been set at

the beginning and to make our thoughts about this

matter known and use the inputs like an existing

CAD model and a preliminary design process.

Each team had to present what kind of activity

can provide and which are the inputs and outputs

for the activity. To formalize the provided activities

and to obtain finally an aggregation all the activities

provided it was used the ICOM box model, derived

from IDEF0 Modeling Language (*). These ICOM

boxes are rectangular boxes that contain a unique

text description or label which describes the activity

expressed as a verb phrase. A line entering the

process on the left shows INPUT. Each input has a

label that describes information used by the activity.

A line leaving the process to the right shows

OUTPUT. Each output has a label that describes

information delivered by the process. Completion of

the process may be subject to one or more controls

that constrain the way in which the process may be

undertaken. A line entering the top of the process

shows a CONTROL. Each control has a label that

describes the constraint on the process. Completion

of the process may use one or more mechanisms

that assist or have an involvement with its

undertaking. A line entering the underside of the

process shows a mechanism. A mechanism is an

actor in the process and may be a person, a database

or software that is used. Each mechanism has a

label that describes what it is. The activities

engaged from the participant teams are: component

selection, manufacturing processes selection and

TECHNICAL PAPERS


DFM, advanced reverse engineering modeling-,

ergonomic modeling, manufacturing strategies,

recycling modeling, FE analyses, manufacturing

strategies, conceptual design, and virtual

prototyping. Regarding the possible activities that

can be developed by teams (figure 1) our team

started to develop “Conceptual design phase” and

the corresponding ICOM BOX for this activity is

presented in figure 2.

Figure 2. ICOM box for UPT Team

The activity that we have to provide is

presented in figure 2. The inputs are product

specifications, team’s knowledge, existent jig saw’s

studies and the control elements are the constraints.

The outputs will be the identification of the

essential problems, the working principles,

conceptual variants and a functional structure. All

these will be managed by our team.

3 DESIGN APPROACHES

The most representative approaches of design

used now are algorithmic (systematic) design

elaborated by Pahl and Beitz (Pahl, 1996) and

axiomatic design elaborated by Nam P. Suh (Suh,

1990).

3.1 Systematic (algorithmic) Approach

Generally, the systematic approach is founded

on the notion that the best way to advancing in

design field is to understand the process by

following the best design practice. Approaches

founded on phase notion are considered algorithmic

(Lonchampt, 2004). In algorithmic approach

(systematic) is tried to identify or prescribe the

design process.

Among design models the most representative

is the model of Pahl and Beitz (1996). This model is

based on a sequential decomposition of design

process, using phase concept. It is based on a design

seen as a hierarchical, sequenced phases, the

predominant logic being the convergence. The

phases are: planning and clarifying the task,

conceptual design phase, embodiment design, and

detail design.

3.2 Axiomatic Approach

The researches about axiomatic design begun

in 1977 initiated by professor Nam P. Suh from

MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) and in

the next years he analyzed the axiomatic approach

application into manufacturing systems. Axiomatic

design is characterized through its generality, it can

be applied in all design fields, its rules are the same

and the guidelines on how to make axiomatic design

are given by the design axioms and have four core

concepts: domain, zigzagging and hierarchies,

mapping, axioms.

In initial stages two domains are involved, the

functional domain and the physical domain.

Associated with each domain there are design

elements, the functional requirements (FRs) and

design parameters (DPs) respectively. In addition to

these elements that are specifically associated with

each particular domain, constraints on the design

task can also exist. Constraints are specification of

the characteristics that the design solution must

posses to be acceptable to its customers and to the

company designing it. The design process basically

involves interrelating FRs to DPs. Functional

requirements are defined as the minimum set of

independent requirements that completely

characterize the design objective for a specific need.

As the number of functional requirements increases,

the complexity of the design problem also increases.

