Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Active variation compensation in vehicle body conceptual assembly

  • ORIGINAL ARTICLE
  • Published:
The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper, an intelligent heuristic optimization algorithm in active variation compensation is proposed to improve the dimension accuracy in the assembly of a vehicle body by finding the optimal configuration of joint types and the corresponding assembly sequence to compensate variation accumulation in the conceptual assembly process. The authors develop and apply the algorithm to predict variation accumulation and then develop compensating assembly schemes to accomplish optimal joint configuration and assembly sequence compensating for the unnecessary or surplus variation. The essence of the active variation compensation algorithm means measuring and correcting assembling variations during the assembly conceptual process. The paper employs the design of experiment (DOE) approach to verify the heuristic optimization method in the simple application case.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Feng SC, Song EY (2000) Information modeling of conceptual process planning integrated with conceptual design. Proceedings of DETC2000. The 2000 ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences, September 10–13, Baltimore, Maryland

  2. Chen Y, Feng PE, Lin ZQ (2005) A genetics-based approach for the principle conceptual design of mechanical products. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 27:225–233

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Hsu W, Lim A, Lee CSG (1996) Conceptual level design for assembly analysis using state transitional approach. Proc IEEE Int Conf Robot Autom 4:3355–3361

    Google Scholar 

  4. Lombeyda SV, Regli WC (1999) Conceptual design for assembly. Proceedings of the 1999 ASME design engineering technical conferences, September 12–15, Las Vegas, Nevada

  5. Gottipolu RB, Ghosh K (1997) Representation and selection of assembly sequences in computer-aided assembly process planning. Int J Prod Res 35(12):3447–3465

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Thornton AC (1999) A mathematical framework for the key characteristics process. Res Eng Des 11:145–157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Chirdchid S, Mazouz AK (2002) A genetic algorithm for combined parameter and tolerance design optimization. IEEE ICIT, 2002, Bangkok, Thailand, pp 1223–1228

  8. Liu SC, Hu SJ (1998) Sheet metal joint configurations and their variation characteristics. J Manuf Sci Eng 120(5):461–467

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Liu SC, Hu SJ (1997) A parametric study of joint performance in sheet metal assembly. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 37(6):873–884

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Ceglarek D, Shi J (1998) Deign evaluation of sheet metal joints for dimension integrity. J Manuf Sci Eng 120:452–460

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Nikolaidis E, Long LH, Ling Q (2000) Neural networks and response surface polynomials for design of vehicle joints. Comput Struct 75:593–607

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Lee B, Saitou K (2003) Assembly synthesis with subassembly partitioning for optimal in-process dimensional adjustability. Proceedings of the ASME design engineering technical conference 2 A:257–268

  13. Chase KW, Parkinson AR (1991) A survey of research in the application of tolerance analysis to the design of mechanical assemblies. Res Eng Des 3:23–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Chase KW, Gao J, Magleby SP (1995) General 2-D tolerance analysis of mechanical assemblies with small kinematic adjustments. J Des Manuf 5:263–274

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Gao J, Chase KW, Magleby SP (1998) Generalized 3-D tolerance analysis of mechanical assemblies with small kinematic adjustments. IIE Trans 30:367–377

    Google Scholar 

  16. Roy U, Li B (1998) Representation and interpretation of geometric tolerances for polyhedral objects-1. Form tolerances. Comput Aided Des 30(2):151–161

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Roy U, Li B (1999) Representation and interpretation of geometric tolerances for polyhedral objects-II. Size, orientation and position tolerances. Comput Aided Des 31:273–285

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Zhang G (1996) Simultaneous tolerancing for design and manufacturing. Int J Prod Res 34:3361–3382

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Salomons OW, Poerink HJJ, Slooten FV, Van Houten FJAM, Kals HJJ (1995) A computer-aided tolerancing tool based on kinematic analogies. CIRP/JSPE/ASME Proceedings of the 4th CIRP seminar on computer aided tolerancing. The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan, April 5–6, pp 53–72

  20. Shiu BW, Apley DW, Ceglarek D, Shi J (2003) Tolerance allocation for compliant beam structure assemblies. IEE Trans 35:329–342

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Ciarallo FW, Yang CC (1997) Optimization of propagation in interval constraint networks for tolerance design. IEEE 1924–1929

  22. Yang CC, Marefat MM, Ciarallo FW (1997) Tolerance analysis and synthesis by interval constraint networks. IEEE 2522–2527

  23. Ceglarek DJ (1998) Multivariate analysis and evaluation of adaptive sheet metal assembly system. Ann CIRP 47(1):17–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Johannessson H, Soderberg R (2000) Structure and matrix models for tolerance analysis from configuration to detail stage. Res Eng Des 12:112–125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Xiong C, Rong Y, Koganti RP, Zaluzec MJ, Wang N (2002) Geometric variation prediction in automotive assembling. Assem Autom 22(3):260–269

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Cai W, Long YF, Hsieh C (2003) Variation simulation for digital panel assembly. ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress, Washington, DC, Nov 12–15

  27. Huang Q, Zhou NR, Shi JJ (2000) Stream of variation modeling and diagnosis of multi-station machining processes. Proceeding of IMECE 2000. International mechanical engineering congress & exposition, Nov 5–10, 2000, Orlando, Florida

  28. Ceglarek D, Huang W, Zhou S, Ding Y, Kumar R, Zhou Y (2004) Time-based competition in multistage manufacturing: Stream-of-variation Analysis (SOVA) methodology-review. Int J Flex Manuf Syst 16:11–44

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  29. Gerth RJ, Pfeifer T, Oehme O (2000) Early cost tolerance sensitivity analysis for inspection planning. Human Factors Ergon Manuf 10(3):309–329

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Gao JS, Chase KW, Magleby SP (1998) Global coordinate method for determining sensitivity in assembly tolerance analysis. Proceedings of the ASME international mechanical engineering conference and exposition, Anaheim, California

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Auto-Body Manufacturing Technology Center, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, China

    Li Yubing, Chen Guanlong, Zheng Cheng & Lai Xinmin

Authors
  1. Li Yubing
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chen Guanlong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Zheng Cheng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Lai Xinmin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Li Yubing.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Yubing, L., Guanlong, C., Cheng, Z. et al. Active variation compensation in vehicle body conceptual assembly. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 37, 178–190 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-007-0961-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-007-0961-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation