ARTICLE IN PRESS

Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 22 (2006) 409–419

www.elsevier.com/locate/rcim

Computer-aided assembly planning for the diemaking industry

Antonio Armillotta, Giovanni Moroni, Marco Rasella
Dipartimento di Meccanica, Politecnico di Milano, Piazza Leonardo da Vinci 32, 20133 Milano, Italy
Received 7 October 2005; accepted 28 November 2005

Abstract

The paper describes a CAD-based approach to some management tasks related to the manufacture of stamping tools for car body
parts. The proposed method generates assembly plans for draw dies and trim/pierce dies from their design information. Die assembly is a
highly constrained process including a variety of part handling, measurement and surface finishing operations. As such, it escapes some
critical assumptions underlying most generative planning methodologies in literature. Such complexity is faced through a comprehensive
description model of the assembly process, which represents the space of all feasible operation sequences for any allowable die
configuration within a predefined domain. Once a specific configuration has been retrieved from solid and surface CAD descriptions of
die parts, the assembly model is instantiated into a graph-like data structure, which include only applicable operations and their
precedence constraints. An instance describes operations at a sufficient detail level to support time estimation, process documentation
and production scheduling. A prototype software tool derived from the assembly planning method has been tested in a real industrial
context, in order to evaluate its potential impact on the efficiency of die manufacture.
r 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Die manufacturing; Assembly; Process planning.

1. Introduction During last years, diemaking companies have been

Tooling is the main cost factor in the production of
conventional steel parts of car body. One of the reasons for
the high cost of forming dies used for outer panels and
underbodies is the large amount of work needed to
assemble them. A typical die (Fig. 1) is made by dozens
of mechanical parts mounted on four main large-sized, cast
elements (lower shoe, blankholder, punch, upper die).
Within die manufacturing, the assembly process is a
complex set of activities, which follows CNC machining
of cast elements. It includes a number of very different
operations, from part handling and fastening to bench
machining, thermal treatment, dimensional control, sur-
face finishing and die tryout. The whole process takes up a
great deal of personnel and machinery resources for several
months. Its efficient running is critical to avoid cost
overruns and delays on production schedules.
Corresponding author. Tel.: +39 02 2399 4925; fax: +39 02 7063 8377.
E-mail address: marco.rasella@polimi.it (M. Rasella).
improving their engineering, procurement and in-house
machining practices through an increasing CAD/CAE/
CAM integration. To date, few efforts have been done to
extend the benefits of modern product data management to
the assembly stage. According to the above considerations
on process complexity, significant margins for time and
cost reduction could be gained through the adoption of a
structured methodology referred to as computer-aided
assembly planning (CAAP). As proved in different
industrial contexts, the implementation of an integrated
CAD/CAAP software tool could be helpful to optimize the
assembly process for throughput and resource utilization.
The present paper describes a method for the assembly
planning of draw dies and trim/pierce dies for sheet metal
body parts. The development of a CAAP tool is proposed
as an interfacing link between the design of a die and the
operational management of its assembly process. The
purpose of such integration is to streamline or automate
several tasks, which are usually carried out by an unformal-
ized, empirical approach. These include preparation of

