i2
About iSquare
iSquare
(InterOperability & InterChangeability Solutions)
Pune, INDIA
i2
Focus Areas:
i2
Relationships:
l
InterOperability:
i2
Relationships:
InterChangeability:
With Dimensional Control Systems, USA having
more than 15 years of experience in Dimensional
Control techniques, solutions and Services.
i2
Our Offerings:
CAD Data InterOperability:
Focused & Customized Training Programs on:
CAD/CAM/CAE Data Exchange : Problems and Solutions from CAD, CAE , CAM Perspective.
CAD Model Quality Assessment : CAD Model Quality evaluation from downstream application
perspective
i2
Our Offerings:
InterChangeability:
Focused & Customized Training Programs on:
Dimensional Management : Understanding and appreciation of computer aided tools for.
Takes participants thru evolution, various approaches and real life problems from their
application areas.
i2
GD&T Workshop and Practice (15% theory, 85% working on various problems):
~24hrs
The Role of Probability and Statistics in Mechanical Tolerance A nalysis: ~20hrs
Measurement of GD&T and Functional Gauging Techniques: ~24hrs
Metrology: Measurement Uncertainty and Analysis : ??
i2
Customers
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
TATA Motors
TATA Technologies
TATA Auto Plastics
TATA Auto Components
Ashok Leyland
Mahindra & Mahindra Auto
Godrej & Boyce Mfg Ltd.
GE
Infotech Enterprises
TATA Johnson Control
Automotive
Kinetic Engineering
Research & Development
Establishment (Engrs)
Armament Research &
Development Establishment
Bhabha Atomic Research
Center
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
Bajaj Auto
Bajaj Tempo
Brakes India
Emerson Climate Technologies
Grupo Antolin
Mahindra Engg Design Develop
Center
Kirloskar Copeland
Mahindra Engineering Services
Onward Technologies
Space Applications Center
TATA Consultancy
Lear Seatings Pvt. Ltd.
Atlas Copco
Jayahind Industries
L&T
Satyam Venture Engg Services
i2
10
i2
11
i2
Objectives:
12
i2
13
i2
Step #1:
Step #2:
14
i2
Step #3:
Stacks that go left and right in the assembly, start at the left
side of gap and end up at the right side of the gap.
Left direction is ve (right of gap to left)
Right direction is +ve (left of gap to right OR towards end)
15
Remember that you are working one part at a time; so deal with o ne
parts significant features before jumping to next part. This is the best way
to work with assemblies having many parts
i2
16
Remember that one set of mating features between parts creates the variable
you are looking for. Variable in this case is either minimum gap or maximum
gap or maximum overall assembly dimension. One set mating featur es creates
it. So, though multiple routes may have to be investigated to fi nd this most
significant set of features, only one set creates worst case, fr om one part to
next.
Its often mistake to follow one route from one set of mating fea tures
(holes/shaft, hole/pin) then continue the same route through ano ther set. One
of these sets creates the smallest or biggest gap or maximum ove rall
dimension, Once you find, which it is, others become non -factors in analysis.
Using more than one set of features within same two parts, will most likely
produce wrong results. Still tolerances from other features may contribute to
the critical set you are using. For example: when datum features are
referenced at MMC or when more than one set of datum features co me into
effect.
i2
17
i2
18
i2
19
Its important to mentally shove all the features and parts in the
directions that will create the max or min gap (variable). This is to
allow your routes always pass through material and you dont
want to jump over an air space unnecessarily in analysis
You should position the features of the parts against each other so
that you will get extremes and make clear to you the correct path
and +ve v/s ve designations for each number.
i2
20
i2
21
i2
22
i2
23
i2
Boundaries
24
i2
2.11)
25
i2
section 2.11)
VCB for external FOS such as pin = LMC Size boundary Geometric Tolerance.
