Olerance Stackup Course PDF

Welcome to a Course On
Tolerance Stack-up Analysis using Co-ordinate

Dimensioning and GD&T
For
Satyam Venture Engineering Services

Pvt.Ltd., Secunderabad, INDIA
1 i2
About iSquare
iSquare
(InterOperability & InterChangeability Solutions)
Pune, INDIA
2 i2
Focus Areas:
l CAD Data InterOperability : Consistent

representation of 3D CAD data in variety of
CAD/CAM/CAE applications and platforms.
l InterChangeability: Predicting Dimensional

Variations, its impact and causes at the
product and assembly level at early design
stage.
3 i2
Relationships:
l InterOperability:
With International TechneGroup Incorporated, USA
having more than 20 years of Experience in CAD
Data InterOperability technology, solutions and
services.
4 i2
Relationships:
InterChangeability:
With Dimensional Control Systems, USA having
more than 15 years of experience in Dimensional
Control techniques, solutions and Services.
5 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
Software Solutions For:

Effective Data exchange between heterogeneous CAD/CAM systems: R egardless of source,
target application, standard and formats !! Solutions Include CA Dfix, IGES/Works,CAD/IQ.
Model Quality Assessment from Downstream application perspective
Quality Services for:

Data Exchange, Data Migration, Lower version to higher or vice -a-versa
Vendor Supplier data integration : ensuring effective data exchange with minimal / NO
rework at either ends.
6 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.
Software Solutions For:

Dimensional Management / Stack Analysis: Solutions embedded in C ATIA V4/V5 as Gold
Partner and also Stand Alone solutions for data coming from othe r CAD platforms !! Solutions
Include 1-DCS, DCS-DFC, 3DCS-SA, 3DCS-CAA V5 Designer, 3DCS-CAA V5 Analyst,
GDM3D
Quality Services for:

Dimensional Engineering / Management : Base Line tolerance mode l creation, reporting with
suggestions and recommendations. Follow-on consulting
Per requirement, includes 1D, 1D with GD&T, Full 3D simulations, Piece part variations,
assembly variation prediction against desired objectives.
7 i2
Training Programs in Dimension
Management / Engineering
l Training Programs Launched:
Fundamentals of GD&T based upon ASME Y14.5M : ~36hrs

Tolerance Stack up Analysis: A logical approach to solve assembly build
problems: ~30hrs
Advanced GD&T: Concepts and Applications as per ASME Y14.5M : ~30hrs
Tolerance Stack up Analysis using DCS (Dimensional Control Syste ms, USA)
Software Solutions (1DCS, DCS-DFC, 3DCS-SA): ~36hrs
l Training Programs Under Development (Tentative release by Oct 05)

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 : ??
8 i2
Customers
l TATA Motors l Bajaj Auto
l TATA Technologies l Bajaj Tempo
l TATA Auto Plastics l Brakes India
l TATA Auto Components l Emerson Climate Technologies
l Ashok Leyland l Grupo Antolin
l Mahindra & Mahindra Auto l Mahindra Engg Design Develop
l Godrej & Boyce Mfg Ltd. Center
l GE l Kirloskar Copeland
l Infotech Enterprises l Mahindra Engineering Services
l TATA Johnson Control l Onward Technologies
Automotive l Space Applications Center
l Kinetic Engineering l TATA Consultancy
l Research & Development l Lear Seatings Pvt. Ltd.
Establishment (Engrs) l Atlas Copco
l Armament Research & l Jayahind Industries
Development Establishment
l L&T
l Bhabha Atomic Research
l Satyam Venture Engg Services
Center
9 i2
Thats about iSquare
10 i2
How is Course Organized?
l Total 11 Sessions; 3days (June 23,24 and 25 , 2005)

l Pre-defined objectives at the beginning of each
session
l Classroom exercises at the end of each session
l Homework
l Extended hours as necessary
l Assumption : Understanding of GD&T controls
l Feel free to interrupt and ask Questions
11 i2
Session #1 : The Basics
l Objectives:
How to calculate mean dimensions with equal