The choice of FR depends on the way in which the

designer hopes to satisfy a set of market needs. The

determination of a good set of FR needs expertise,

extensive market study and several iterations. FRs,

basically are the designer’s characterization of the

perceived needs for a product. The design

parameters (DPs) are key variables that characterize

the physical entity created by the design process to

“Virtual prototyping” (i.e. Virtual development

Conceptual design

Detail design

Embodiment Design

Product requirements specification

Customers requirements analysis

“Real” Prototyping

Development

Industrialization

Manufacturing

Assembly

Maintenance

Recycling

PRODUCT LIFECYCLE

Conceptual design

Constraints Product specifications Team’s knowledge Existent jig saw’s studies

UPT Team

Identifie Essential problems Working principles Functional Structure Conceptual variants

Figure 1. Product development phases

TECHNICAL PAPERS


fulfill the FRs. A good designer must have the

ability to choose a minimum number of FR at each

hierarchical level of FR tree. (**)

The designed product or process is described in

design domain, physic domain and process domain

like a design tree with more levels. So, to the

functional requirements belonging to a certain level

from the functional domain there are the

correspondent conception parameters that are on the

same level on the physical domain and further on to

the process parameters from the process domain.

The four domains are interconnected through the

questions: how can the customers be satisfied

(result FR), how to obtain functional requirements

(result DP), how to obtain the design parameters

(result PV). The lower levels from a domain are

constrained by higher levels from next domain thus

it is necessary to go permanently from one domain

to another to detail the design process and obtain it.

FR can be dependent or independent depending on

the chosen parameters (DP). The design can be

uncoupled, coupled, or decoupled in its functional

behavior depending on choice of DP. The degree of

design coupling can be seen in Design matrix which

expresses connection between Dp and FR. There are

basically two axioms that aid in this process:

Independence Axiom and Information Axiom.

The former aims at maintaining the

independence of Functional requirements and the

later aims at minimizing the information content in

the design. Once a set of FRs has been formulated

and possible sets of DPs have been generated, the

two design axioms are used to evaluate the

proposed designs (the design axioms can also be

applied to analyze relationships between DPs and

PVs). (**)

4 CONCEPTUAL DESIGN PHASE FOR THE JIGSAW

For our work in T300_VP, to achieve the

necessary outputs for the conceptual design phase,

we will try to use both approaches mentioned above

aiming to get a good structured and exhaustive

conceptual design phase. In figure 3 is a picture of

the studied object, the jigsaw.

Conceptual design phase’s aim is to get a set of

wide solutions to a design problem, principal

solution that satisfies product’s fundamental

requirements. As a result of this phase we will can

identify essential problems, establish function

structure, search for working principles, combine

and firm up into concept variants, evaluate against

technical and economic criteria.

Figure 3. The Jigsaw

4.1 Functional Analysis

4.1.1 Pieuvre (APTE)

To emphasize the studied object’s functions

(jigsaw’s functions) and their interrelations it can be

used the pieuvre diagram. The connections created

between the product and the elements of its external

environment can be seen graphically. This diagram

is an association diagram; the associations between

the environment elements and studied object are

expressed through functions, as a verb phrase

followed by complements. There are two kinds of

functions: working functions and technical

functions. The working functions are divided into

main and constraint functions. The main functions

justify the system’s existence, and they connect two

elements of the environment through the studied

object. The relations between the environment’s

elements and the study object are constraint

functions.

Working functions has to be achieved through

technical functions. These connect possible

technical solutions and reflect the organization

between more possibilities to obtain the main

functions. Technical functions are intern to product,

they are chosen by the team to provide a working

function. The relations between studied object and

the environment elements are represented in the

diagram drafted in figure 4. The identified functions

are:

A) Main Functions (FP):

FP1: Cutting of metallic materials

B) Constraint functions (C):

C1: Be secure when is used

C2 Easy maneuverability

C3: To be reliable

C4: To assure imposed functioning parameters

C5: To assure chipping removal

C6: Easy recycling

TECHNICAL PAPERS


Figure 4. Pieuvre

4.1.2 Function Analysis System Technique

A FAST Diagram (Functional Analysis System

Technique) (***) represents a translation of each

working function into technical functions and next

materializes these in constructive solutions. This

kind of diagram is built from left to right governed

by the logic why? How? First, we started to analyze

the existent product, the jigsaw. We know that the

main functionality for our product is to be able to

cut materials. The effective cutting of materials is

materialized through a blade movement. This

movement requires an energy source. We

considered in a first step two main physical

principles that have to be respected and so they can

lead to a set of possible solutions for the product.