0736-5845/$ - see front matter r 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.rcim.2005.11.015
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
410 A. Armillotta et al. / Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 22 (2006) 409–419
Fig. 1. Single-action draw die for outer body panels (courtesy: Fontana-
Pietro SpA).
Fig. 2. CAD integration in die assembly.
blueprints and other process documents, allocation of
resources to manufacturing projects and scheduling of
assembly work (Fig. 2).
The proposed method has been developed within a
specific industrial context, referring to an Italian company
with a leading position in the field of automotive
diemaking (FontanaPietro SpA). The contribution of the
company has been essential for a clear understanding of
key issues related to process modeling. It has also helped to
define software specifications and to test results on real
cases. However, it is claimed that the followed approach
can be proposed for similar problems in a wider class of
applications.
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows.
Sections 2 and 3 provide an overview of the method and
justify the approach with respect to related literature.
Sections 4–6 describe the three basic elements of the
planning architecture, namely the extendable knowledge
base, the extraction of CAD data and the generation of
assembly plans. Sections 7 and 8 discuss the results of
validation tests on the method and identify possible
extensions of the work.
2. Related work
The assembly-planning problem has been widely studied
since the introduction of commercial CAD packages based
on solid modelers [1]. Its relevancy to the manufacturing
industry was first recognized when robots with suitable
accuracy to the execution of fine-positioning tasks became
available. While paving the way for flexible automated
assembly, this innovation suggested the idea that a robot
line could be automatically reconfigured according to the
geometry of parts to be assembled. Early CAAP methods
were dedicated to task-level robot programming, i.e.
generation of a high-level sequence of operations for each
robot cell in an assembly system [2,3]. In a later phase, the
interest moved to different applications including product
design for ease of assembly [4,5], selection and design of
assembly systems, management of assembly lines [6,7].
A fast, data-driven definition of feasible operation
sequences is a critical condition for the efficient fulfilment
of all these tasks.
Most methods proposed in literature focus on auto-
mated assembly processes. These lend themselves to a
relatively simple geometric description, since robots lack
sufficient dexterity to complex motion trajectories and
ability to react to complex sensory information. Few
studies have investigated on reasoning criteria to describe
manual assembly, which poses special difficulties such as
more complicated part handling, two-handed manipulation
and the need to consider ergonomic requirements [8,9].
The search for assembly plans is usually carried out by a
generative approach, which involves direct reasoning on
part geometry with little or no reliance on domain-
dependent information. Most available methods share a
common architecture deriving from general-purpose plan-
ning methods proposed in the field of artificial intelligence
[10]. In a first step, product data are analyzed to extract all
information concerned with the assembly process. This
always includes the definition of contact relations among
parts, typically expressed through a graph-like structure.
Based on geometric and relational information, combina-
torial algorithms generate a new structure (precedence
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
A. Armillotta et al. / Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 22 (2006) 409–419
graph, AND/OR graph, state transition diagram) repre-
senting an ordered set of feasible assembly sequences
[11–13]. A final optimization step may select one or more
optimal plans according to such criteria as cycle time
minimization and availability of assembly tools in the
system [14,15].
The main shortcoming of the generative approach is the
computational complexity of the problem, whose solution
space grows exponentially with part count. To overcome
this difficulty, the problem has been faced under simplify-
ing assumptions recognized as consistent with foreseen
applications. Specifically, assembly plans are bound to be
sequential (only a part or subassembly at a time is
manipulated) and linear (each part reaches its final
assembly position by just one manipulation). Moreover,
sequence generation algorithms are seldom able to treat
assemblies with large numbers of parts. Another typical
limitation of generative planners is the difficulty to enhance
reasoning with technical knowledge related to the specific
product to be assembled. Little attention seems to have
been paid to the variant approach, which has been
successfully attempted to tackle highly domain-dependent
problems in the planning of machining processes.
Despite the availability of CAD/CAM tools dedicated to
diemaking, few studies have pursued the development of a
seamless integration between die design and manufactur-
ing. Computer-aided process planning methods have been
recently proposed to streamline the CNC machining of
casting patterns and free-form surfaces of main die