Bilateral Tolerances
Calculating Inner and Outer Boundaries
Virtual and Resultant Conditions
12 i2
What is Tolerance Stack-up Analysis?
Tolerance Stack-up Analysis (also called as Gap

Analysis, Loop Diagrams or Circuit Analysis) is the
process of calculating minimum and maximum
airspaces or wall thickness or material interferences in
a single part or assemblies
Its a logical process broken in few steps
13 i2
Steps in Tolerance Stack-up Analysis
l Step #1:
Identify objectives: for example, you want to test if no
interference is possible at a certain place in an assembly, then
you set your requirement as Gap must be equal to or greater
than zero
l Step #2:
Identify all dimensions that contribute to your objectives as
defined in step #1 (gap) and convert them to equal bilateral
toleranced dimensions; if they are not already
14 i2
l Step #3:
Assign each dimension a +ve or ve value. For Radial stacks
(going up and down); start at the bottom of gap and end up at
the top of gap
Down direction is ve (top of gap to bottom)
Up direction is +ve (bottom of gap to top OR towards end)
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)
l 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
15 i2
l Step #4 (Basic Rules):

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.
16 i2
l Step #5 (Basic Rules):

When a single feature or a pattern of features are controlled by
more than one Geometric Tolerance (such as orientation
combined with position), the designer must determine which, if
either is contributing factor to variable. It is also possible that
none of geometric tolerance is a factor and instead size
dimensions are factors.
The Designer must deduce what factors are pertinent through

sketches and reasoning.
The judgment of designer is critical in these determinations.
17 i2
Beginning Tolerance Stack-up Analysis
l Add all +ve and ve dimensions which will calculate your

mean gap. If mean gap is ve number, your requirement
of no material interference (or clearance in other
words) is already violated!
l Then we must add sum of equal bilateral tolerances (1/2

of total tolerance) to the mean dimension (or gap) to
determine maximum gap.
l Then we must subtract the sum of equal bilateral

tolerances (1/2 of total tolerance) from the mean
dimension (or gap) to determine minimum gap.
l Again any ve value for minimum or maximum gaps

indicate interference situation
l Maximum gaps are maximum clearance (or in case of

interference fits, minimum interference)
l Minimum gaps are minimum clearance (or in case of

interference fits, maximum interference)
18 i2
Beginning Tolerance Stack-up Analysis
l 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
l 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.
19 i2
Finding Mean Dimensions
l Few Important Concepts of Tolerance Stack-up

Analysis:
There is NO difference between equal, unequal or unilaterally

toleranced dimension.
There is NO difference between a limit dimension and a plus
or minus toleranced dimension
They all have extremes and they all have means. So, first thing
is to change any dimension to an equal bilateral toleranced
dimension
20 i2
21 i2
22 i2
Finding Mean Dimensions : Exercise
Convert following Dimensions to an equal bilateral toleranced dimensions
23 i2
Boundaries
Boundaries are generated by collective effects of

size and Geometric tolerances applied to
feature(s) and often referred to as simply inner
and outer boundaries
There are two types of boundaries
l Virtual Condition boundary (VCB)

l Resultant Condition Boundary (RCB)
24 i2
Virtual Condition Boundaries (Refer ASME Y14.5M section
2.11)
l FCFs that use m (MMC symbol), generate constant

boundaries (VCB) for features under consideration and
are calculated as:
VCB for internal FOS such as hole = MMC Size Boundary

Geometric Tolerance value
VCB for external FOS such as pin = MMC Size boundary +

Geometric Tolerance
VC Boundaries are Constant and do not vary based upon actual

mating size of the feature
25 i2
Virtual Condition Boundaries (Refer ASME Y14.5M
section 2.11)
l FCFs that use l (LMC symbol), generate constant

boundaries (VCB) for features under consideration and
are calculated as:
VCB for internal FOS such as hole = LMC Size Boundary +