The first physical principle is the transformation of

the electrical energy into mechanical energy and the

second physical principle is to transform the

circular uniform motion into alternative

reciprocating motion. Analyzing the possibilities to

realize these principles it will be identified the

solutions that can provide these functions and will

be choused one of them. Next, based on the logic to

make a FAST diagram we imagined a possible

product decomposition taking into account more

possibilities to achieve the functions, presented in

figure 5 at page 22.

4.2 Advantages and disadvantages of the existent or proposed solutions

A) Mechanism for blade clamping

In actual solution the blade is clamped between

two plates using two screws. The advantage is the

constructive simplicity but the

clamping/unclamping action is time consuming

because the area for blade clamping is protected by

a plastic cover that has to be removed, the key

needed for clamping/unclamping can be easy lost

because it is kept on a place on the housing.

B) Reduction gear box unit with one step

The advantage is that is a constructive

simplicity, the space occupied by this mechanism is

reduced but in actual solution a great rotation ratio

on gear stage (i =z2 /z1 = 10), quickly gearing wear.

C) Reduction gear box unit with two steps

It reduces the disadvantages presented at B but

the space occupied is greater.

D) Housing

In actual build it has a lot of ribs and should be

redesigned so that the costs for the injection mould

to be reduced.

E) Angled cutting

The angled cutting is realized using a very

simple constructive solution, inclinable saw base

but the provided angles are only 0, 15, 30 and 45

degrees. For the mechanism needed to transform the

circular uniform motion into alternative

reciprocating motion it were proposed several

variants that will be drafted below.

4.3 Solutions for the mechanism needed to transform the circular uniform motion into alternative reciprocating motion

1. For the actual solution the advantage is that

the mechanism is very easy, stroke length = 2r

(assembling diameter of the driving bolt) at small

size of the crank. The disadvantage is that we have

Figure 6. Actual solution

variable translation speed v=�rsin�(t), a great

rotation ratio on gear stage (i =z2 /z1 = 10), quickly

gearing wear, figure 6.

Study Object JIGSAW

Cutting Material

Electric Energy

Operator

FP 1 C2

C1

C4

C6

Quality Principles

Environment

C5

v=�r=

v=�rsin�(t)�

�(t)� r gear wheel z2

Pinion z1

v=�r=ct

TECHNICAL PAPERS


Cutting of materials

Transformation of electrical energy into mechanical energy Electrical

Motor

Provide the needed revolutions per minute for cutting speed

Helical spur gear

Worm-worm wheel gearing

Rotating movement for shaft

Rotating movement to main drive shaft

Reduction gear box unit with one step

Reduction gear box unit with two steps

Electronic device to vary the revolution speed Rising and falling

motion (Alternating movement of the saw blade

Connecting rod-crank guideway mecanism

Plan cam mecanism

Mechanism for transforming the rotation movement into reciprocating mov.

