WO2001016658A1 - Feature based assembly - Google Patents
Feature based assembly Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- WO2001016658A1 WO2001016658A1 PCT/GB2000/003330 GB0003330W WO0116658A1 WO 2001016658 A1 WO2001016658 A1 WO 2001016658A1 GB 0003330 W GB0003330 W GB 0003330W WO 0116658 A1 WO0116658 A1 WO 0116658A1
- Authority
- WO
- WIPO (PCT)
- Prior art keywords
- assembly
- kcs
- variation
- carrying
- features
- Prior art date
Links
Classifications
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G05—CONTROLLING; REGULATING
- G05B—CONTROL OR REGULATING SYSTEMS IN GENERAL; FUNCTIONAL ELEMENTS OF SUCH SYSTEMS; MONITORING OR TESTING ARRANGEMENTS FOR SUCH SYSTEMS OR ELEMENTS
- G05B19/00—Programme-control systems
- G05B19/02—Programme-control systems electric
- G05B19/18—Numerical control [NC], i.e. automatically operating machines, in particular machine tools, e.g. in a manufacturing environment, so as to execute positioning, movement or co-ordinated operations by means of programme data in numerical form
- G05B19/4097—Numerical control [NC], i.e. automatically operating machines, in particular machine tools, e.g. in a manufacturing environment, so as to execute positioning, movement or co-ordinated operations by means of programme data in numerical form characterised by using design data to control NC machines, e.g. CAD/CAM
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G05—CONTROLLING; REGULATING
- G05B—CONTROL OR REGULATING SYSTEMS IN GENERAL; FUNCTIONAL ELEMENTS OF SUCH SYSTEMS; MONITORING OR TESTING ARRANGEMENTS FOR SUCH SYSTEMS OR ELEMENTS
- G05B19/00—Programme-control systems
- G05B19/02—Programme-control systems electric
- G05B19/418—Total factory control, i.e. centrally controlling a plurality of machines, e.g. direct or distributed numerical control [DNC], flexible manufacturing systems [FMS], integrated manufacturing systems [IMS], computer integrated manufacturing [CIM]
- G05B19/41805—Total factory control, i.e. centrally controlling a plurality of machines, e.g. direct or distributed numerical control [DNC], flexible manufacturing systems [FMS], integrated manufacturing systems [IMS], computer integrated manufacturing [CIM] characterised by assembly
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G05—CONTROLLING; REGULATING
- G05B—CONTROL OR REGULATING SYSTEMS IN GENERAL; FUNCTIONAL ELEMENTS OF SUCH SYSTEMS; MONITORING OR TESTING ARRANGEMENTS FOR SUCH SYSTEMS OR ELEMENTS
- G05B2219/00—Program-control systems
- G05B2219/30—Nc systems
- G05B2219/35—Nc in input of data, input till input file format
- G05B2219/35193—Manufacturability
-
- Y—GENERAL TAGGING OF NEW TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS; GENERAL TAGGING OF CROSS-SECTIONAL TECHNOLOGIES SPANNING OVER SEVERAL SECTIONS OF THE IPC; TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC CROSS-REFERENCE ART COLLECTIONS [XRACs] AND DIGESTS
- Y02—TECHNOLOGIES OR APPLICATIONS FOR MITIGATION OR ADAPTATION AGAINST CLIMATE CHANGE
- Y02P—CLIMATE CHANGE MITIGATION TECHNOLOGIES IN THE PRODUCTION OR PROCESSING OF GOODS
- Y02P90/00—Enabling technologies with a potential contribution to greenhouse gas [GHG] emissions mitigation
- Y02P90/02—Total factory control, e.g. smart factories, flexible manufacturing systems [FMS] or integrated manufacturing systems [IMS]
Definitions
- This invention provides a practical approach to Feature Based Assembly, in particular as applied to an aircraft and here as an example as applied to a leading edge section of an aircraft wing.
- Feature Based Assembly will be understood by those skilled in the art.
- Feature Based Assembly captures important component relationships within the design and subsequent assembly. Transformation of these Key Characteristics (KCs) into the final assembly requires an intimate understanding at the part feature level.
- KCs Key Characteristics
- the invention seeks to simplify the assembly process.
- Today's wing designs have evolved incrementally with the launch of each new aircraft variant, but essentially the philosophy of gradual improvement in design and assembly has resulted in minimal change. If major savings are to be achieved then new approaches must be adopted.
