You are on page 1of 7

Journal of Materials Processing Technology 123 (2002) 9399

Identifying tolerance chains with a surface-chain model in tolerance charting


Jianbin Xue*, Ping Ji
Department of Manufacturing Engineering, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hum, Kowloon, Hong Kong Received 26 November 2001

Abstract A tolerance chart is an effective tool used to determine the working dimensions and tolerances in process planning. Its kernel are the tolerance chains among the machining cuts through which the component will be manufactured. Identifying tolerance chains is a painstaking job. In this paper, a coordinate system is set up for the component in question so that all surfaces of the component are expressed with their coordinates and the tolerance chart is parameterised. Then an object-oriented model is developed so that each blueprint dimension is represented as a blueprint object while each working dimension is expressed as a machining-cut object. Each object has a special attribute, the surface chain, which is made up of all surfaces involved in the tolerance chart. The surface-chain model is very helpful in identifying the tolerance chains. By establishing the linear equations of the working dimensions, the stock removals and the blueprint dimensions, the tolerance chains among the machining cuts are derived automatically. The working dimensions and tolerances then can be determined easily once the tolerance chains are identied. # 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Process planning; Surface-chain model; Tolerance charting; Tolerance stack-up

1. Introduction When manufacturing a product with routed operations over a series of machining cuts, process engineers should be capable of recognising that a tolerance stack-up situation has been created, which will affect how to assign the tolerances to the machining cuts. To handle the tolerance stack-up problem in manufacturing, the most effective way is to use a tolerance chart. The tolerance chart is a graphic tool to ensure an accurate development of the mean working dimensions and the tolerances required by the manufacturing process. The early work on tolerance charting [14] was carried out manually. Since the 1980s, some researches have been done on computer-aided tolerance-charting systems [57]. The most essential task of tolerance charting is the tolerance-chain identication, which is critical for the working dimensions determination and the tolerance allocation. The manual-tracing method [6] is an efcient way of identifying the tolerance chains, but it is very primitive and has been proven to be time-consuming and error-prone. Some more advanced methods have been reported in recent works such as the matrix-tree-chain method [6], the graph method [7], the tree approach [8] and the relationship matrix
* Corresponding author. E-mail address: 98901769r@polyu.edu.hk (J. Xue).

method [9]. An interesting method called the ``Maze chart'' method [10] is also used to identify the tolerance chains, and the tolerance-chain identication in angular-tolerance charting has been investigated with the use of dummy cuts [11]. Although these methods are capable of solving the tolerance-charting problems with a computer-programming technique, they are somewhat complex and difcult to understand. In this paper, a surface-chain model is proposed to identify the tolerance chains within a parameterised tolerance chart. Without constructing any graphs, any tree but some matrix, the tolerance chains are identied automatically by some manipulations on the surface-chain model. The working dimensions and their tolerances of all machining cuts then can be determined easily. 2. A parametric object-oriented tolerance chart An example tolerance chart for manufacturing a precision sleeve shown in Fig. 1 is used to illustrate the surface-chain method. The component has three blueprint dimensions, which are achieved by 10 machining cuts listed in the operation sequence. Some alternative operation sequences may be possible, designed by process engineers or generated in a CAPP (computer-aided process planning) system for the component. In order to decide whether the operation

0924-0136/02/$ see front matter # 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved. PII: S 0 9 2 4 - 0 1 3 6 ( 0 2 ) 0 0 0 7 8 - X

94

J. Xue, P. Ji / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 123 (2002) 9399

Fig. 1. An example tolerance chart.