Oscillating crank lever mechanism

Reinforcing the saw blade on cutting direction

Clamping/ unclamping the blade

Roll for blade guidance Mechanism for

blade guide

Mechanism for clamping/ unclamping the blade

Blade clamped between plates fixed with screws

Blade clamped between jaws

Contact between roll and saw blade

Elastic force

Slanted cutting of materials

Slanting to different prescribed angles

Slanting to any desired angle

Mechanism for labelling (indexing)-blocking

Mechanism for rotating and blocking

Jigsaw plate

Mechanism for orbital movement of the saw blade

Feed motion for the blade for aggressive feed

Chipping removal

Possibility to connect to vacuum cleaner

Vacuum cleaner

Security Protecting screen

Avoid the cutting of the alimentation cable

Easy to operate with Ergonomic shape

Reduced weight

TECHNICAL PAPERS


2. The second’s solution advantage is an easy

guide; the translation speed is more uniform for

eccentric, uniform for Archimedes spiral (cam

curve). The disadvantage is that we have a small

stroke length = rmax - rmin small size of the crank and

if we want a bigger stroke this suppose a big size of

the crank. This is drafted in figure 7.

Figure 7.

3. Advantages of the solution drafted in figure

8 are that is easy guide, more uniform translation

speed for eccentric, uniform for Archimedes spiral

(cam curve). The disadvantage is that it is a more

complex mechanism and the size of the mechanism

is bigger.

Figure 8.

4. Worm gearing and cam

The advantages of this solution, drafted in

figure 9, are: the blade stroke is amplified by

oscillating crank lever, oscillation speed more

uniform for eccentric, uniform for Archimedes

spiral (cam curve), the possibility to take the

alternative movement of the blade actuating roll

from the oscillating crank lever, the time for active

stroke more then time for idle stroke, feed stroke

variable (0,…,m).The disadvantage is that the

mechanism is more complex.

Figure 9. Worm gear and cam

5. The solution using a blade stroke amplified

by oscillating crank lever drafted in figure 10 has as

advantage a greater reducing rotation ratio in the

case of worm-gearing, the possibility to take the

alternative movement of the blade actuating roll

from the oscillating crank lever, time for active

stroke greater then time for idle stroke, feed stroke

variable (0, ..., max)�.The disadvantages are that one

guide more (oscillating crank lever)�, low yield for

worm-gearing, imposition of the rotation direction

for creation of the idle stroke time smaller.

Figure 10. Blade stroke amplified by oscillating crank lever

Mechanism for blade feed in active stroke of

actual building is drafted in figure 11.

A better solution imagined for the blade feed is

drafted in figure 12.

r

rmax

rmin

rmax

rmin

worm wheel

worm gear

TECHNICAL PAPERS


Figure 11.Drafted solution for the blade feed in actual build Figure 13. Su-field analysis

Figure 12. Drafted solution for the blade feed, an improved solution

4.4 Searching for new solutions using TRIZ

All the solutions presented above use the

transformation of electrical energy into a linear

reciprocating motion of the blade. We tried to see if

there exists any other ways to obtain the blade

movement, and regarding this problem we used the

“substance field analysis” from TRIZ. (More details

about TRIZ technique can be found in (Choulier

2000, Salamatov). This technique transposed in our

problem can be seen in figure 13. Using the Su-field

analysis and interaction matrix (figure 14) we can

see possible solutions for a periodic action. One of

these solutions could be the using of a linear

permanent magnet oscillatory machines (Tutelea

2008). This kind of machines have grained

momentum in the last decade and could pay an

important role in the direct driving of piston pumps,

compressors etc. A flat surface mover allows for

permanent magnet flux concentration and the

machine core is easy to manufacture from

laminations. The main dimension of the

experimental prototypes are: stroke length: 10 mm,

teeth with: 5 mm, air-gap: 1 mm, permanent magnet

thickness 2 mm, permanent magnet material

NdFEB, numbers of turns/coil 285, Wire diameter

0.45 mm, mover mass 2 kg. The sketch of the

permanent oscillatory machine with buried

permanent magnet flux concentration is shown in

figure 15. The mover is sliding on linear bearings,

V=�r=ct

V=�rsin�(t)�

�(t)� r

f=0 f=max

El. M a.c.

Electronically rotation adjuster

V=�r=ct

V=�rsin�(t)�

�(t)� r

Fel

Fmag

S2, gearing

S1, rotor

S3, S4 (blade)

Fel

Fmag

Felast

S3 (S4, blade)

TECHNICAL PAPERS


Figure 14. Interactive TRIZ contradiction matrix (****)

the kinetic energy is recovered by two mechanical

springs and the blade will be joint with mover.

