IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/joinma/v36y2025i4d10.1007_s10845-024-02368-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Manufacturing process selection based on similarity search: incorporating non-shape information in shape descriptor comparison

Author

Listed:
  • Zhichao Wang

    (Georgia Institute of Technology)

  • Xiaoliang Yan

    (Georgia Institute of Technology)

  • Jacob Bjorni

    (California State University-Sacramento)

  • Mahmoud Dinar

    (California State University-Sacramento)

  • Shreyes Melkote

    (Georgia Institute of Technology)

  • David Rosen

    (Georgia Institute of Technology)

Abstract

Given a part design, the task of manufacturing process selection chooses an appropriate manufacturing process to fabricate it. Prior research has traditionally determined manufacturing processes through direct classification. However, an alternative approach to select a manufacturing process for a new design involves identifying previously produced parts with comparable shapes and materials and learning from them. Finding similar designs from a large dataset of previously manufactured parts is a challenging problem. To solve this problem, researchers have proposed different spatial and spectral shape descriptors to extract shape features including the D2 distribution, spherical harmonics (SH), and the Fast Fourier Transform (FFT), as well as the application of different machine learning methods on various representations of 3D part models like multi-view images, voxel, triangle mesh, and point cloud. However, there has not been a comprehensive analysis of these different shape descriptors, especially for part similarity search aimed at manufacturing process selection. To remedy this gap, this paper presents an in-depth comparative study of these shape descriptors for part similarity search. While we acknowledge the importance of factors like part size, tolerance, and cost in manufacturing process selection, this paper focuses on part shape and material properties only. Our findings show that SH performs the best among non-machine learning methods for manufacturing process selection, yielding 97.96% testing accuracy using the proposed quantitative evaluation metric. For machine learning methods, deep learning on multi-view image representations is best, yielding 99.85% testing accuracy when rotational invariance is not a primary concern. Deep learning on point cloud representations excels, yielding 99.44% testing accuracy when considering rotational invariance.

Suggested Citation

  • Zhichao Wang & Xiaoliang Yan & Jacob Bjorni & Mahmoud Dinar & Shreyes Melkote & David Rosen, 2025. "Manufacturing process selection based on similarity search: incorporating non-shape information in shape descriptor comparison," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 36(4), pages 2509-2536, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:joinma:v:36:y:2025:i:4:d:10.1007_s10845-024-02368-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s10845-024-02368-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10845-024-02368-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10845-024-02368-5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peizhi Shi & Qunfen Qi & Yuchu Qin & Paul J. Scott & Xiangqian Jiang, 2020. "A novel learning-based feature recognition method using multiple sectional view representation," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 31(5), pages 1291-1309, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Xinhua Yao & Di Wang & Tao Yu & Congcong Luan & Jianzhong Fu, 2023. "A machining feature recognition approach based on hierarchical neural network for multi-feature point cloud models," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 34(6), pages 2599-2610, August.
    2. Shirine El Zaatari & Yuqi Wang & Yudie Hu & Weidong Li, 2022. "An improved approach of task-parameterized learning from demonstrations for cobots in dynamic manufacturing," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 33(5), pages 1503-1519, June.
    3. Changxuan Zhao & Shreyes N. Melkote, 2024. "Learning the manufacturing capabilities of machining and finishing processes using a deep neural network model," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 35(4), pages 1845-1865, April.
    4. Peng Shi & Xiaomeng Tong & Maolin Cai & Shuai Niu, 2024. "A novel 2.5D machining feature recognition method based on ray blanking algorithm," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 35(4), pages 1585-1605, April.
    5. Fangwei Ning & Yan Shi & Maolin Cai & Weiqing Xu, 2023. "Part machining feature recognition based on a deep learning method," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 809-821, February.
    6. Maja Trstenjak & Tihomir Opetuk & Hrvoje Cajner & Natasa Tosanovic, 2020. "Process Planning in Industry 4.0—Current State, Potential and Management of Transformation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-25, July.
    7. Victoria Miles & Stefano Giani & Oliver Vogt, 2023. "Recursive encoder network for the automatic analysis of STEP files," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 34(1), pages 181-196, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:joinma:v:36:y:2025:i:4:d:10.1007_s10845-024-02368-5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.