- the applicant commenced on a program of lean manufacturing studies to produce a physical wing assembly demonstrator reducing costs through Feature Based Assembly. This program of work created a consistent Feature Based methodology, ultimately simplifying the process.
- Feature Based Assembly is here applied to a wing inboard leading edge.
- the process of the invention covers initial customer requirements and design, supply and manufacture. Particular emphasis is on creating a closed loop between design, manufacture and assembly. Today's practices are labour intensive, relying on critical dimensions and fixed expensive tooling. It is demonstrated that a new design, manufacture and assembly process can be derived from recognising important component features and dealing with them in a new way.
- KC identification is essential in determining which product features, manufacturing process parameters and assembly process issues most significantly affect the product's performance function and form. It is customary to classify the KCs into three different types within engineering functions. In use on the shopfloor, no such distinction is normally made.
- PLCs Product Key Characteristics
- APCs Assembly Process Key Characteristics are the features during each assembly stage on the product, tool or procedure that significantly affect the realisation of a product KC at the next higher assembly process level during the assembly process.
- Manufacturing Process Key Characteristics are the manufacturing machine process parameters and/or workplace fixturing features for machine tools and equipment that significantly affect the realisation of a product or an assembly process KC at the part feature level.
- a method of selecting KCs including the steps of identifying potential KCs and carrying out a risk assessment for variation of the KCs preferably including four values, namely probability of failure or variation; the severity of the variation; the detectability of the variation, and the repairability if variation occurs. Scores attributed to each value are then preferably multiplied together to produce the risk assessment, see figure 10.
- the invention includes carrying out a process of at least one of the steps of assembly feature identification for the KC, assembly feature classification for the KC and establishment of assembly precedence of assembly features for the KC.
- the management of the design, manufacturing, assembly and inspection processes can be carried out by addressing the CAD design engineering process, by creating a digital production data set and by creating a feedback mechanism for the manufacturing and assembly process.
- the invention can provide extremely beneficial tolerance management in aircraft OEMs and the supply chain. For example, roughing machine shops can be used to create parts or surface finish on parts which are not affected by KCs.
- the invention can provide an enormous reduction in the use of hard gauges with the use of feature based part to part assembly. This can lead to reduction in floor space used in the factory and the use of simple low cost jigs. A more consistent process will also result with reduction in time-consuming fettling operations and the elimination of unnecessary assembly operations. Additionally greater ease of assembly can result together with a more consistent product. Focus can transfer to major process improvements and to solving root causes rather than just treating symptoms.
- KCs are essentially permanent for a given design and can be identified on product, fixture and tool drawings; however it must be noted that changes in the design or build process can change the KCs.
- the MKCs are directly associated with the physical creation of PKCs, based on the manufacturing process selected. Interactions between the three KC types must be determined and assessed concurrently. Thus it is essential that the identification of KCs be completed at an early stage of the design process using multi-functional design-build teams.
- the project limited the PKCs to those which affect the aerodynamic requirements of the leading edge. These include factors relating to wing shape, profile, steps and gaps and surface smoothness. A number of top-level aerodynamic requirements were chosen. The choice of KCs is decided upon on a basis of economical justification, normally following from risk analysis. The assessment process results in quantification of four values: probability of failure (occurrence), risk (severity), uncertainty (detectability) and repairability. Based on these parameters, the design build team can make decisions about the most effective action. A risk analysis matrix was used.
- the weighting factors were based on design understanding as well as current knowledge of our manufacturing process capabilities and type of equipment likely to be used for each manufacturing/assembly task. Thus, if an old unreliable piece of equipment was being used, the occurrence weighting was raised as a defect/concession was more likely than using a newer more capable machine.
- a robust design according to the invention will make the KCs less sensitive to manufacturing process variation. This process change reduces the input variation, and process improvements adjust current processes to reduce the input variation; statistical process control (SPC) monitors the existing manufacturing process to prevent degradation and inspection can be used to identify scrap or rework parts.