The disadvantage of the solution is that the

frequency of mover has to be equal with resonance

frequency of the mechanical spring, the cutting

speed has to be constant and the maximum stroke is

30-40 mm. The main advantages of this solution are

that the chain of converting energy is reduced and

also the size of the motor. Using a pneumatic spring

can be built an oscillatory machine with variable

speed, but the solutions are not experimented yet.

Figure 15. Sketch of the permanent oscillatory machine(Tutelea 2008)

4.5 Axiomatic approach

Taking into account those presented in

previous chapters we drafted based on axiomatic

approach a structure of functional requirements and

design parameters that can provide these

requirements. We considered that each design

parameter satisfies a functional requirement in this

case the design is uncoupled but further we will

analyze in more detail each requirement and design

parameter and we will try to solve the eventual

couplings. Using the ACCLARO DFSS software

we made the decomposition FR-DP, tree diagram

and module-junction diagram. In the future work we

will develop these further. Next we present the FR

and their corresponding DP.

Functional requirements:

F – Cutting of materials

F1– Rising and falling motion (Alternating

movement of the saw blade)

F2 – Feed motion

F3 – Angled cutting

F4 – Chipping removal

F5 – Assure a straight line cutting

F6 – Clamping/unclamping of the blade

F7 – Operator’s security

F11 – Transform circular motion into linear

motion

F12 – Assure the neeed cutting speed

F21- Variable feed on active stroke

F22 – Apply a feed force on the blade

F31 – Slanting to prescribed angles

F32 – Slanting to any desired angle

The corresponding design parameters are:

PC -Jigsaw

PC1 – Electrical motor and reciprocating rod-

crank guideway mechanism

PC2 – Feed lever and shove off roll

PC3 – Swinging base plate

PC4 – Vacuum device

PC5 – Light projected on material for guidance

PC6 – Mechanism for clamping/unclamping the

blade

PC7 – Protection screen

P11 Slide crank mechanism

P12 – Electronically rotative speed variation

P21 – Levers with variable amplification

P22 – Roll in contact with blade

P31 – Blocking and labelling (indexing)

mechanism

P32 – Blocking and rotation mechanism

Figure 16. FR-DP decomposition

The corresponding design matrix are :

TECHNICAL PAPERS


��

�

��

�

�

��

�

��

�

�

⋅

��

��

�

=

��

�

��

�

�

��

�

��

�

�

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

000000

000000

000000

000000

000000

00000

000000

PC

PC

PC

PC

PC

PC

PC

X

X

X

X

X

XX

X

F

F

F

F

F

F

F

��

��

⋅�

��

=

��

��

12

11

12

11

0

0

PC

PC

X

X

F

F

��

��

⋅�

��

=

��

��

22

21

22

21

0

0

PC

PC

X

X

F

F

��

��

⋅�

��

=

��

��

32

31

32

31 0

PC

PC

XX

X

F

F

Figure 17. FR-DP Design Matrix......................................... Figure 18. Tree Diagram

Figure 19. Flow Diagram

TECHNICAL PAPERS


Figure 20. The module-junction diagram for jigsaw

The flow chart and module junction diagram is

a better way of representing system architecture.

The relationship between modules (Ms) are

represented using circled symbols. A module

represents a row in design matrix. The following

circled symbols have been used:

S = simple summation of FRs (uncoupled

design)

C = control junction (DPs and Ms must be

controlled in a sequence (decoupled design)

F = requires feedback and violates the

Independence Axiom (coupled design)

5 COLLABORATIVE WORK

The collaborative work was supported inside

the VRL network through formal presentations done

using Polycom VC material (discussions,

presentations). In our last session it was proposed to

use AREL, software that can be useful to create

interactive design sessions.