sequence can achieve the nal blueprint requirements, and more than that, which way is the easiest and most economical to manufacture the component, it is necessary to construct a tolerance chart for each operation sequence and a proper mathematical model should be established. For the exibility of constructing tolerance charts, a parametric object-oriented tolerance chart model is proposed here. In Fig. 1, all numerical data in the tolerance chart are represented with corresponding variables. The three blueprint dimensions are represented with the mean dimensions B1, B2, B3 and their tolerances b1, b2 and b3: the order makes no difference. The resultant dimensions are represented with the mean dimensions R1, R2, R3 and their tolerances r1, r2 and r3, respectively. Ten working dimensions are represented with mean dimensions X1 ; X2 ; . . . ; X10 and their tolerances x1 ; x2 ; . . . ; x10 . The stock removals are represented with mean dimensions Y1 ; Y2 ; . . . ; Y10 and their tolerances y1 ; y2 ; . . . ; y10 . Now that the tolerance chart is parameterised, the operation can be performed without any real case data. The data in the parentheses are just the example. Every tolerance chart has two classes of information, the blueprint dimensions and the operation sequence. Each row of the blueprint dimensions can be considered as a blueprint object. From the blueprint objects, the blueprint class can be expressed as follows: Class blueprint {

ID; Mean dimension; Tolerance; Start surface; End surface; Surface chain;

Each row of the operation sequence can be considered as a machining-cut object. From the machining-cut objects, the machining-cut class can be expressed as follows: Class machining_cut { Sequence number; Operation name; Machined surface; Datum surface; Mean working dimension; Working tolerance; Mean stock removal; Stock-removal tolerance; Surface chain; } The number of the blueprint objects is given in the blueprint, and the number of the machining-cut objects is determined by the length of the operation sequence. Thus whichever operation sequence for machining the given

J. Xue, P. Ji / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 123 (2002) 9399 Table 1 The machining-cut objects Sq 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Name RB RB RT RT FB FB FT FT G G Mach A C D B A C D B D B Datum D A A A D A A A A D WD X1 X2 X3 X4 X5 X6 X7 X8 X9 X10 WT x1 x2 x3 x4 x5 x6 x7 x8 x9 x10 SR Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 Y6 Y7 Y8 Y9 Y10 SRT y1 y2 y3 y4 y5 y6 y7 y8 y9 y10 SurChain ABCD ABCD ABCD ABCD ABCD ABCD ABCD ABCD ABCD ABCD

95

balance dimension was employed to divide the whole tolerance chain into several simple tolerance chains, each of which consists of only two constituent links and a close link, which can simplify the manual computation in tolerance charting. Regardless of which method is used, only the correct tolerance chain identication can result in the proper tolerance allocation. The proposed method in this paper can ensure the determination of complete and accurate tolerance chains in the tolerance chart. 4. The surface-chain model Developing a surface-chain model should begin with the component sketch in the tolerance chart. The component sketch should be laid out on the basis of mean blueprint dimensions in the correct left-to-right relationship. If not done in this way, for certain conditions of design in which surfaces of different features are close together, faulty surface relationships can lead to faulty numerical relationships in the tolerance chart [1]. In Fig. 1, the component is set up in a Cartesian coordinate system. Here, only a 1D tolerance chart is concerned, thus the x-axis is sufcient. From the component sketch, four surfaces are involved in the tolerance chart, forming a surface chain with the left-to-right relationship AD. Both two classes of the objects have a special attribute, the surface chain, i.e. the surfaces AD and their left-to-right relationship. When machining cuts are made on the surfaces, the positions of those surfaces being cut are changed in the coordinate system. Here, the position of a surface means the distance of the surface to the origin of the coordinate system. As shown in Fig. 1, from top to bottom, each machining-cut object in the operation sequence has the same surface chains. However, the positions of the individual surfaces among the surface chain are different from each other. Thus, what need to be traced are the position changes of the individual surfaces being cut. As a result, the states of the surface chain at each stage of the operation process are recorded. The working dimension is the absolute value by subtracting the ``machine to'' surface from the ``datum'' surface. The stock removal is the amount that the surface changes between two cuts. 5. Analysis of surface change Now that the surface-chain model has been built, the next step is to nd how the surface changes when a cut is made on it. Look at surface A in Fig. 2. Xa is the position before the machining cut and Xa' is the position after the machining cut. SRa is the amount of the stock removal. When the cut is made on surface A, Xa is sure to increase along the positive direction of the x-axis to Xa'. However, the change of surface A is considered backwards from the last machining cut to the rst one, and so before the machining cut, surface