Geometric Tolerance value
VCB for external FOS such as pin = LMC Size boundary -

Geometric Tolerance.
VC Boundaries are Constant and do not vary based upon actual

mating size of the feature
26 i2
Resultant Condition Boundaries (Refer ASME
Y14.5M section 2.11)
l RC Boundaries are non constant in nature and

are generated on opposite side of the virtual
conditions.
l When RFS (Regardless of Feature Size)

concept applies to FOS, they generate only
non-constant or RC boundaries.
27 i2
Case#1: Internal FOS controlled at MMC
Hole MMC Concept
28 i2
Case#1: Calculating VC & RC boundaries
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
Case#1: Creating equal Bilateral Toleranced
Dimension from VCB and RCB
30 i2
Case#2: Internal FOS controlled at LMC
Hole LMC Concept
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
Case#3: Internal FOS controlled at RFS
Hole RFS Concept
34 i2
Case#3: Calculating RC boundaries
Since its a RFS Callout, no virtual condition

boundaries exist and all boundaries are non -constant
35 i2
Case#3: Assumption about feature form in
case of RFS callout
Only if the hole has a significant

depth, might this median line
curvature (out of straightness)
be a consideration. For thin
parts, such as sheet metal, it is
probably not of concern in these
analyses. In fact many
designers would agree that a
banana shaped hole is not likely
to occur on most products.
Therefore we are ignoring

axially out of straightness
consideration from the
analyses.
36 i2
Dimension from Inner and Outer Boundaries
37 i2
Case#4: External FOS Controlled at MMC
Shaft MMC Concept
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
Case#5: External FOS controlled at LMC
Shaft LMC Concept

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
Case#6: External FOS controlled at RFS
Shaft RFS Concept

44 i2
Case#6: Calculating RC boundaries
Inner Boundary
45 i2
Case#6: Assumption about feature form in
case of RFS callout
In case of RFS Callout, one may want to consider

additional deviation arising out of form to
determine absolute worst case inner boundary.
This applies only if shaft length is significant. For

very shirt shafts / pins, it is probably not of
concern in the analysis.
Therefore we are ignoring out-of-straightness

consideration from our analysis. If your product
runs a risk of banana shaped shafts, you may
wish to consider illustration on the left in your
calculations.
46 i2
Dimension from Inner and Outer Boundaries
47 i2
Formulae to Remember
For Internal FOS controlled at MMC / LMC:

VCB at MMC (IB) = MMC Size Boundary Geometric Tolerance value at MMC
VCB at LMC (OB) = LMC Size Boundary + Geometric Tolerance value at LMC
For External FOS controlled at MMC / LMC:

VCB at MMC (OB) = MMC Size boundary + Geometric Tolerance value at MMC
VCB at LMC (IB) = LMC Size boundary - Geometric Tolerance value at LMC
48 i2
Finding Inner & Outer Boundaries : Exercise
49 i2
Session #2: Analyzing a Box Assembly
l Objectives:
To determine min and max gap for a simple

eleven parts assembly
l Perform the calculations

l Create a Loop Analysis Diagram
l Create a Number Chart
50 i2
Box Assembly
51 i2
Box Assembly: Part #1
l Cavity in part#1 has limit dimensions (392.43

384.81); so we need to convert these to mean
with equal bilateral toleranced dimensions
Add limit dimensions : 392.43 + 384.81=777.24

Find Mean dimension: 777.24/2=388.62
Find total tolerance by subtracting limit dimensions: 392.43
384.81=7.62
Find equal bilateral tolerance=7.62/2=3.81
Finally express limit dimensions as equal bilaterally toleranced
dimension as: 388.62`3.81
52 i2
Box Assembly: Part #2- #11
parts MMC (1)
parts LMC (2)
Add (1) and (2) (3)
Subtract (1) and (2)(4)
Half of (3) (5)