i2
(Refer ASME
27
i2
28
i2
VCB for internal FOS (such as hole) controlled at MMC = MMC Size Boundary Geometric
Tolerance value
VCB for external FOS (such as pin) controlled at MMC = MMC Size boundary + Geometric
Tolerance value
29
i2
30
i2
31
i2
VCB for internal FOS (such as hole) controlled at LMC = LMC Size Boundary +Geometric
Tolerance value
VCB for external FOS (such as pin) controlled at LMC = LMC Size boundary - Geometric
Tolerance value
32
i2
33
i2
34
i2
35
i2
36
i2
37
i2
38
i2
VCB for internal FOS (such as hole) controlled at MMC = MMC Size Boundary Geometric
Tolerance value
VCB for external FOS (such as pin) controlled at MMC = MMC Size boundary + Geometric
Tolerance value
39
i2
40
i2
41
i2
VCB for internal FOS (such as hole) controlled at LMC = LMC Size Boundary +Geometric
Tolerance value
VCB for external FOS (such as pin) controlled at LMC = LMC Size boundary - Geometric
Tolerance value
42
i2
43
i2
44
i2
Inner Boundary
45
i2
46
i2
47
i2
Formulae to Remember
48
i2
49
i2
Objectives:
50
i2
Box Assembly
51
i2
52
i2
53
i2
54
i2
55
i2
lNext
lNext
56
lMean
dimensions difference + sum of tolerances = (1) + (2)= (+)7 .62+(+)7.62=+15.24 (max gap)
lMean
i2
57
i2
58
i2
59
i2
Objectives:
60
i2
61
i2
62
i2
63
i2
64
i2
65
i2
66
i2
67
i2
68
Objectives:
l
i2
69
i2
70
i2
71
i2
Graph the loop from top-to-bottom through material, using appropriate signs (+ve /
-ve) (- 24.995, +25.805)
Add these mean dimensions (dont forget signs) to get difference between mean
dimensions ((-) 24.995 + (+) 25.805)=+0.810
l
l
l
l
72
Add plus and minus tolerances for dimensions 1, 2, 3 to get tota l plus and minus
tolerance (0.405+0.405 = 0.810)
Max gap in horizontal direction is = sum of difference between mean dimensions
and total of plus and minus tolerances (0.810+0.810=1.620)
Min gap in horizontal direction is = difference (subtraction) of difference between
mean dimensions and total of plus and minus tolerances (0.810-0.810=0.0)
i2
73
i2
Vertical Loop
74
Horizontal Loop
i2
75
i2
Objectives:
l
l
l
l
l
l
76
i2
77
i2
2.
3.
4.
78
i2
79
i2
Step #1: Calculate Virtual and Resultant Condition for each holes (holes #1 thru #4)
80
i2
81
i2
82
i2
83
i2
84
i2
85
i2
86
i2
1.
The Loop begins at the the face on the left side of the gap, it
proceeds towards left (thru material), designated as ve
numbers thru the basic dimension of 125mm to the center of
hole #1.
2.
3.
4.
8
7
6
5
6.
7.
Here we again reverse the loop and go right direction (+ve) thru the right pin diameter 3mm
8.
This step begins on last hole #2, the route goes from right side edge of this hole towards center (-ve) 3mm
9.
Go in the same direction from center of hole #2 to the end of the gap (inner right side face of part) (-ve) 125mm
5.
87
i2
88
The full pin diameters were used as the pins got trapped
between hole edge faces.
The basic dimensions were used to allow a route from left
side of gap to the center of hole 1 and then center of hole
3 to to the center of hole 4 and at the last from center of
hole 2 to the right side face of the gap
i2
89
i2
90
i2
91
i2
92
i2
93
i2
Objectives:
l
l
l
94
i2
2.
3.
4.
95
Calculate Virtual and Resultant Condition for Tab and Slot. They
work on similar principals as hole and pin and are controlled at
MMC.
For Slot and Tab, calculate difference between resultant
condition and virtual condition boundaries. This difference
represents total size tolerance for Slot or Tab. Take half of the
difference which is represents equal bilateral tolerance value .
For Slot and Tab, add resultant condition and virtual condition
boundaries; and take mean of the sum. This mean represents
the mean width for either Slot or Tab (for analysis purpose)
Again, for Slot and Tab, take mean of values in step #2 and #3.
This new mean represents mean radius`mean radial tolerance
i2
96
i2
97
2.
3.
4.
i2
98
i2
99
2.
3.
4.
i2
1
2
3
4
100
1.
2.
3.
4.
i2
101
i2
102
i2
103
i2
104
i2
105
i2
106
i2
107
i2
108
i2
Assembly
109
i2
110
i2
lWill
111
i2
112
VC= n8.0+0.44=n8.44
RC=n8.0-0.44=n7.56
Sum of RC+VC=n16; half of this=n8
Difference of VC and RC=n8.44-n7.56=0.88; half of this is 0.44
So, threaded hole expressed in equal bilateral toleranced dimens ion
is: n8`0.44
i2
VC= n8.66-0.22=n8.44
RC=n8.90+0.22=n9.12
Sum of RC+VC=n17.56; half of this=n8.78
Difference of VC and RC=n9.12-n8.44=0.68; half of this is 0.34
So, clearance hole expressed in equal bilateral toleranced dimension
is: n8.78`0.34
113
i2
In this case the perpendicularity tolerance callout on crankshaf ts center bore and
couplings center shoulder are ignored since the maximum clearanc e (and thus
play) between these two features would occur at when both features a re at their
LMC sizes and perfectly perpendicular to their datum planes.