elements [16–18]. A method for the generation of assembly
plans for stamping dies has been proposed to enable
simulations and design evaluations on product assembl-
Fig. 3. Overview of the CAAP system.
411
ability. It implements a generative search for feasible
operation sequences from adjacency relations among die
components, without any reference to non-assembly
operations involved in the typical assembly process of
automotive dies [19].
3. Approach
Some assumptions underlying generative planning meth-
ods are not satisfied in the assembly of large sized, highly
accurate tools such as stamping dies for the automotive
industry. Nonlinear plans result from the frequent need to
temporarily fasten parts for the sake of dimensional
measurements or functional tests, and then take them
apart to allow remachining or finishing operations.
Domain-dependent information is often critical in the
organization of the assembly process, due to the unique
functional requirements of forming tools compared to
generic mechanical products. Constraints to feasible
assembly sequences derive from both corporate practices
and specifications of car manufacturers.
As a consequence of these special requirements, the
assembly process of a die cannot be regarded as a mere
sequence of part-handling operations, and cannot be
analyzed through purely geometric considerations. Due
to the diversity of operations and resources involved, its
structure resembles a complex project made by a set of
activities subject to precedence constraints. A feasible
assembly sequence consists in each allocation of activities
to resources, which does not violate project constraints.
For any given die configuration, a CAAP tool must build a
formal description of the project, which represents the set
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
412 A. Armillotta et al. / Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 22 (2006) 409–419
of feasible assembly sequences. Such description should be
sufficiently clear to convey process information, and
sufficiently complete to allow process optimization.
However, there is a logical difference between the output
of assembly planning and PERT/CPM charts or similar
work breakdown structures. While the latter are inherently
static models, assembly operations and their precedence
relations must be explicitly evaluated as a function of die
configuration. In the proposed approach, the assembly
description for a die is built as an instance of a
comprehensive process model through the use of CAD
data. Specific views of the process are generated from the
instance according to the needs of supported applications
(documentation, time and cost estimation, scheduling). The
architecture of the CAAP system, shown in Fig. 3, is
defined by the following concepts:
 Model: is the set of all assembly process descriptions for
any allowable die configuration within a predefined,
company-specific domain of variants; it contains de-
tailed information regarding assembly operations, which
are arranged into a hierarchy of phases and subject to
precedence constraints; the information is stored in an
implicit form, i.e. it depends on die design parameters.
 Instance: is the explicit description of the assembly
process for a die; it is built from the process model
through the extraction of assembly-related data from die
CAD models; the instantiation resolves model alter-
natives, eliminates inapplicable operations and prece-
dences, and evaluates the execution time of each
operation from parameter values defined in die config-
uration.
 Views: are subsets of information selected from a model
instance and transferred to all interested subjects (design
and manufacturing engineers, shop-floor foremen and
operators); they include an estimation of time and cost,
an assembly plan and an interactive graphical descrip-
tion of assembly operations.
4. Process modeling
Through a preliminary analysis of all kinds of activities
involved in the manufacture of draw dies and trim/pierce
Fig. 4. Model of the assembly process.
dies at the reference company, a descriptive model of
the assembly process has been built. As shown in Fig. 4,
the model is organized as a network of relations among
lists of four basic entities: die parts, available resources,
assembly operations and occurrence conditions associated
to them.
The operation list includes any operation that could
be involved in the assembly process of a die within the
given domain. Information related to each operation
includes:
 type and amount of needed resources (operators,
machine tools, presses, coordinate measuring machines,
material handling and other kinds of equipment),
selected from a list of available resources;
 precedence relations with other operations, given their
applicability in a feasible assembly sequence; these
constraints can also involve phases, i.e. sets of opera-
tions to be carried out consecutively by the same
resources on the same die element;
 an occurrence condition, selected from a list of
predefined ones; conditions may simply invoke the
presence of one or more die parts, or involve constraints
on the values of part attributes;
 one or more time estimators, which express execution
time as a function of part attributes; in the simplest case,
typical of part-fastening operations, the function multi-
plies a unit time by the number of handled parts; in