Half of (4) (6)
(5)
(6)
53 i2
Box Assembly: Part #1 & Part #2- #11 put
together
54 i2
Box Assembly : Loop Analysis Diagram
lLoop Diagram begins by showing Gap to be

calculated at the top
lSo, loop diagram begins at Part#11 (plate)
and progresses downward constantly through
material until it reaches at the last plate at the
bottom of an assembly (ie. Part#2 or plate#2)
lThe sum of all these ve mean dimensions,
which run from top to bottom is 381and has
total tolerance of `3.81
lThe loop then reverses and progresses up
through cavity (ie. Part #1).
lThis portion of the loop is +ve since it
progresses from bottom to top
lThe logic of +ve and ve is simple material
removes airspace (therefore ve) and cavity
which lacks material adds to airspace
(therefore +ve)
55 i2
lThe mean dimension of cavity is 388.62 and has a

total tolerance of `3.81
lSo, in numbers chart, we add means: (+)388.62 + ( -
)381.00 = 7.62 (1)
lIf this number is ve, it would have proven that even
mean sizes of parts, when produced result in
interference. Now that sum is +ve, we can proceed
lNext step is to add, charted plus or minus tolerances : 3.81+3.8 1 = 7.62 (2)
lNext step is to calculate min and max gaps (airspace or interfer ence):
lMean dimensions difference + sum of tolerances = (1) + (2)= (+)7 .62+(+)7.62=+15.24 (max gap)
lMean dimensions difference - sum of tolerances = (1) - (2)= (+)7.62-(+)7.62=0 (min gap)
56 i2
Box Assembly : Alternate Method to
calculate min / max gap
From situations such as this, it is easier to simply calculate t he MMC of the

cavity and the collective MMCs of the plates and subtract them to get
minimum gap.
57 i2
58 i2
Session #2: Exercises
59 i2
Session #3: Loop Analysis for Features of
Size (FOS)
l Objectives:
Using Loop Analysis Technique; determine Max and Min gap

in Horizontal and Vertical Directions
Determine proper start and End points for stack-ups
Graph the numbers calculated into Loop Diagram
60 i2
Analyzing FOS: Problem Description
61 i2
Analyzing FOS: Charts to be used
62 i2
Analyzing FOS: Steps Involved (Horizontal
Direction)
l Convert horizontal limit dimensions of part #1 to equal bilatera l toleranced

dimension. (26.615`0.405)
l Convert horizontal limit dimensions of part #2 to equal bilatera l toleranced
dimension. (25.705`0.105)
l Graph the loop from left-to-right through material, using appropriate signs
(+ve / -ve) (- 25.705 and + 26.615)
l Add these mean dimensions (dont forget signs) to get difference
between mean dimensions ((-) 25.705 + (+) 26.615)=+0.910
l Add plus and minus tolerances for part#1 and part#2 to get total plus and
minus tolerance (0.105+0.405)=0.510
l Max gap in horizontal direction is = sum of difference between mean
dimensions and total of plus and minus tolerances (0.910+0.510=1.42)
l Min gap in horizontal direction is = difference (subtraction) of difference
between mean dimensions and total of plus and minus tolerances (0.910-
0.510=0.4)
63 i2
Analyzing FOS: Steps Involved (Vertical
Direction)
l Convert vertical limit dimensions of part #1 to equal bilateral toleranced

dimension. (26.615`0.405)
l Convert vertical limit dimensions of part #2 to equal bilateral toleranced
dimension. (24.390`0.610)
l Graph the loop from top-to-bottom through material, using appropriate
signs (+ve / -ve) (- 24.390 and + 26.615)
l Add these mean dimensions (dont forget signs) to get difference
between mean dimensions ((-) 24.390 + (+) 26.615)=+2.225
l Add plus and minus tolerances for part#1 and part#2 to get total plus and
minus tolerance (0.610+0.405)=1.015
l Max gap in vertical direction is = sum of difference between mean
dimensions and total of plus and minus tolerances (2.225+ 1.015)=3.24
l Min gap in vertical direction is = difference (subtraction) of difference
between mean dimensions and total of plus and minus tolerances (2.225-
1.015)=1.21
64 i2
Analyzing FOS: Easier Method using MMC
and LMC
Calculating min and max gaps may be easier as discussed before ( slide #48); by
subtracting the MMCs for minimum gaps and LMCs for maximum gaps as
shown below:
65 i2
Analyzing FOS: Charts and Loops with
dimensions
Part #1, vertical

direction
Part #1, horizontal
direction
Part #2, vertical

Part #2, horizontal
direction
direction
Material side (-ve)