Table 2 The blueprint objects ID 1 2 3 BD B1 B2 B3 BT B1 B2 B3 StartS B A A EndS D B D SurChain ABCD ABCD ABCD

component is in question, the proper instances of the machining-cut class should be rst initialised for the machining cuts. All objects involved in the tolerance chart in Fig. 1 are listed in Tables 1 and 2. The abbreviations of the column headers are explained as follows: Sq operation sequence Mach machine surfaces to which the working dimensions are measured Datum datum surface from which the working dimensions are measured WD working dimensions WT working tolerances SR mean stock removals SRT stock-removal tolerances SurChain surface chains BD blueprint dimensions BT blueprint tolerances StartS start surface of the blueprint dimension EndS end surface of the blueprint dimension

3. The tolerance chains The tolerance chains are inherent and hidden among the machining cut and the blueprint objects. They can be denoted with the linear relationships among the variables in the tolerance chart. In general, the blueprint dimensions and the stock removals are the closing links of the chains, whilst the working dimensions are the constituent links. Each constituent link shall be properly assigned with a tolerance, which will eventually contribute to the closing link. One tolerance chain usually consists of one closing link and several constituent links. In Wade's work [1], the

96

J. Xue, P. Ji / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 123 (2002) 9399

Fig. 2. Illustration for the surface changes for a machining cut.

is set up for the component. Surface A is set as the origin of the x-axis, and so A 0. Other surfaces positions in the coordinate system are obtained from the blueprint dimensions. Because the blueprint dimension equals the distance between two surfaces in the blueprint drawing, i.e. the absolute value of subtraction of two surface positions, the following set of equations (1) is obtained from the blueprint dimensions: jC Bj B1 ; jB Aj B2 ; jD Aj B3 ; A 0 (1) In the surface-chain model, D > C > B > A, and so the above equations can be rewritten as C B B1 ; B A B2 ; D A B3 ; A0 (2)

A should be attached to a stock. The coordinates of surface A will decrease along the x-axis, which means that surface A is negative. With the same derivation, surface B is positive. Coincidentally, the normal of surface A is opposite to the positive direction of the x-axis, while the normal of surface B is consistent. Thus, a conclusion can be drawn that in the surface-chain model, if the normal of a surface is consistent to the positive direction of the x-axis, then the surface is positive; and if it is opposite to the positive direction of the x-axis, then the surface is negative. In general, the surface change can be expressed as LS1 LS0 C SR where LS1 is the position of surface S before the machining cut is made on it, LS0 the position of surface S after the machining cut is made on it, C the direction of surface S in the coordinate system and SR the stock removal of the machining cut. With this equation, the new position of each surface in each machining can be obtained easily when a machining cut is made on the surface. Every machining-cut object has a surface-chain ABCD, a ``machine to'' surface and a ``datum'' surface in the tolerance chart. The ``machine to'' surface will change its position when a machining cut is made. It is very easy to obtain the working dimensions from the surface-chain model. The working dimension is the distance between the ``datum'' surface and the ``machine to'' surface. Both surfaces are the ingredients of the surface chain in the machining-cut object. They have their own position values in the coordinate system. Thus by subtracting the position value of the ``machine to'' surface from that of the ``datum'' surface, the absolute value is the working dimension. When deriving the working dimensions for the machiningcut object, the reverse tolerance chains are then easily determined. 6. Identifying the tolerance chains with the surface-chain model The process of identifying tolerance chains with the surface-chain model can be divided into three steps. Step 1. First, determine which surfaces will be involved in the tolerance chart by analysing the blueprint drawing, and then obtain their initial positions. Here, in Fig. 1, surfaces AD are involved in the tolerance chart. A coordinate system

The linear equations can be neatly expressed in vector and matrix format. The blueprint dimensions can be represented by vector B B1 ; B2 ; B3 ; 0T and the surfaces can be represented by vector S A; B; C; DT. Detaching the coefcients from the variables in the linear equations to form a coefcient matrix, Eq. (2) can be written as follows: 2 30 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 A B1 6 1 1 0 0 7B B C B B2 C 6 7B C B C (3) 4 1 0 0 1 5@ C A @ B3 A 1 0 0 0 D 0 With the coefcient matrix and the blueprint vector, the surface positions can be worked out easily as A 0; B B2 ; C B1 B2 ; D B3 (4)