other cases, such as surface-finishing operations, it can
involve a different mathematical function of one or
more geometric attributes (e.g. surface areas and edge
lengths of the main die elements); alternative estimation
functions defined for the same operation can be selected
according to conditions on die parts.
Part attributes are needed to check occurrence condi-
tions and to calculate the execution time of operations.
Attributes have a different meaning for each part type, and
relate to such properties as size, shape complexity,
mechanical construction and location in die assembly.
For the main cast elements, attributes may be related to
specific geometric properties: for example, areas of free-
form surfaces on die elements (punch, die, blankholder)
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
A. Armillotta et al. / Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 22 (2006) 409–419
Fig. 5. Part attributes and their use in process modeling.
influence the duration of most-finishing operations on the
same surfaces. Attributes defined for all parts and cast
elements define the set of information to be extracted from
the CAD description of a die.
A demonstration of how part attributes are used in
process planning is shown in Fig. 5. The part in the
example (a die button for a trim/pierce die) is identified by
four attributes. Three of them (mounting part, size, shape)
take discrete values referring to choices among options,
while the latter (area of freeform surface) can take any
value within a continuous range. The assembly process for
the die includes some operations, which involve the
existence of at least one part of this type. At a first stage,
attribute values are used to check the occurrence of these
operations in the actual assembly plan. Afterwards, they
are used to select one of the available functions for the
estimation of operation time, as well as to provide the
values of parameters used in the selected function (con-
stants appearing in time estimators have been altered for
confidentiality reasons).
The model of the assembly process forms the knowledge
base for the planning method. In the software prototype,
the information contained in the model can be changed and
updated to accommodate for new part types and technical
improvements in the manufacturing process, whose impact
on the whole process can be readily evaluated with the help
of the CAAP tool.
413
5. Assembly data extraction
The bulk of design data on a die contains a number of
assembly related attributes. They need to be extracted in
order to define the corresponding assembly plan and to
estimate the time needed for the execution of each single
operation within the plan. The main source of information
for this task is the CAD model of the die, which can be
regarded as a hierarchical data set arranged on four levels:
die assembly, main elements, components and surfaces.
Specific kinds of attributes can be extracted from each
different level.
Data extracted at assembly level include the type
and basic dimensions of the die. Identification of die
type (draw or trim/pierce, single or double-action, for
outer panels or underbodies) allows a selection of the
applicable process model. Dimensional data, evaluated
with reference to a bounding box of the assembly,
are needed to estimate standard times for such types
of operations as CNC programming and dimensional
control.
Information collected at the second level is aimed at
checking the presence of all main die elements. These
include the cast parts already shown in Fig. 1 for a draw die
and the corresponding parts (lower and upper shoe,
blankholder, blanking and piercing inserts) for trim/pierce
dies. Missing die elements are usually related to incomplete
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
414 A. Armillotta et al. / Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 22 (2006) 409–419
die configurations, which are likely to result into useless
assembly plans.
The third level consists in the solid models of the single
components to be mounted on main die elements. Guide
pins, standoffs, gas cylinders, and lifters are examples of
these kinds of components. As a first step, for a correct
reconstruction of the assembly plan from the process
model, the presence of each type of component on the die
has to be detected. To avoid the resort to complex
recognition rules, components are identified from basic
model properties, expressed as either numeric of string-
based data. Such information is arranged into a proper
format and provided by product engineers at design stage.
Further information, needed to correctly estimate the
execution time of each single assembly operation, include
part type, shape complexity and size. To extract type and
complexity data, appropriate properties have been defined
and included in part models. These allow to recognize
either commercial or company-specific variants for many
components. For example, jacks used to lift the sheet metal
part after the drawing cycle are available in three different
types (T-shaped, cylindrical, air spring), which are distin-
guished from a ‘type’ attribute in model properties. Size
attributes, which affect execution time for many part-
mounting operations, are recognized from model bounding
boxes, extracted through dedicated calculation procedures.