Part #2 thickness
66 i2
Session #3: Exercise
67 i2
Session #4: Analysis of an assembly with
Plus and Minus tolerancing
l Objectives:
l Calculate the airspaces and interferences for a plus and

minus toleranced assembly
l Performing multiple loop analyses on an assembly
68 i2
Assembly with plus and minus tolerances :
Problem Description
69 i2
Assembly with plus and minus tolerances :
Charts to be used
70 i2
Steps Involved in calculating stack in
Horizontal Direction
l Convert horizontal limit dimension 1 male (31.75 34.90) to equal bilateral

toleranced dimension. (33.325`1.575)
l Convert horizontal limit dimension 2 air (21.41 19.84) to equal bilateral
l Convert horizontal limit dimension 3 male (16.67 15.09) to equal bilateral
l Graph the loop from left-to-right through material, using appropriate signs (+ve / -
ve) (- 33.325, +20.625 and + 15.880)
l Add these mean dimensions (dont forget signs) to get difference between mean
dimensions ((-) 33.325 + (+) 20.625 + (+)15.880)=+3.180
l Add plus and minus tolerances for dimensions 1, 2, 3 to get tota l plus and minus
tolerance (0.785+0.790+1.575 = 3.150)
l Max gap in horizontal direction is = sum of difference between mean dimensions
and total of plus and minus tolerances (3.180+ 3.150=6.330)
l Min gap in horizontal direction is = difference (subtraction) of difference between
mean dimensions and total of plus and minus tolerances (3.180-3.150=0.030)
71 i2
Steps Involved in calculating stack in Vertical
Direction
l Convert vertical limit dimension 1 air (26.21-25.40) to equal bilateral toleranced

dimension. (25.805`0.405)
l Convert vertical limit dimension 2 material (25.40 24.59) to equal bilateral
l Graph the loop from top-to-bottom through material, using appropriate signs (+ve /
-ve) (- 24.995, +25.805)
l Add these mean dimensions (dont forget signs) to get difference between mean
dimensions ((-) 24.995 + (+) 25.805)=+0.810
l Add plus and minus tolerances for dimensions 1, 2, 3 to get tota l plus and minus
tolerance (0.405+0.405 = 0.810)
l 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)
l 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)
72 i2
Easier Method for calculating stacks using
MMC and LMC
Calculating min and max gaps may be easier as discussed before ( slide #56); by
subtracting the MMCs for minimum gaps and LMCs for maximum gaps in
horizontal direction as shown below:
73 i2
Assembly Analysis: Charts and Loops with
dimensions
Vertical Loop Horizontal Loop
74 i2
75 i2
Session #5: Analyzing a Floating Fastener
Assembly with Geometric Controls
l Objectives:
l Calculate Virtual and Resultant conditions (Inner / Outer

Boundaries) for GD&T callouts
l Determine mean of all these boundaries
l Convert all FOS (diameters and widths) to mean radii with
equal bilateral tolerance
l Mixing FOSs (widths and diameters) in number chart
l Graph the numbers in tolerance stack-up diagram
l Determine all unknown gaps in the assembly
76 i2
Floating fastener assembly sketch with
GD&T
77 i2
Steps involved in analyzing floating fastener
assembly
1. Calculate Virtual and Resultant Condition for each holes (holes