By now, the initial positions of all surfaces have been calculated from the blueprint dimensions. Step 2. The positions of the surfaces in each operation cut object must be updated step-by-step. As discussed above, each machining cut is made on the ``machine to'' surface. Thus only the ``machine to'' surfaces change their positions. Other surfaces are frozen as nothing happens on them. The surface position must be updated from the last machiningcut object to the rst one in the operation sequence. In each machining cut, the amount of stock removal is just added to or subtracted from the ``machine to'' surface, depending on the direction of the ``machine to'' surface. The evolution of the surface positions of all machining-cut objects is shown in Fig. 3. The surface positions in the last operation should be the same as those in the blueprint, which were obtained in Step 1. However, in this last cut, the ``machine to'' surface is B, while the stock amount is Y10, and B is positive, so in Operation 9, the B's position is changed from the old B2 to B2 Y10 . Other surface changes are similar, as shown in Fig. 3. Step 3. The working dimension is the absolute value of the distance between the ``machine to'' and the ``datum'' surfaces. In order to obtain the absolute value, the left

J. Xue, P. Ji / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 123 (2002) 9399

97

Fig. 3. The evolution of surface changes in the surface chain.

surface is just subtracted from the right surface, i.e. the small value is subtracted from the large value to ensure that the dimension value is positive regardless of whether the surface is ``machine to'' or ``datum''. Thus X 1 D A B 3 Y 7 Y5 Y3 ; X 2 C A B 1 B 2 Y 9 Y 6 Y5 ; X 3 D A B 3 Y 7 Y5 ; X4 B A B2 Y10 Y8 Y5 ; X5 D A B3 Y 7 ; X 6 C A B 1 B 2 Y9 ; X7 D A B3 ; X8 B A B2 Y10 ; X9 C A B1 B 2 ; X10 C B B1 (5)

equation is obtained:

(6) In Eq. (6), all the variables in the tolerance chart are included. In the coefcient matrix, three columns have zero

Similarly, by detaching the coefcients from the variables in the equation set to form a coefcient matrix, the following

98

J. Xue, P. Ji / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 123 (2002) 9399

elements and their corresponding stock removal variables are Y1, Y2 and Y4. Thus these three stock removals are solid, and they play no role in the tolerance chains because their coefcients are zero: they can be eliminated from the coefcient matrix. Correspondingly, Y1, Y2 and Y4 are eliminated from the variable column so that 1 2 0 X1 B X2 C 6 1 C 6 B C 6 B B X3 C 6 0 C 6 B B X C 60 B 4C 6 C 6 B B X5 C 6 0 C 6 B B X C 61 B 6C 6 C 6 B B X7 C 6 0 C 6 B B X C 60 B 8C 6 C 6 B @ X9 A 4 1 1 X10 0 30 1 B1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 7B B2 C 7B C 7B C 7B B3 C 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 7B C 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 7B Y3 C 7B C 7B C 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 7B Y5 C 7B C 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 7B Y6 C 7B C 7B C 7B Y7 C 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7B C 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7B Y8 C 7B C 7B C 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5@ Y9 A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y10 (7) Here, the coefcient matrix shows the backward-chain matrix, also named as a reverse tolerance chain [12]. If its inverse matrix is used to express the relationships between the working dimensions and stock removals and the blueprint dimensions, then 1 2 0 B1 B B2 C 6 1 C 6 B C 6 B B B3 C 6 0 C 6 B B Y C 60 B 3C 6 C 6 B B Y5 C 6 0 C 6 B B Y C 61 B 6C 6 C 6 B B Y7 C 6 0 C 6 B B Y C 60 B 8C 6 C 6 B @ Y9 A 4 1 1 Y10 0 0 60 6 60 6 61 6 60 6 60 6 60 6 60 6 40 0 2 3 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 7 B 7 B 7 B 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 07 B 7 B 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 17 B 7 B 7 B 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 07 B 7 B 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 7 B 7 B 7 B 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 07 B 7 B 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 B 7 B 7 B 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 @ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 X1 X2 C C C X3 C C X4 C C C X5 C C X6 C C C X7 C C X8 C C C X9 A X10 30 1 X1 1 1 7B X2 C 7B C 0 7B X3 C 7B C 0 7B X4 C 7B C 0 7B X5 C 7B C 0 7B X6 C 7B C 0 7B X7 C 7B C 0 7B X8 C 7B C 0 5@ X9 A 1 X10 (8)