- SPC statistical process control
- Feature Based Assembly overcomes the limitations of pure geometry creation by providing a richer picture. Designers think in features intuitively, but capturing and conveying this information is a non-trivial exercise. Historically, tolerances assigned to components are based upon designer experience. Feature Based recognition provides an ideal medium to explicitly communicate and articulate PKCs into the final assembly. Its foundation is geometric dimensioning and tolerancing at the detail stage, see figures 8 and 9. In this manner the number of datum structures derived throughout the design, machining and inspection stages can be agreed. This eliminates ambiguity, by assembling to key features. A methodology is set out below. Feature identification
- a feature identification process was developed. When two parts are related, it is possible to define an area on each part involved in the assembly. These two areas need to have matching features, so that they can be assembled. Therefore, the relationship between two part features is termed an assembly feature. To attain this level of detail a classification system is required, in this case based upon the attachment of Track Rib 4 to the spar (shown in bold).
- What is regarded as a particularly important aspect of the invention comprises a feature classification system which was developed as a hierarchical structure or database. This system communicates design intent into assembly and provides a practical method by which the overall process can be realised. Reference is made to Figure 4 in this section.
- Level 1 Domain Gives an understanding of which families of components are to be joined in the assembly. Structure/Structure. Other options are Structure/Tooling or Structure/Systems
- Level 3 Specific situation j Describes the type of spatial orientation and relationship of components.
- rib has a flange to attach to a spar web
- Fixing agent attributes fastener type HLT 900, specification
- Assembly means - type of tooling required: fastened manual or automated.
- the transfer of the KC and Feature Based techniques to the shop floor must begin in the machine shop. Once a part is produced consistently to the nominal tolerance value with minimal variation then the work can continue in the assembly areas.
- the first task that is required is to ensure that the datum structure defined by consultation with the design department is maintained throughout the process. It was identified that, during the production of the track rib, five datum setups had been used, see Fig 6. Once the tool designers, planners and manufacturing engineers started to utilise the same datums then the variation in location of the part in different processes was minimised.
- Feature Based Assembly provides the fundamental path by which the use of SPC can be employed in the identification and control of variance.
- the key features are the largest contributors to variation and so if they can be monitored and controlled then the benefits can be seen in a simplified assembly process.
- the level of control was critical within this project with limits of positional accuracy of 0.03mm for spar and track rib holes A and B, as defined by tolerance analysis work undertaken using a Tecnomatix Valysis Assembly (TVA) software package. This gave the limits that would be acceptable on assembly for the design intent to be met. This was achieved with a Bridgeport 3 axis high speed milling machine.
- a second benefit was with the interpretation of the measurement data within the Tecnomatix Valysis computerised measuring machine (CMM) software package.
- CCM Tecnomatix Valysis computerised measuring machine
- the demonstrator consisted of a spar 5m long, with two slat track ribs, single rib and an engine pylon. Having optimised the assembly sequence, new aluminium modular tooling was introduced, reducing costs and complexity. As both spar and track ribs had been pre-drilled to the predetermined tolerances, part to part assembly was achieved. Verification of a theoretical CAD model to the physical demonstrator was achieved with a Leica LTD500 laser tracker system.
- KCs encourages and indeed forces the design build team to actively consider process capability and robust design and manufacturing processes.
- the process of the invention benefits most from a consistent datum structure. Without such a structure, the resulting geometry will be difficult to assemble and large amounts of adjustment on assembly and reworking will be required.
- Feature Based Assembly captures and controls the important few features which contribute most to variation in an assembly.
- the design can then be de-sensitised to the actual manufacturing variation (i.e. known statistical process data) by simulating process, design, assembly method and geometry changes. By predicting the various part assembly processes, costly errors will not be locked into the design.