LMC = 50.10
LMC = 49.97
Subtracting these two values, we get clearance of 50.10 49.97 = 0.13, which is less than
0.68 clearance calculated on threaded and clearance hole in previous slide.
This means in this case, the threaded/clearance holes are not the factors in stack-up and we
would consider only offset between datum features B and D due to their respective LMC
sizes.
114
i2
+115
+25.05
-24.985
+115
115
i2
Bottom to
Top
Top to
Bottom
(+ve)
(-ve)
` Tolerance
Remarks
115
25.05
From center of
crankshaft to edge of
center bore/shoulder
24.985
115
255.05
24.985
0.30
Totals
Max Dimension
116
i2
117
i2
Calculate MAX
overall diameter
of assembly
118
i2
Assembly
119
i2
120
i2
121
i2
Objectives:
l
l
l
l
l
l
122
i2
123
i2
2.
3.
4.
124
i2
7.
8.
125
i2
Calculate Inner and Outer Boundaries for Slot and Width of block.
Note that slot in the rail has refinement frame. A positional to lerance is refined by a
orientation (perpendicularity) tolerance. So, is positional tole rance a factor in stack-up or
an orientation tolerance?
Draw tolerance zone shapes / boundaries for each frame and discu ss
126
i2
Difference of Slot =
Difference of Block=
Sum
Sum
--------------------------------------
--------------------------------------
127
3.
4.
2.
Outer Boundary of Block =
i2
Calculate Inner and Outer Boundaries for Slot and Width of block.
Note that we have ignored positional tolerance on the slot in ra il.Only orientation
(perpendicularity) is accounted for in the analysis.
128
i2
Difference = 0.008
Sum
Sum
--------------------------------------
= 3.012
--------------------------------------
129
3.
4.
= 2.880
2.
i2
130
i2
Difference =
Difference of Screw =
Difference of Hole =
Sum
Sum
--------------------------------------
--------------------------------------
131
7.
8.
6.
i2
Inner Boundary of Screw Mounted in Rail = n0.2408 (LMC Major Dia) 0.0140 = n0.2268
Outer Boundary of Screw Mounted in Rail = n0.250 + 0.0140 = n0.264
Outer Boundary of Hole in Block = n0.286+ 0.015 = n0.301
Inner Boundary of Hole in Block = n0.276- 0.005 = n0.271
132
i2
Difference = 0.0372
Sum
Sum
--------------------------------------
= 0.4908
--------------------------------------
133
7.
8.
= 0.572
6.
i2
134
i2
2.
3.
4.
1
3
2
4
135
i2
1
2
3
4
136
i2
MIN GAP
` Tolerance
`Tolerance
0.7530
0.0020
0.1227
0.0093
0.1430
0.0075
0.7200
0.0020
0.8630
0.8757
0.0208 (Totals)
Since the min gap value is a ve number (-0.0081), we know that there is interference possible.
Discuss on possibility of occurring such interference in practic e. Not the configuration under
which the interference occurred. Can such configuration exist? A nd is avoidable?
137
i2
138
i2
1.
2.
3.
4.
4
3
2
1
139
i2
2
1
140
i2
MIN GAP
` Tolerance
+
0.7530
0.1227
0.0020
0.0093
0.1430
0.7200
0.8427
`Tolerance
0.0075
0.0020
0.8960
0.0208 (Totals)
141
i2
Conclusions
l
142
The traditional methodology we used for MAX and MIN gap calculations
may be misleading! It may arrive at a wrong decision if one is t rying to
determine from MIN gap value whether or not parts will actually fit
together; if the route chosen assumes the screw WCOB touches WCIB of
clearance hole, but it does not actually touch
If WCIB of holes (internal FOS) and WCOB of the shafts (external FOS)
of all the mating features are compatible, we can assume that the parts
are able to fit.
For example, the WCIB of the slot in rail is 1.502 and WCOB of block is
1.444 (smaller); therefore they dont interfere and there is still a play
(clearance) within these boundaries.
Similarly, we know that, WCOB of mounted screws is 0.264 and WCI B of
clearance hole is 0.271; therefore we conclude that they these t wo
boundaries dont interfere and there is play (clearance) within these
boundaries
Therefore, if the parts are allowed to assembly naturally (not pushed to
extremes at the assembly stage), they will fit w/o interference.
i2
143
i2
144
i2
---------------------------------------------------------------------
2.
3.
-------------------------------------------------------------Difference = Min Airspace between the screw surface & Slot wall =
145
i2
---------------------------------------------------------------------
2.
3.
-------------------------------------------------------------Difference = MAX Wall thickness between the Hole surface & Block wall =
146
i2
Minimum Airspace =
- Maximum Wall Thickness =
----------------------------------------------------Difference = Clearance between Rail and Block per side =
147
i2
2.
3.
-------------------------------------------------------------Difference = Min Airspace between the screw surface & Slot wall = 0.619
148
i2
2.
3.
-------------------------------------------------------------Difference = MAX Wall thickness between the Hole surface & Block wall =
0.5865
149
i2
150
i2
151
i2
152
i2
+
0.7540
0.1134
Slot
Mounted Screw
0.1505
0.7190
0.8324
Part/Feature
Clearance Hole
Block
0.9045
Totals
153
i2
154
i2
155
i2
Objectives:
156
i2
l From
lNote
157
i2
MMC
lThough
Min wall
AMS/AME.
datum feature B is produced at n0.255 (LMC), the part
can shift radially by 0.005 or diametrically 0.010
lIf
158
i2
lFind
159
i2
at the bottom surface of bottommost smallest hole, go up (away from start point) by
0.105 to the center of the hole (-0.105)
lFrom
center of this hole go up by 1.375 (basic) to the center of datum feature B (-1.375)
lFrom
center of datum feature B, go further up to the part edge ( basic 0.375), (-0.375)
lFrom
top upper edge of part, loop reverses in downward direction (+ve) and goes until inner
boundary of width datum feature G. Inner boundary for datum feature G is calculated as 1.950
(LMC Width) -0.100 (Geo tol at LMC) = +1.850
lSo,
160
i2
We calculated worst
case outer boundary of
bottommost hole as
n0.210.
Now, calculate worst
case inner boundary in
the same manner.
161
i2
162
i2
163
i2
Steps:
164
1.
2.
3.
i2
165
i2
Steps:
166
1.
2.
3.
i2
167
i2
168
i2
169
i2
170
i2
171
i2
172
i2
lThe
0.245
lSince
lHowever,
when holes size grow, they could be out of proportion i n any radial
direction by an amount equal to half of amount of departure from MMC (half of
(AMS-MMC size))
lIf
the holes are produced at LMC size (0.255), it could result i n following
configurations
173
i2
OR
174
i2
MIN- MAX
175
i2
lThe
datum features referenced on profile callout has no effect o n size of the part, but has effect
on angle and location of part surfaces
176
i2
now that the datum feature B is referenced at MMC, does have an effect on 0.500 and 0.375
dimensions beyond 0.050 profile tolerance due to pattern shift ( or datum shift effect).
lFollowing
OR
MAX DIST=0.025+0.500+0.005=0.530
177
i2
178
i2
179
i2
180
i2
OR
181
i2
182
i2
183
i2
184
1.
2.
i2
185
1.
2.
3.
i2
1.
186
i2
1.
187
i2
188
i2
Objectives:
l
l
l
189
i2
190
i2
191
i2
192
i2
193
i2
194
i2
195
1.
2.
Seating length on part#5 for part#1 = 324.5 -51.0 = 273.5, therefore provides
sufficient stability for part #1 when fastened with part#5.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Attitude variations from #4,#5 tends walls to lean 0.2 each, but the size
tolerance (249.5-250.5) on overall inner width cannot be violated
i2
lPart
back to inner width of housing; which is 249.5 0.2 (attitude tolerance due to leaning of walls) = 249.3
lSo,
196
the clearance = 249.3 169.1 = 80.2, so we have plenty of clearance to house all three parts.
i2
lPart
197
i2
ln115
198
i2
199
i2
200
i2
201
i2
202
i2
203
i2
204
These are all factors in this analysis. We started with with fac tors on
Part#4 until we exhausted those and then moved on to part#3 and so
on
The first and the foremost, one must decide objectives ( what ga ps or
overall dimensions or material thickness are to be calculated). Secondly
assembly should be investigated to determine which parts, which part
features, which sizes and which geometric tolerances are and are not
factors in analysis.
i2
205
i2
206
i2
Objectives:
l
l
l
l
l
207
i2
208
So, its illogical to rock the part until it interfered in the as sembly,
same as it would be illogical to rock it until the part checked bad in
inspection.
i2
209
i2
210
i2
lOut
211
i2
lNormally
212
i2
lParallelism
213
i2
lInitially,
214
i2
lUnlike
215
i2
Part #2
lWe
Part #3
216
i2
217
i2
218
i2
219
i2
220
i2
221
i2
222
i2
223
i2
224
i2
225
i2
226
i2
Objectives:
l
l
l
l
227
i2
Background
l
228
So far, in our examples, we assumed that all parts and tolerance s that
participate in stack-up analysis are produced at their worst case
tolerances and also assembled in worst case configurations!
The probability of producing features at their worst case assemb ly
conditions is unlikely unless manufactures are targeting them and in most
cases they are not.
Although manufacturing practices differ place to place, even if they are
aiming at smallest hole and largest shaft, they would unlikely be trying to
use up all of the tolerances that affect the assembly.
We have seen, there are four things related to part geometry to come
together to create worst case assembly conditions. They are Size , Shape
(form), angle (orientation) and position (location)
For example, in mating features that have size dimensions and also have
position tolerances, all four would affect their worst case.(see next slide)
i2
Background
229
i2
Background
l
230
i2
Background
l
99.73%
231
i2
232
So, the statistical probability can be applied to tolerance stac k-up analysis for
assemblies both with and without geometric tolerances.
Thus the tolerance of an assembly is expressed as square root of the sum of
squares of the individual component tolerances and is called as RSS
formula:
i2
2.
3.
233
i2
234
i2
235
i2
236
i2
l This
l With
So, by the same RSS method, we arrived at `9.7 tolerance, we were able to calculate
that the likely consumed amount of tolerance by the assembly wil l be only `5.08, so
likely max gap is still 10.16 and likely min gap is still zero e ven though the individual
component tolerance has been increased by 191%
237
i2
238
i2
l Now,
likely to be consumed) /
0.910 (worst case tolerance) = 0.7817273, so
0.7817273 is approx. 78% of 0.910
l1
239
i2
l This
l With
So, by the same RSS method, we arrived at `1.164 tolerance, we were able to calculate
that the likely consumed amount of tolerance by the assembly wil l be only `0.910, so
likely min gap is still 2.88 even though the individual componen t tolerance has been
increased by 191%
240
i2
The statistical approach assumes a zero mean shift for all the dimensions being
used. It is based upon manufacturing processes that are under st atistical control,
not in statistical chaos!
Those not employing statistical process control in manufacturing should not use
the RSS tolerancing methodology described now.
RSS method also assumes that parts produced for assembly have be en mixed and
components are picked randomly for assembly.
The logic of RSS model is interesting it basically allows more tolerance for those
manufacturers that need it least : those using SPC controls!
It calculates that the chances of producing a part that spans it s larger statistical
tolerance (ST) are so small that if it does happen, the randomly selected mating
parts will make up for the potential problem by not spanning the ir tolerances.
l
l
l
241
In fact, it presupposes that the mating part will be produced so much well than its
tolerance extremes as to allow parts to assemble well!!. If this is false assumption,
unacceptable functional conditions may arise such as interferenc e.
i2
242
i2
Benderizing Tolerances
l
l
l
243
i2
244
i2
Recollect that in second example, we increased worst case tolera nces by approx 128%.
Therefore the slots radial dimensions would be 6.095 `0.07 instead of previous 6.095
`0.055, similarly tabs radial dimensions will be 5.985 `0.07 instead of previous 5.985
`0.055.
Now, we need to apportion this increased tolerance to size and p osition. To do this, we simply
reverse the process
Slot:
245
Now, to get new MMC of slot, we add (inner boundary of slot + TOP on slot at MMC) = 12.05+
0.064m=12.114
On the similar lines, to get LMC size of slot, we subtract (Outer boundary of slot - TOP on slot at LMC) =
12.33 0.1408 = 12.189
i2
246
The key in this process was to use the % that all tolerances wer e
increased to 128% in this case.
There are other methods that can be used to reintegrate the tole rances
that distributes them differently. Some try to help difficult to manufacture
features by drawing tolerances from other features in assembly. This
allows difficult to manufacture features to get more of the tole rances. But
if that was a factor, it probably should have been thought of and handled
when tolerances were being arithmetically calculated and before
calculation of the Statistical Tolerances began.
i2
247
i2
248
i2
Final Answer
249
i2
250
i2
251
i2
Miscellaneous
252
i2
253
i2
254
i2
255
i2
Thank You!
Rajendra Deshmukh
Principal Consultant
i2
iSquare (InterOperability & InterChangeability Solutions)
Pune, INDIA
Telefax: 020-24250234
Cell: +91-98.900.36625
Email: rajendra@isquare -india.com
256
i2