During the discussions and presentations it was

presented the assessment of users’ perception of the

jigsaw with respect to their level of use

(professional, occasional user). Regarding the

assessment of users’ perception of the jigsaw the

idea that we have to take into account is the origin

of the vibration (functional analysis) captured by

the users of the jigsaw. That could lead to new

solutions (i.e. new design). Another problem that

has to be solved is how to integrate “user

perception” in order to lead design choices.

In another presentation it were discussed

problems regarding the recycling assessment of the

jigsaw and problems raised by the materials used

for the jigsaw’s components and their possibilities

of recycling. Also it was presented the fact that it is

hard to automatically extract motor after shredding

and in this case we have to think to an easy

accessibility of motor, the PVC of cable not

recyclable, PC is not sortable after shredding and in

this case is preferred the use of ABS or HIPS for

protection hood. Also in actual build, the hood is

mounted with eight screws and it is too costly (long

time) to dismantle the 8 screws. In this case the

suggestions are to decrease number of screws,

prefer snap-fit or to use Shape-Memory Materials

for screws.

It was also discussions on LCA (Lifecycle

Assessment) and the results (SimaPro solution)

provides some indicators to identify which

component has the higher environmental impact

(e.g.: copper).

In other presentation were presented the first

results based on functional and physical modeling

to support CAD using energetic flows interface.

6 CONCLUSIONS

In this paper we presented the work done until

now by our team regarding the functional analysis

of the jigsaw and we provided some design

alternatives regarding the mechanical transmission,

work that is not definitive because this task (project)

is undergoing. In the future work we will develop

further this work and we will try to take into

account all the presentations and discussions that

had or will have place with other participants

regarding this task and use them like guidance for

the conceptual design phase.

7 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The research for this paper has been done in

the frame of the Program FP6 -Virtual Research

Lab for a Knowledge, Community in Production

FP6-507487 and National Excellence Research

Program INPRO, CEEX No. 243/2006 “National

Research Network for Integrated Product and

Process Engineering-INPRO”, Complex Project

financed by National Authority for Scientific

Research.

8 REFERENCES

�Choulier, D., Dr�ghici, G. (2000). TRIZ : une approche de résolution des problèmes d’innovation dans la conception de produits. In: Modélisation de la connaissance pour la conception et la fabrication intégrées, Dr�ghici G. & Brissaud D. (Ed.), pp. 31-59, Editura Mirton, ISBN 973-585-216-0, Timi�oara. �Lonchampt, P. (2004), Co-évolution et processus de conception intégrée de produits: Modèle et support de l'activité de conception, Thèse de l’INP Grenoble

M11

S

M12

S

M21 M22

S

M31 M32

C

M4 M5 M6

C

FR top

Maine module

Modules M7

TECHNICAL PAPERS


�Pahl, G., Beitz, W. (1996), Engineering Design, Second edition, Springer, ISBN 3-540-19917-9 �Suh, N. P. (1990), The Principles of Design, Oxford University Press, ISBN 0-19-504345-6 �Yuri Salamatov ().TRIZ:Tthe Right Solution at the Right Time,Published by Insytec B.V.1999, ISBN 90-804680-1-0, Netherlands �Tutelea,L.N., Kim, M. C., Topor, M., Lee, J., Boldea,I.(2008). Linear permanent magnet oscillatory machine, comprehensive modeling for transients with validation by experiments, IEEE

Transactions On Industrial Electronics, vol. 55, no. 2, February, 2008, pg. 492-500 �(*) Integration Definition for Function Modeling (IDEF0), Category of Standard: Software Standard, Modeling Techniques at http://www.idef.com/pdf/idef0.pdf �(**) Axiomatic Design Methodology-Independence Axiom http://www.vr.clemson.edu/credo/classes/AxiomTheory_(1).pdf), �(***) http://www.npd-solutions.com/va.html �(****) http://www.triz40.com/

Date post:	17-May-2023
Category:	Documents
Upload:	upt
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

REDESIGN CASE OF A JIGSAW

Documents