Abstract
Description
Claims
Priority Applications (7)
Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
---|---|---|---|
JP2001520553A JP2003508841A (en) | 1999-08-31 | 2000-08-31 | Assembling based on features |
CA002382711A CA2382711C (en) | 1999-08-31 | 2000-08-31 | Feature based assembly |
DE60015586T DE60015586T2 (en) | 1999-08-31 | 2000-08-31 | CHARACTERIZED ASSEMBLY |
US09/674,308 US6748284B1 (en) | 1999-08-31 | 2000-08-31 | Feature based assembly |
AT00956684T ATE281664T1 (en) | 1999-08-31 | 2000-08-31 | FEATURE BASED ASSEMBLY |
EP00956684A EP1218805B1 (en) | 1999-08-31 | 2000-08-31 | Feature based assembly |
AU68552/00A AU6855200A (en) | 1999-08-31 | 2000-08-31 | Feature based assembly |
Applications Claiming Priority (2)
Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
---|---|---|---|
GB9920560.1 | 1999-08-31 | ||
GBGB9920560.1A GB9920560D0 (en) | 1999-08-31 | 1999-08-31 | Feature based assembly |
Publications (1)
Publication Number | Publication Date |
---|---|
WO2001016658A1 true WO2001016658A1 (en) | 2001-03-08 |
Family
ID=10860087
Family Applications (1)
Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
---|---|---|---|
PCT/GB2000/003330 WO2001016658A1 (en) | 1999-08-31 | 2000-08-31 | Feature based assembly |
Country Status (10)
Country | Link |
---|---|
US (1) | US6748284B1 (en) |
EP (1) | EP1218805B1 (en) |
JP (1) | JP2003508841A (en) |
AT (1) | ATE281664T1 (en) |
AU (1) | AU6855200A (en) |
CA (1) | CA2382711C (en) |
DE (1) | DE60015586T2 (en) |
ES (1) | ES2230148T3 (en) |
GB (1) | GB9920560D0 (en) |
WO (1) | WO2001016658A1 (en) |
Cited By (2)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
WO2003001310A2 (en) * | 2001-06-20 | 2003-01-03 | Daimlerchrysler Ag | Method for determining the effects of manufacturing changes |
CN107515971A (en) * | 2017-08-10 | 2017-12-26 | 北京航空航天大学 | A kind of product design method and device based on maintainability and functional structure |
Families Citing this family (5)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US7953506B2 (en) * | 2004-12-17 | 2011-05-31 | Bae Systems Plc | Skin design process |
CN103895876B (en) * | 2014-03-27 | 2015-12-02 | 浙江大学 | The wing wallboard guided based on provincial characteristics and the evaluation method in Skeleton assembly gap |
CA2962025C (en) * | 2014-09-25 | 2023-06-20 | Bombardier Inc. | Inspection tool for manufactured components |
US20180308027A1 (en) * | 2017-04-25 | 2018-10-25 | General Electric Company | Apparatus and method for determining and rendering risk assessments to users |
US20190318257A1 (en) * | 2019-06-28 | 2019-10-17 | Helen Adrienne Frances Gould | Assessment and response mechanism for autonomous systems |
Citations (2)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US5581466A (en) * | 1994-05-12 | 1996-12-03 | Texas Instruments Incorporated | Tolerance analysis system and method |
EP0819996A2 (en) * | 1991-04-04 | 1998-01-21 | Hitachi, Ltd. | Automatic manufacturability evaluation method and system |
Family Cites Families (8)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US5586022A (en) * | 1990-02-14 | 1996-12-17 | Hitachi, Ltd. | Method of evaluating easiness of works and processings performed on articles and evaluation apparatus |
US5717598A (en) * | 1990-02-14 | 1998-02-10 | Hitachi, Ltd. | Automatic manufacturability evaluation method and system |
JPH07104802A (en) * | 1993-10-08 | 1995-04-21 | Mita Ind Co Ltd | Device provided with self-repairing function and self-repairing method for the same |
US5586252A (en) | 1994-05-24 | 1996-12-17 | International Business Machines Corporation | System for failure mode and effects analysis |
US5765137A (en) * | 1996-03-04 | 1998-06-09 | Massachusetts Institute Of Technology | Computer system and computer-implemented process for correlating product requirements to manufacturing cost |
US6219805B1 (en) * | 1998-09-15 | 2001-04-17 | Nortel Networks Limited | Method and system for dynamic risk assessment of software systems |