Fig. 6 shows the extracted data for a sample part (the
blankholder of a draw die).
The fourth level, which includes face models, provides
several kinds of geometric data on die components. These
include the areas of surface regions and the lengths of edges
involved in some operations (free-form surface, sharp
Fig. 6. Assembly-related data for a die component.
bending corners, contours to be deburred after CNC
machining). Such data are essential to estimate execution
times for most machining and finishing operations. For
example, the time needed to finish a punch surface is
estimated as proportional to its area; while the time needed
to polish the blankholder surface is estimated as a linear
model of punch edge length and of upper die surface area.
This linear model is obtained from a regression study.
A software module has been developed within the
CATIA V5 user interface to directly extract these
information from CAD data and to transfer them to the
planning module. A recursion-based search allows to
explore the whole logical tree of die CAD model regardless
of its design history. The resulting data structure, stored in
an appropriate file format, contains all information needed
to plan a correct assembly sequence and to calculate
operation times.
6. Instantiation and view generation
In the developed prototype, the final steps of assembly
planning are carried out by a stand-alone software module.
This choice creates a logical separation between the
treatment of product geometric data and manufacturing
information. While the former is naturally linked to the
software design platform, the latter is most often accessed
out of the CAD environment. In the perspective industrial
deployment of the software tool, this choice allows also
updates of the planning module to occur independently of
future releases of the CAD package.
As said before, information transferred to the planning
module lists die parts and related attributes. Each parts is
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
A. Armillotta et al. / Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 22 (2006) 409–419
Fig. 7. Summary and editing of basic die information.
recognized by its identifier as belonging to a given part
type. Values of part attributes are assigned to parameters
needed for planning calculations through rules depending
on part type. For verification purposes, the user is provided
with a list of parts to be mounted on main die elements
(Fig. 7).
As some planning parameters do not refer to informa-
tion contained in CAD models, user data are provided in
addition to extracted part attributes (Fig. 7). These include
specifications on die materials, type of sheet metal part
(outer panel or underbody), thermal treatments and
stamping tests, as well as some operation times, which
have been evaluated off-line by manufacturing engineers.
Starting from both extracted and user-provided data, the
planning module builds the instance of the assembly
process for the die. Applicable operations and related
resources are selected through an evaluation of occurrence
conditions based on die data. Similarly, subconditions for
estimator selection are also verified in order to calculate the
execution time for each applicable operation. Precedence
relations among applicable operations are calculated by
pruning the constraint set of the overall assembly model.
The instance is then stored in a convenient format for the
generation of user views.
A list of estimated operation times is output as a first
view deriving from the instance. It provides an overview of
how total assembly time is spread among different types of
activities. It also allows to evaluate the workload for each
available resource for the completion of the die. In the
reference company, this information is critical to allocate
415
jobs to manufacturing units. Based on unit costs of
resources, a cost breakdown is also generated to identify
margins for process improvements.
A second instance view provided by the software tool is a
graphical chart of the assembly plan, which shows
precedence relations among operations and allows to
visually spot which phases of the assembly process can
occur simultaneously on different die elements (Fig. 8). The
chart identifies operations of the critical path, which
deserve special attention in order to avoid delays on
assembly lead time. Such information is helpful to gain a
complete understanding of the assembly process for both
managers and engineers. For this purpose, users can also
request details on operation times and resources. Informa-
tion presented through the user interface can be output in
the form of worksheets useful for the preparation of paper
documentation on the assembly plan.
A third view provided by the software is a graphical
description of assembly operations. This is obtained
through a sort of process ‘movie’ which illustrates, for
each assembly phase and for each main die element, the
path followed by single components from a die external
position to final mounting position (Fig. 9). The digital
animation is automatically created from a set of images
that show the components at discrete position steps. This
information is helpful for operators to gain a complete
understanding of each single assembly operation. For this
purpose, operators are allowed to interact with the
animation by changing the point of view and the zoom