applied to the component sketch, the output tolerance chains must be different. Here, the tolerance chains in the tolerance chart shown in Fig. 1 are B1 X10 ; B2 X9 X10 ; B3 X7 ; Y3 X1 X3 ; Y5 X3 X5 ; Y6 X2 X3 X5 X6 ; Y7 X5 X7 ; Y8 X3 X4 X5 X8 ; Y10 X8 X9 X10 Y9 X6 X9 ;

With these tolerance chains, the resultant dimensions can be calculated with Eq. (8) to check whether the component can be made into the required product when the working dimensions and stock removals are all known. Of course, as long as the blueprint dimensions and the tentative stock removals for the machining-cut objects are all given, all working dimensions can be calculated with Eq. (7). The tolerancechain model has enhanced the capability of the tolerance chart. The tolerance chains obtained here are very useful for tolerance allocation. In the tolerance chain, regardless of whether the constituent links are increasing or decreasing, their tolerances are all added together. Thus when using Eq. (8) to calculate the tolerance stack-up, the absolute value of the coefcient matrix is applied, as shown in Eq. (9). If the tolerances are assigned to the working dimensions, then Eq. (9) can be used to obtain the resultant dimensions to check whether or not the tolerance stack-up violates the blueprint requirement: 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 b1 B b2 C 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 B C 6 B C 6 B b3 C 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 B C 6 B y C 6 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 B 3 C 6 B C 6 B y5 C 6 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 B C 6 B y C 6 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 B 6 C 6 B C 6 B y7 C 6 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 B C 6 B y C 6 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 B 8 C 6 B C 6 @ y9 A 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 y10 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 60 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 6 60 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 6 6 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 6 6 6 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 6 6 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 6 6 6 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 6 6 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 6 6 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 0 1 x1 1 1 7 B x2 C 7 B C 7 B C 0 0 7 B x3 C 7 B C 0 0 7 B x4 C 7 B C 7 B C 0 0 7 B x5 C 7 B C 0 0 7 B x6 C 7 B C 7 B C 0 0 7 B x7 C 7 B C 0 0 7 B x8 C 7 B C 7 B C 1 0 5 @ x9 A 1 1 x10 30 1 x1 0 1 1 1 7B x2 C 7B C 7B C 0 0 7B x3 C 7B C 0 0 7B x4 C 7B C 7B C 0 0 7B x5 C 7B C 0 0 7B x6 C 7B C 7B C 0 0 7B x7 C 7B C 0 0 7B x8 C 7B C 7B C 1 0 5@ x9 A 1 1 1 x10 (9)

0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0

0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0

0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1

0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1

This matrix exposes the (forward) tolerance chains in the tolerance chart. Each row of the matrix represents a tolerance chain. Obviously, if a different operation sequence is