US7451063B2 (en) * | 2001-07-20 | 2008-11-11 | Red X Holdings Llc | Method for designing products and processes |
US20030171897A1 (en) * | 2002-02-28 | 2003-09-11 | John Bieda | Product performance integrated database apparatus and method |
-
1999
- 1999-08-31 GB GBGB9920560.1A patent/GB9920560D0/en not_active Ceased
-
2000
- 2000-08-31 JP JP2001520553A patent/JP2003508841A/en not_active Withdrawn
- 2000-08-31 WO PCT/GB2000/003330 patent/WO2001016658A1/en active IP Right Grant
- 2000-08-31 CA CA002382711A patent/CA2382711C/en not_active Expired - Fee Related
- 2000-08-31 ES ES00956684T patent/ES2230148T3/en not_active Expired - Lifetime
- 2000-08-31 AU AU68552/00A patent/AU6855200A/en not_active Abandoned
- 2000-08-31 US US09/674,308 patent/US6748284B1/en not_active Expired - Lifetime
- 2000-08-31 DE DE60015586T patent/DE60015586T2/en not_active Expired - Lifetime
- 2000-08-31 EP EP00956684A patent/EP1218805B1/en not_active Expired - Lifetime
- 2000-08-31 AT AT00956684T patent/ATE281664T1/en not_active IP Right Cessation
Patent Citations (2)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
EP0819996A2 (en) * | 1991-04-04 | 1998-01-21 | Hitachi, Ltd. | Automatic manufacturability evaluation method and system |
US5581466A (en) * | 1994-05-12 | 1996-12-03 | Texas Instruments Incorporated | Tolerance analysis system and method |
Non-Patent Citations (6)
Title |
---|
BHIMAVARAPU K ET AL: "PERFORMANCE-BASED SAFETY STANDARDS: AN INTEGRATED RISK ASSESSMENT PROGRAM", ISA TECH/EXPO TECHNOLOGY UPDATE,US,INSTRUMENT SOCIETY OF AMERICA, SALEM, MA, vol. 1, no. PART 04, 1997, pages 11 - 20, XP000832928, ISSN: 1054-0032 * |
BORDEGONI M. AND CUGINI U.: "FEATURE-BASED ASSEMBLY IN AERONAUTICS DESIGN: FROM CONCEPTS DEVELOPMENT TO FORMALIZATION", INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF VEHICLE DESIGN, vol. 21, no. 2/3, 1 March 1999 (1999-03-01), pages 228 - 242, XP000874116 * |
CHENG LEONG ANG ET AL: "IDEF0 MODELLING FOR PROJECT RISK ASSESSMENT", COMPUTERS IN INDUSTRY,NL,ELSEVIER SCIENCE PUBLISHERS. AMSTERDAM, vol. 22, no. 1, 1 June 1993 (1993-06-01), pages 31 - 45, XP000381055, ISSN: 0166-3615 * |
FEND C -X ET AL: "CONSTRAINT-BASED DESIGN OF PARTS", COMPUTER AIDED DESIGN,GB,ELSEVIER PUBLISHERS BV., BARKING, vol. 27, no. 5, 1 May 1995 (1995-05-01), pages 343 - 352, XP000532428, ISSN: 0010-4485 * |
HAMILTON D L ET AL: "RISK AND FAULT TOLERANCE ANALYSIS FOR ROBOTICS AND MANUFACTURING", MELECON. MEDITERRANEAN ELECTROTECHNICAL CONFERENCE,US,NEW YORK, IEEE, vol. CONF. 8, 1996, pages 250 - 255, XP000696237, ISBN: 0-7803-3110-9 * |
SUMMERS A E: "Techniques for assigning a target safety integrity level", ISA TRANSACTIONS,US,INSTRUMENT SOCIETY OF AMERICA. PITTSBURGH, vol. 37, no. 2, 1 April 1998 (1998-04-01), pages 95 - 104, XP004128794, ISSN: 0019-0578 * |
Cited By (4)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
WO2003001310A2 (en) * | 2001-06-20 | 2003-01-03 | Daimlerchrysler Ag | Method for determining the effects of manufacturing changes |
WO2003001310A3 (en) * | 2001-06-20 | 2003-12-04 | Daimler Chrysler Ag | Method for determining the effects of manufacturing changes |
CN107515971A (en) * | 2017-08-10 | 2017-12-26 | 北京航空航天大学 | A kind of product design method and device based on maintainability and functional structure |
CN107515971B (en) * | 2017-08-10 | 2020-12-18 | 北京航空航天大学 | Product design method and device based on maintainability and functional structure |
Also Published As
Publication number | Publication date |
---|---|
ES2230148T3 (en) | 2005-05-01 |
GB9920560D0 (en) | 1999-11-03 |
ATE281664T1 (en) | 2004-11-15 |
US6748284B1 (en) | 2004-06-08 |
CA2382711C (en) | 2008-02-12 |
AU6855200A (en) | 2001-03-26 |
EP1218805A1 (en) | 2002-07-03 |
DE60015586T2 (en) | 2005-03-24 |
EP1218805B1 (en) | 2004-11-03 |
DE60015586D1 (en) | 2004-12-09 |
JP2003508841A (en) | 2003-03-04 |
CA2382711A1 (en) | 2001-03-08 |
Similar Documents