level.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
416 A. Armillotta et al. / Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 22 (2006) 409–419
Fig. 8. Schematic illustration of the assembly plan.
7. Results
Tests carried out on a first prototype of the CAAP
software tool have allowed a first verification of process
models and procedures for instantiation and view genera-
tion. It has been noted that preliminary data collection and
comparison of results to industrial practice are essential
phases for a critical analysis of assembly activities. As a
result, process knowledge has been formalized at a more
detailed level than usually experimented in die manufac-
ture. As in most projects aimed at implementing computer-
aided planning, such effect is at least as important as are
practical benefits achieved in production management
activities.
In order to validate the effectiveness of the proposed
approach, some test cases provided by the partner
company have been processed by the assembly planner.
They account for the main variability factors that could be
found in draw dies and trim/pierce dies with respect to die
size and configuration as well as combinations of part
count, types and sizes. For each case, the software tool
has provided an estimation of lead time and total work
content of the assembly process. For some sample dies,
Table 1 shows the differences between estimated values
of these entities to actual figures recorded at manufactur-
ing stage.
Estimates have been recognized as sufficiently accurate
for all intended applications. Specifically, resource alloca-
tion to manufacturing divisions is usually done under
comparable tolerances on cycle time. The achieved benefit
is especially in the short response time of the CAAP tool.
Time estimates are immediately generated without the need
of any additional time delay at design stage. For the same
task, former practice required a few workdays to be spent
on each different die for paperwork and data collection
through interactive queries on CAD models. This need
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
A. Armillotta et al. / Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 22 (2006) 409–419
Fig. 9. Video animation of mounting phases.
Table 1
Test results on the CAAP software prototype
Case Difference on lead Difference on total
time [%] work hours [%]
Die 1 8.8 2.9
Die 2 5.8 7.7
Die 3 7.5 0.4
used to result in significant personnel costs due to the high
number of dies engineered at the company.
Moreover, corporate managers have been provided with
documentation that was not previously available. This
includes assembly plans in worksheet format and calcula-
tion of workloads on the different functions of the
assembly division (part handling, measurement, tryout
etc.). In the long run, such information will help to gain
insights for an efficient management of manufacturing
personnel.
Software-generated information about precedence rela-
tions has allowed to build some Gantt charts of assembly
operations. They could be essential tools for a thorough
revision of assembly processes, whose bottlenecks can be
clearly identified. In the example of Fig. 10, the lead time of
the assembly process is clearly affected by three-time
consuming operations in the die tryout phase. The evidence
of their impact on process efficiency suggests the need to
consider technological alternatives that could ensure the
proper accuracy and surface finish on the die in accordance
with customers’ specifications. In general, such a time
planning cannot be directly used for the scheduling of
manufacturing activities, which always deals with common
417
resources shared by multiple projects. However, it can
suggest corrective actions, which can remove constraints
and streamline the whole flow of activities.
8. Conclusions
The use of the software prototype has confirmed the
expectations, which suggested the development of an
assembly planning method. The most immediate impact
of the work is likely to affect manufacturing activities.
Managers involved in resource allocation decisions
can be provided with more responsive and accurate
estimations of assembly time and cost. For manufacturing
engineers, a CAAP tool is a valuable support to decisions,
which are often taken without full information about
process variants imposed by specific dies. Assembly
operators can find interactive graphical information more
effective than paper blueprints for a quick understanding
of daily tasks.
As a positive side effect for diemaking companies,
implementation of assembly planning is a means to
collecting explicit corporate knowledge, which may be
scattered among employees and paper archives. Moreover,
due to CAD integration, many manufacturing evaluations
can be anticipated at design stage. This enhances the ability
of design engineers to identify critical issues and process
bottlenecks, thus acquiring additional design criteria for
new dies. This opportunity will be better tested during the
first new projects that will be carried out with the help of
the CAAP tool.
Future developments of the method will involve an
extension of assembly planning to different die types and a
complete testing of the software tool after its final
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
418 A. Armillotta et al. / Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 22 (2006) 409–419

Op02.1
Op02.3
Op02.4
Op03.1
Op03.17
Op06.1
Op06.2
Op06.3
Op06.4
Op06.5
Op08.1
Op09.3
Op12.1
Op13.1
Op13.2
Op13.3
Op13.4
Op17.1
Op17.2
Op19.1
Op19.2
Op19.3
Op22.1
Op22.3
Op23.2
Op23.3
Op24.1
Op24.3
Op25.1
Op25.3
Op25.7
Op26.1
Op29.2
Op31.2
Op32.2
Op37.2
Op39.2
Op42.1
Op44.2 lead time
Op48.2
Op50.2
Op52.2
Op63.1
Op63.2
Op66.2 most critical operations
Op68.2
Op68.5
Op70.1
Op71.1
Op71.2
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600

Fig. 10. Gantt chart prepared from CAAP output.

deployment at the partner company. Some open issues,
related to estimation and optimization of specific assembly
operations, will be addressed with the aim of developing
improved CAD-based solutions. Efforts will also be
dedicated to interfacing assembly planning to a compu-
ter-aided tool for the scheduling of the assembly
process. This will support an optimized management of
manufacturing units through the use of assembly process
information related to all dies to be assembled at the
company in a given planning horizon.
Acknowledgements
Financial support to this work has been provided by
MAP (Italian Ministry of Production Activities), MIUR
(Italian Ministry of University and Research) and Fonta-
naPietro SpA, Calolziocorte (LC). The authors wish to
gratefully acknowledge the helpful collaboration of Dott.
F. Tagliabue and of the whole R&D FontanaPietro SpA
staff.
References
[1] Abdullah TA, Popplewell K, Page CJ. A review of the support tools
for the process of assembly method selection and assembly planning.
Int J Prod Res 2003;41(11):2391–410.
[2] Weule H, Friedmann T. Computer-aided product analysis in
assembly planning. CIRP Ann 1989;38(1):1–4.
[3] Zussman E, Lenz E, Shpitalni M. An approach to the automatic
assembly planning problem. CIRP Ann 1990;39(1):33–6.
[4] Hsu W, Fuh JYH, Zhang Y. Synthesis of design concepts from a
design for assembly perspective. Comput Integr Manuf 1998;11(1/
2):1–13.
[5] De Fazio TL, Rhee SJ, Whitney DE. Design-specific approach to
design for assembly (DFA) for complex mechanical assemblies. IEEE
Trans Robotic Autom 1999;15(5):869–81.
[6] ElMaraghy WH. Integrated assembly planning and scheduling—
CAPP-related issues. CIRP Ann 1992;41(1):11–4.
[7] Grewal S, Tran P, Bakshare A. Assembly planning software. CIRP
Ann 1995;44(1):1–6.
[8] Bullinger HJ, Rally PJ, Schipfer J. Some aspects of ergonomics in
assembly planning. Int J Ind Ergonom 1997;20:389–97.
[9] Wilson RH. Geometric reasonong about assembly tools. Artif Intell
1998;98:237–79.
[10] Fikes RE, Nilsson NJ. STRIPS: a new approach to the applica-
tion of theorem proving to problem solving. Artif Intell 1971;2:
189–208.
[11] De Fazio TL, Whitney DE. Simplified generation of all mechanical
assembly sequences. IEEE Trans Robotic Autom 1987;3(6):640–58.
[12] Sanderson AC, Homem de Mello LS. Automatic generation of
mechanical assembly sequences. In: Wozny MJ, et al., editors.
Geometric Modeling for Product Engineering. New York: Elsevier;
1990. p. 461–82.
[13] Jones RE, Wilson RH, Calton TL. On constraints in assembly
planning. IEEE Trans Robot Autom 1998;14(6):849–63.
[14] Chen RS, Lu KY, Yu SC. A hybrid genetic algorithm approach on
multi-objective of assembly planning problem. Eng Appl Artif Intell
2002;15:447–57.
[15] Santochi M, Dini G. Computer-aided planning of assembly opera-
tions: the selection of assembly sequences. Robot Comp-Int Manuf
1992;9(6):439–46.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
A. Armillotta et al. / Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 22 (2006) 409–419 419

[16] Shin H, Olling GJ, Chung YC, Kim BH, Cho SK. An integrated
CAPP/CAM system for stamping die pattern machining. Comput
Aided Des 2003;35(2):203–13.
[17] Choi BK, Ko K. C-space based CAPP algorithm for free-
form die-cavity machining. Comput Aided Des 2003;35(2):
179–89.
[18] Sheen D, Lee CH, Noh SD, Lee K. Process planning and NC-code
generation in manufacturing of press dies for production of car
bodies. Int J Prod Res 2004;42(1):37–49.
[19] Yang X, Ou Z, Lu P, Han F. Assembly sequence planning and
assembling simulation of stamping die tools. Proc SPIE 2003;4756:
274–9.