J. Xue, P. Ji / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 123 (2002) 9399

99

7. Discussion The surface-chain model begins with the analysis of the blueprint. The blueprint dimensions must not include reference, duplicate or double dimensions. Violation of this rule is a major source of charting problem. To ensure that this condition is satised, the listed blueprint dimensions were checked with a method of seven steps in Wade's work [1]. Ji [8] also proposed the blueprint tree model to check whether the blueprint dimensioning is correct or not. Here the blueprint dimensions can also be checked with the surface-chain model. Considering the coefcient matrix in Eq. (3), if the rank of the matrix equal the number of the surfaces, then the equation set has a unique solution, which indicates that the blueprint dimensions are correct. If the rank of the matrix is less than the number of the surfaces, then the equation set has multiple solutions: one or more surface positions cannot be determined with the blueprint dimensions, thus the blueprint dimensions should be reorganised and corrected. If the rank of the matrix is larger than the number of the surfaces, then the equation set has no solution. There must be some over-dimensioning, with dimensions contradicting each other. In such a case, the blueprint dimensions should be reorganised and corrected also. This surface-chain model in the tolerance chart takes the surface chain as one attribute of the blueprint and machining-cut objects. Each machining-cut object seems to be an independent entity, but inter-related relationships exist in the tolerance chart. The interaction among these objects is made up of the tolerance chains. The approach to identifying the tolerance chain is similar to the algebraic approach [13]. However, the blueprint dimensions and the stock removals must all be known in the algebraic approach, and the solid stock removals all known before the tolerance chart is constructed. With this surface-chain model, what must be known rst are the operation sequence and the component sketch. The working dimensions, the stock removals and the blueprint dimensions are all denoted with variables. Given the blueprint dimensions and stock removals, the working dimensions can be obtained easily with the surface-chain model. If the working dimensions are given, the resultant dimensions can be calculated easily with the surface-chain model to check whether or not the requirement in the blueprint can be met. 8. Conclusions This paper presented an efcient approach to identify the tolerance chains with a surface-chain model in the parameterised tolerance chart. The surface-chain model plays an important role in the tolerance chart throughout the whole process. As to the nature of the machining cuts, only position changes of the machined surfaces in the coordinate system

occur during the machining process. By tracing the state of the surface-chain model, the solid-stock removals and the reverse-tolerance chains are obtained. By inversing the reverse-tolerance-chain matrix, the (forward) tolerancechain matrix is also obtained. After the tolerance chains are identied, the remaining work to be done in the tolerance chart is simplied. When analysing a tolerance chart, process engineers may want to relax an unnecessarily tight working tolerance, in which case they can use Eq. (9) to check whether or not their trials are workable. In a more complex situation, when an additional operation is inserted into the operation sequence, just one more set of variables is needed to be added for that operation, i.e. the working dimensions Xi, xi and stock removals Yi and yi. It is easy to obtain the new solution by using the approach described in this paper. The method discussed in this paper can also be applied to the 2D tolerance chart for some more complex parts such as parts with angular features. Acknowledgements The work described in this paper has been supported by the Research Grants Council of Hong Kong, China (Project No. PolyU-5142/98E). References
[1] O.R. Wade, in: T.J. Drozda, C. Wick (Eds.), Tolerance Control, Tools and Manufacturing Engineers Handbook, Vol. 1, Machining, ASME, New York, 1983, pp. 160 (Chapter 2). [2] C.J. Marks, Tolerance charts control production machining, Am. Machinist 97 (1953) 114116. [3] C.T. Mooney, How to adjust tolerance charts, Tool Engr. 3 (1955) 7581. [4] J.K. Matter, Tolerance charts forecast accuracy, Am. Machinist 4 (1947) 114118. [5] R.S. Ahluwalia, A.V. Karolin, CATCa computer-aided tolerance control system, J. Manuf. Syst. 3 (1984) 153160. [6] X.Q. Tang, B.J. Davies, Computer-aided dimensional planning, Int. J. Prod. Res. 26 (1988) 283297. [7] S.A. Irani, R.O. Mittal, E.A. Lehtihet, Tolerance chart optimisation, Int. J. Prod. Res. 27 (1989) 15311552. [8] P. Ji, A tree approach for tolerance charting, Int. J. Prod. Res. 31 (1993) 10231033. [9] B.K.A. Ngoi, O.C. Teck, A complete tolerance charting system, Int. J. Prod. Res. 31 (1993) 453469. [10] B.K.A. Ngoi, C.S. Tan, Graphical approach to tolerance chartinga maze chart method, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 13 (1997) 282 289. [11] Y.R. Pan, G.R. Tang, Computer-aided tolerance charting for products with angular features, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 17 (2001) 361370. [12] P. Ji, Determining dimensions for process planning: a backward derivation approach, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 11 (1996) 5258. [13] P. Ji, An algebraic approach for dimensional chain identification in process planning, Int. J. Prod. Res. 37 (1999) 99110.

You might also like