Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Computational implementation of part stiffness on tolerance specification based on the functional performance of assemblies

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

Abstract

One of the most critical tasks within the scope of Design for Manufacturing (DfM) is to define the set of Geometrical Product Specifications (GPS) in the 3D model or in the engineering drawing that ensures the functionality and the interchangeability of parts, as well as the intended functional performance of an assembly. Several methodologies have been proposed for the optimal designation of such specifications; however, the majority of them do not effectively take into account the deformations that are inevitably induced during assembly and operation for the vast majority of mechanical components. Motivated by the widely accepted tolerancing practice for sheet metal parts in the automotive industry, where the distinction between free state and constrained state is considered, the paper investigates the influence of the deformations induced during assembly and operation on GPS. The effect of part stiffness in the resultant functional GPS of the assembly/component is explored, through CAD surfacing and non-linear numerical finite element analysis tools including the contact problem. The current stage of development of a novel, performance-based methodology for the GD&T design procedure is presented. The methodology is applied on a real-world mechanical assembly that is derived from tolerance stack up-related literature. This study illustrated is that for an unpredictably wide range of mechanical components the default, free-state GPS scheme should only be assigned after rigorous analysis of their compliance behaviour. The proposed approach will lead to deduce the correlation between production cost and performance through a further development in future study.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. ISO 8015 (2011) Geometrical product specifications (GPS) - Fundamentals - Concepts, principles and rules. International Organization for Standardization (ISO), Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  2. ISO 10579 (2010) Geometrical product specifications (GPS) —dimensioning and tolerancing—non-rigid parts. International Organization for Standardization (ISO), Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  3. Calì M, Oliveri SM, Ambu R, Fichera G (2018) An integrated approach to characterize the dynamic behaviour of a mechanical chain tensioner by functional tolerancing. Strojniski Vestnik/J Mech Eng 64(4). https://doi.org/10.5545/sv-jme.2017.5079

  4. Falgarone H, Thiébaut F, Coloos J, Mathieu L (2016) Variation simulation during assembly of non-rigid components. Realistic assembly simulation with ANATOLEFLEX software. Proc CIRP 43:202–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2016.02.336

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Fallot Y, Thiébaut F, Royer M (2018) Functional ISO specification of a blade: a tolerancing challenge. Proc CIRP 75:190–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2018.02.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Liu SC, Hu SJ, Woo TC (1996) Tolerance analysis for sheet metal assemblies. J Mech Des Trans ASME 118(1):62–67. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.2826857

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Liu SC, Hu SJ (1997) Variation simulation for deformable sheet metal assemblies using finite element methods. J Manuf Sci Eng Trans ASME 119(3):368–373. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.2831115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Mounaud M, Thiebaut F, Bourdet P et al (2011) Assembly sequence influence on geometric deviations propagation of compliant parts. Int J Prod Res 49(4):1021–1043. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207540903460240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Shahi VJ, Masoumi A, Franciosa P, Ceglarek D (2020) A quality-driven assembly sequence planning and line configuration selection for non-ideal compliant structures assemblies. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 106:15–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-019-04294-w

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Liao X, Wang GG (2005) Wavelets-based method for variation analysis of non-rigid assemblies. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 45(14):1551–1559. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2005.03.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Dong C, Kang L (2012) Deformation and stress of a composite–metal assembly. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 61:1035–1042. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-011-3757-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Korbi A, Tlija M, Louhichi B, BenAmara A (2018) CAD/tolerancing integration: a new approach for tolerance analysis of non-rigid parts assemblies. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 98:2003–2013. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-018-2347-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Abenhaim GN, Desrochers A, Tahan AS, Bigeon J (2015) A virtual fixture using a FE-based transformation model embedded into a constrained optimization for the dimensional inspection of non rigid parts. Comput Aided Des 62:248–258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cad.2014.12.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Sabri V, Sattarpanah S, Tahan SA, Cuillière JC, François V, Pham XT (2017) A robust and automated FE-based method for fixtureless dimensional metrology of non-rigid parts using an improved numerical inspection fixture. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 92:2411–2423. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-017-0216-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Karganroudi SS, Cuillière JC, François V, Tahan SA (2018) “What-if” scenarios towards virtual assembly-state mounting for non-rigid parts inspection using permissible loads. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 97:353–373. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-018-1947-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Morse E, Grohol C (2012) Practical conformance evaluation in the measurement of flexible parts. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 68:507–510. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2019.04.076

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Abenhaim GN, Desrochers A, Tahan A (2012) Nonrigid parts’ specification and inspection methods: notions, challenges, and recent advancements. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 63:741–752. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-012-3929-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Lindau B, Lorin S, Lindkvist L, Söderberg R (2016) Efficient contact modeling in nonrigid variation simulation. J Comput Inf Sci Eng 16(1). https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4032077

  19. Soner C, Sodeberg R, Warmefjord K, Lundblad M (2018) Tolerance analysis of surface-to-surface contacts using finite element analysis. Proc CIRP 75:250–255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2018.04.029

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Gouyou D, Ledoux Y, Teissandier D, Delos V (2018) Tolerance analysis of overconstrained and flexible assemblies by polytopes and finite element computations: application to a flange. Res Eng Design 29:55–66. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-017-0256-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. ASME Y14.5-2009 (2009) Dimensioning and tolerancing. The American Society of Mechanical Engineers National Standard. The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York

    Google Scholar 

  22. Fischer BR (2011) Mechanical tolerance stackup and analysis, 2nd edn. CRC Press-Taylor&Francis, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  23. Papadopoulos AC (2017) Machine Elements, 3rd edn. Tziola Publications, Athens

    Google Scholar 

  24. Banarjee B, Chen J, Das R, Kathirgamanathan A (2011) Comparison of ANSYS elements SHELL181 and SOLSH190. Techn Rep Univ of Auckland, Auckland

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Section of Mechanical Design and Automatic Control, School of Mechanical Engineering, National Technical University of Athens, Heroon Polytechniou 9, Zografou, 15780, Athens, Greece

    Andreas Mavridis-Tourgelis, Christos Vakouftsis, Georgios Kaisarlis, Vaios G. Arampatzis, Christopher G. Provatidis & Vasilios Spitas

Authors
  1. Andreas Mavridis-Tourgelis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Christos Vakouftsis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Georgios Kaisarlis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Vaios G. Arampatzis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Christopher G. Provatidis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Vasilios Spitas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Georgios Kaisarlis.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mavridis-Tourgelis, A., Vakouftsis, C., Kaisarlis, G. et al. Computational implementation of part stiffness on tolerance specification based on the functional performance of assemblies. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 111, 397–410 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-020-06139-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-020-06139-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation