Statistical Tolerancing

Fritz Scholz
Mathematics & Computing Technology
MS: 7L-22, Phone 425-865-3623
e-mail: fritz.scholz@boeing.com
http://www.rt.cs.boeing.com/MEA/stat/tolerance.html
http://www.rt.cs.boeing.com/MEA/stat/
Statistical Tolerancing11-11-991

Why Tolerancing?

Perfect/nominal parts

perfect assembly.

Perfect parts = interchangeable parts

= mass production, low cost.
Nothing is ever perfekt, manufacturing variation is inevitable.
May have almost perfect parts.
How almost can it be? When do several almost perfect parts
cause problems at assembly? = tolerances
What is not designed with proper tolerancing
will have to be custom xed at assembly.
Costly, not interchangeable, not acceptable.
Statistical Tolerancing11-11-992

Tolerance Chain for Crank Case

L1

L2

L3

L5
L4

L6

Linear clearance criterion C = L1 L2 L3 L4 L5 L6 > 0

Statistical Tolerancing11-11-993

General Smooth Functions: Linearization

detail parts

variation propagation box

assembly t
criterion

actual, nominal

(X1, 1)

Y = f (X1, . . . , Xn)

actual, nominal

(Xn, n)

(Y, )

= f (1, . . . , n)


ai


f (1, . . . , n)
Y = f (X1, . . . , Xn) f (1, . . . , n) + (Xi i)
i=1
i
n

Y a0 + a1X1 + . . . + anXn , a0 = f (1, . . . , n) (a11 + . . . + ann)

= f (1, . . . , n) a0 + a11 + . . . + ann
Statistical Tolerancing11-11-994

Tolerancing and Goalpost Mentality

nominaltol

nominal+tol

nominal

Xi

i Ti

tol

i + Ti

Statistical Tolerancing11-11-995

Worst Case or Arithmetic Tolerancing

Xi within [i Ti, i + Ti],

i = nominal dimension,
A = a0 + a11 + . . . + ann

Xi = realized detail part dimension,

Ti = tolerance.
nominal assembly t criterion,

ai = 1 or other known coecients

YA = a0 + a1X1 + . . . + anXn

realized assembly t criterion

YA within [A TA, A + TA] assembly t criterion variation range.

TA = |a1|T1 + . . . + |an|Tn
arithmetic stacking or worst case tolerancing

Statistical Tolerancing11-11-996

Statistical Tolerancing

No goalpost mentality, aim for the middle

View part to part variation as random, manufacturing variation
Normal distribution is often a suciently reasonable choice
Other distributions are possible (uniform, triangular, . . .)
Distributions typically span tolerance range.
The t criterion YA = a0 + a1X1 + . . . + anXn

normal

Central Limit Theorem (CLT).

Take advantage of variation cancellation
Statistical Tolerancing11-11-997

Normal Variation over Tolerance Interval

i-T i

i + Ti

Statistical Tolerancing11-11-998

RSS Method: Normal Distribution

99.73% of all realized assembly t criteria YA fall within

[A RSS, A + RSS]

where

RSS = a21T12 + . . . + a2nTn2

whence Root Sum of Squares or RSS.

Basic advantage over arithmetic tolerancing (|ai| = 1,


a21T12

+ ... +

a2nTn2

Ti = T )

= n T , whereas |a1|T1 +. . .+|an|Tn = n T.

= tighter assembly tolerance RSS or relaxed part tolerances Ti.

Statistical Tolerancing11-11-999

RSS Method: Basic Assumptions

Each part dimension Xi varies according to a normal distribution.

The distribution is centered over the range i Ti.
Ti = 3i, with i = standard deviation of Xi,
i.e., 99.73% of all Xi fall within i Ti.
The part variations are independent from dimension to dimension.

Statistical Tolerancing11-11-9910

Current Problems in Statistical Tolerancing



RSS may be too optimistic = c a21T12 + . . . + a2nTn2

the ination factor c can be motivated by
dierent distributions
mean shifts from nominal center (ATA patent)
other ad hoc rationales (Benderizing)
Not all tolerance stacks are (approximately) linear
Then RSS wont work, not addressed much in literature
757 cargo door hinge line, 747 keel beam, coordination hole pinning,
etc.
Simulations (e.g. VSA, or other tools) provide exible solutions, but
they are of black box type (sensitivities?)
Statistical Tolerancing11-11-9911

Various Distributions over Tolerance Range

c=1

c = 1.732

uniform density

normal density

c = 1.225

triangular density

c = 1.369

trapezoidal density: a = .5

c = 1.5

elliptical density

c = 1.306

half cosine wave density

c = 2.023

c = 1.134

beta density: a = .6, b = .6

beta density: a = 3, b = 3

c = 1.342

beta density: a = 2, b = 2 (parabolic)

c = 1.512

DIN - histogram density: p = .7, f = .4

Statistical Tolerancing11-11-9912

RSS Method for Nonnormal Variation

Assumptions
distributions symmetric and centered on i
distributions span tolerance range
independence of part to part variation
=

RSS(c) = c



n




i=1

a2i Ti2

where the factor c varies from distribution to distribution.

More generally

RSS(c1, . . . , cn) =



n




i=1

c2i a2i Ti2

if the distributions change from part to part dimension.

Statistical Tolerancing11-11-9913

Why Mean Shifts And Why Bound Them?

Mean shifts from nominal are a fact of life.

A manufacturing process unable to hit the nominal
will also be unable to center the process on nominal.
The center of the process distribution only becomes known
well into production. Corrections may only increase variation.
Mean shifts all the way to the goalposts i Ti, while Cpk 1,
lead back to worst case tolerancing.

Statistical Tolerancing11-11-9914

Normal Variation with Mean Shift

Statistical Tolerancing11-11-9915

Mean Shifts From Nominal Center

Focus on normal part variation that is not centered on nominal,
but still mostly within the tolerance range.
The mean shift from center is controlled by
|i| = |i i| = i Ti 0 Ti ,

where

0 i 1 .

Here i is the mean of Xi with mean shift i = i i.

The variation mostly within the tolerance range is controlled by
the capability index

Cpk

Ti |i|
=
,
3i

e.g., Cpk 1 .

Statistical Tolerancing11-11-9916

RSS Stacking With Mean Shifts

Stack mean shifts arithmetically

1 |a1|T1 + . . . + n|an|Tn
Stack reduced part to part variation statistically
reduced variation

Ti iTi = (1 i)Ti 3i

if Cpk 1 .

statistical stack

a21T12(1 1 )2 + . . . + a2nTn2(1 n )2

Combine the two stacks in worst case fashion.



1 |a1|T1 + . . . + n|an|Tn + a21T12(1 1)2 + . . . + a2nTn2(1 n)2

Statistical Tolerancing11-11-9917

Tolerance Stack with Mean Shift

part dimension 1

X1

part dimension 2

X2

part dimension 3

X3

assembly criterion

Statistical Tolerancing11-11-9918

Some Comments

This hybrid worst case mean shift stack and RSS stack for
remaining part variation was introduced by Mansoor (1963)
and studied by Greenwood and Chase (1987) as a compromise
between worst case and statistical tolerancing.
The assembly tolerance of this hybrid method grows like O(n),
reduced by the i factors.
The above hybrid tolerance stacking formula is increasing in the i
thus we can replace the i by the bounds (0) placed on them.
Statistical Tolerancing11-11-9919

Mean Shifts And Other Part Distributions

The remaining part variation can also be described or modeled

by other than normal distributions.
This then leads to the following hybrid tolerance stacking formula


1|a1|T1 + . . . + n |an|Tn + c21a21T12(1 1)2 + . . . + c2na2nTn2(1 n )2

This is no longer increasing in the i.

Statistical Tolerancing11-11-9920

Correlated or Dependent Variation

A crucial assumption for the RSS method is independence or zero
correlation for detail dimensions
Method can be generalized using the general variance formula
var(a0+a1X1+. . .+anXn) = a21var(X1)+. . .+a2nvar(Xn)

+
i=j ai aj var(Xi ) var(Xj )ij
where ij is the correlation between Xi and Xj , 1 ij 1.
This generalizes the RSS formula to
RSS =

a2i Ti2

i=j ai aj ij Ti Tj

By proper combination of the signs of ij and the signs of the

sensitivity coecients ai one could have
RSS < RSS =



a2i Ti2
Statistical Tolerancing11-11-9921

Historical Perspective

The RSS method is based on the CLT and the long known fact that
variance of a sum of independent random variables
= sum of the variances of these variables
It is dicult to trace the roots of statistical tolerancing.
Boeings (1990) proprietary Tolerancing-Design Guide attributes
the RSS method to Backhaus and Fielden via Wades (1967) book
which points to an in-house IBM article (not able to trace).

Statistical Tolerancing11-11-9922

Some Early References

W.B. Rice (1944) argues (without RSS) that chances are small
for jointly extreme dimensions (by multiplying probabilities).
C.A. Gladman (1945) employs the same reasoning (no RSS).
J. Gilson (discussion to Gladman) points in the same direction.
However, in Gilsons (1951) book we nd the RSS formula
plus a lot of muddled stu without proof.
E.E. Bates (1947/1949) appears to use the RSS method,
refers to it as statistics, keeps specics hidden (trade secret?)
Statistical Tolerancing11-11-9923

The Earliest Reference (so far)

W. A. Shewhart (1931)
Economic Control of Quality of Manufactured Product
long out of print, reprinted 1980 as
50th Anniversary Commemorative Reissue by ASQC
Chapter XVII: Design Limits on Variability
discusses statistical tolerancing, but not RSS by name.
does not pretend to be new, but no references
statistics was in its infancy at that time

Statistical Tolerancing11-11-9924

What Do The Standards Say?

Not Much!

ANSI Y14.5M-1994 just introduced a statistical tolerancing symbol.

It still needs meaning (mean shifts, distributions, process control).
How should/can it be used in tolerance stacking?
DIN 7186 Part 1 and Part 2 (Draft) took a stab at it
(DIN = Deutsche Industrie Norm)
That was more than 20 years ago, results in German only.

Statistical Tolerancing11-11-9925

Grodes Comments on German Tolerancing Eort

Eort failed, because industry felt that contents

were too dicult to be understood by designers
who generally do not like statistical applications
but try to avoid it.
Meanwhile all the old famous experts have died.
A company which uses statistical tolerancing can save a lot of money.

Statistical Tolerancing11-11-9926