Automatically Programmed Tool

Post-processing receives tool movement and part geometry information in the form of an Automatically Programmed Tool (APT) or Cutter Location File (CLFILE). Because post-processing can modify part movements, bi-directional translation is necessary between tool cycle generation and post-processing. 

APT (Automatically Programmed Tools) 1957—forNC machine tools—discussed in Sec. 3.0... 

The use of automatic programming tools in the translation of the functional specification of the software has become widespread. This trend occurred with the A320, and since the A340-600 a significant part of PRlMs and SECs have been automatically programmed. 

The input of such a tool uses the functional board specification and a library of software components, one for each type of symbol. The automatic programming tool produces the software by assembhng software components according to the interconnections of the specification symbols. 

It shorrld be noted that functional specification validation tools (simulators) use an automatic programming tool. This tool has common parts with the automatic programming tool used for FEW computer code generation. This increases the validation power of simulations. 

In parallel with PPA, a different approach was developed, based on Mathematical Programming (MP). Grossman, Floudas and co-workers have brought significant contributions (see the references). Nowadays the two approaches are largely complementary, PPA as conceptual tool while MP as automatic design tool. 

There is a potential risk that by defining the safety function directly in the programming tool any errors in the original specification will be automatically copied through to the implementation without an intervening stage of verification. 

A vibration-based predictive maintenance program is the most difficult to properly establish and will require much more effort than any of the other techniques. It will also provide the most return on investment. Too many of the vibration-based programs fail to use the full capability of the predictive maintenance tool. They ignore the automatic diagnostic power that is built into most of the microprocessor-based systems and rely instead on manual interpretation of all acquired data. 

Through the addition of automated spectrum input on instrument-based computers, automated rule generation, and automatic tracing of decision rules, PAIRS has been enhanced to be an even more valuable tool for the spectroscopist. PAIRS is available for distribution from the Quantum Chemistry Program Exchange, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN 47405 (Catalog No. QCPE 497). 

We are developing an expert system to automate the first step of this process, the interpretation of molecular spectra and identification of substructures present in the molecule. The automatic interpretation of spectra would by itself provide a useful tool for an organic chemist who may not be an expert spectroscopist. Also, reported algorithms for the assembly of candidate structures from known substructures, such as the GENOA program. (3-6) rely on the input of accurate and specific substructures in order to function correctly and efficiently. Identification of substructures is thus a logical starting point. 

---