Publication | Publication Date | Title |
---|---|---|
US10160070B2 (en) | Method for assembling an aircraft structure assembly without use of any of shimming, locating fixtures and final-hole-size drill jigs | |
EP1330688B1 (en) | A method and control system for generating machine tool control data | |
US6400998B1 (en) | Generation of measurement program in NC machining and machining management based on the measurement program | |
US10520921B2 (en) | Model-based definition for machining aircraft parts | |
US20060293906A1 (en) | Method of developing a plan for replacing a product component using a scanning process | |
Lei et al. | A closed-loop machining system for assembly interfaces of large-scale component based on extended STEP-NC | |
EP1218805B1 (en) | Feature based assembly | |
US10899476B1 (en) | Model-based definition for machining aircraft parts | |
Price | Virtual Product Development-Case study of the T-45 horizontal stabilator | |
Naing et al. | Design for tooling to enable jigless assembly–an integrated methodology for jigless assembly | |
Stolt et al. | Design and Evaluation of Aerospace Components for SLM | |
Craig | Predicting and optimizing assembly variation | |
Pei et al. | A closed-loop machining system for assembly interfaces of large-scale component based on extended STEP-NC | |
Sudo et al. | Basic study on development of innovative CNC for improving machining quality based on data sharing | |
Martin | Design of architecture and physical configuration for RMT/RMS: modelling of machines, workpieces, manufacturing | |
Burris et al. | 3D re-engineering: a comprehensive process for solving production assembly fit problems | |
Hopkins et al. | Integration of Machining and Inspection in Aerospace Manufacturing | |
Sulyukova | Information Approach In Constructing Mathematical Models And In Control Of Technological Systems For Processing The Low Rigidity Parts | |
Russell et al. | Automated assembly of aircraft structures at Avcorp Industries Inc., aerostructures division | |
Pun | An Approach to Preliminary Process Planning for Quality | |
Li et al. | Pei Lei, Lianyu Zheng, Wenlei Xiao | |
Hall et al. | Analysis & Modeling Reduce Development Risks for Improving Integration of Large Aircraft Components |
Legal Events
Date | Code | Title | Description |
---|---|---|---|
WWE | Wipo information: entry into national phase |
Ref document number: 09674308 Country of ref document: US |
|
ENP | Entry into the national phase |
Ref country code: JP Ref document number: 2001 520553 Kind code of ref document: A Format of ref document f/p: F |
|
AK | Designated states |
Kind code of ref document: A1 Designated state(s): AE AG AL AM AT AU AZ BA BB BG BR BY BZ CA CH CN CR CU CZ DE DK DM DZ EE ES FI GB GD GE GH GM HR HU ID IL IN IS JP KE KG KP KR KZ LC LK LR LS LT LU LV MA MD MG MK MN MW MX MZ NO NZ PL PT RO RU SD SE SG SI SK SL TJ TM TR TT TZ UA UG US UZ VN YU ZA ZW |
|
AL | Designated countries for regional patents |
Kind code of ref document: A1 Designated state(s): GH GM KE LS MW MZ SD SL SZ TZ UG ZW AM AZ BY KG KZ MD RU TJ TM AT BE CH CY DE DK ES FI FR GB GR IE IT LU MC NL PT SE BF BJ CF CG CI CM GA GN GW ML MR NE SN TD TG |
|
121 | Ep: the epo has been informed by wipo that ep was designated in this application | ||
DFPE | Request for preliminary examination filed prior to expiration of 19th month from priority date (pct application filed before 20040101) | ||
WWE | Wipo information: entry into national phase |
Ref document number: 2000956684 Country of ref document: EP |
|
WWE | Wipo information: entry into national phase |
Ref document number: 2382711 Country of ref document: CA |
|
WWP | Wipo information: published in national office |
Ref document number: 2000956684 Country of ref document: EP |
|
REG | Reference to national code |
Ref country code: DE Ref legal event code: 8642 |
|
WWG | Wipo information: grant in national office |
Ref document number: 2000956684 Country of ref document: EP |