#1 thru #4)
2. For each hole, calculate difference between resultant condition
and virtual condition boundaries. This difference represents total
size tolerance for each hole. Take half of the difference which is
represents equal bilateral tolerance value .
3. For each hole, add resultant condition and virtual condition
boundaries; and take mean of the sum. This mean represents
the mean diameter of that hole (for analysis purpose)
4. Again, for each hole, take mean of values in step #2 and #3.
This new mean represents mean radius`mean radial tolerance
78 i2
Defining Virtual and Resultant Condition
Boundaries
As per ASME Y14.5M-1994,
l Virtual Condition is defined as a constant value outer locus (for

external FOS specified at MMC or internal FOS specified at LMC)
and a constant value inner locus (for internal FOS specified at
MMC and external FOS specified at LMC).
l Resultant conditions are in opposite direction to virtual conditions

and are non-constant in nature. They are the worst case inner
locus and worst case outer locus of FOS
79 i2
Charting values calculated per steps #1
through #4
Step #1: Calculate Virtual and Resultant Condition for each holes (holes #1 thru #4)
80 i2
through #4
Step #2: For each hole, calculate difference between resultant condition and virtual condition
boundaries. This difference represents total size tolerance for each hole . Take half of the difference
which is represents equal bilateral tolerance value .
81 i2
through #4
Step #3, #4: For each hole, add resultant condition and virtual condition bou ndaries; and take mean of
the sum. This mean represents the mean diameter of that hole (for analysis purpose)
Again, for each hole, take mean of values in step #2 and #3. Thi s new mean represents mean
radius`mean radial tolerance
82 i2
Step #1: values printed in the chart
Step #1: Calculate Virtual and Resultant Condition for each holes (holes #1 thru #4)
83 i2
Step #2: Values printed in the Chart
Step #2: For each hole, calculate difference between resultant condition and virtual condition
boundaries. This difference represents total size tolerance for each hole . Take half of the difference
which is represents equal bilateral tolerance value .
84 i2
Step #3,4: Values printed in the Chart
Step #3, #4: For each hole, add resultant condition and virtual condition bou ndaries; and take mean of
the sum. This mean represents the mean diameter of that hole (for analysis purpose)
Again, for each hole, take mean of values in step #2 and #3. Thi s new mean represents mean
85 i2
Locating / Orienting parts in an Assembly to
create MIN gap
l The loop diagram begins by pushing all the parts

is such a manner that the parts configuration
(position) in an assembly would create a minimum
gap. As shown in figure left this has had the effect
of trapping the fasteners (or pins) between hole #1
and #3 and Hole #2 and #4.
l The pin on the left passing thru hole 1,3 is trapped

by pushing part having hole 1 to the right and the
pin on right passing thru holes 2 and 4 is trapped
by pushing part having hole 2 to the left (both
these operations closes gap between the parts
having holes 1, 2)
l Since this is a floating fastener situation, pin on

the left (passing thru holes 1,3) and pin on the
right (passing thru holes 2,4) continues to slide
unless the pins are held against the left and right
side of respective holes as shown in figure
86 i2
Construct a Loop Diagram
1. The Loop begins at the the face on the left side of the gap, it
2 9 proceeds towards left (thru material), designated as ve
1 8
3 numbers thru the basic dimension of 125mm to the center of
7
hole #1.
2. Go 3mm left (-ve) thru the radius of hole #1 ( as calculated
with its VC and RC boundaries). We are done with hole #1 and
exhausted part #1
3. Now go over the left pin trapped between holes 1, 3 in right
6 direction (+ve) 3mm
4
5
4. Now we come across hole#3 and we now go from right side of
hole#3 towards it center in left direction (-ve) 3mm.
5. Step 4 takes us to center of hole 3. From there we go towards
left (+ve) to the center of hole 4; 260mm. We are done with
hole #3.
6. This step reverses the route going left (-ve) thru 3mm radius of hole #4. We are done with hole #4.
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
87 i2
Logic Behind Loop Diagram
The logic behind this loop route was to proceed from left
edge/face of gap through all features having an effect on
the Minimum Gap, to the right of gap.
To begin, the parts were shoved to create a min gap
configuration and in this case this is the only logical route
to take.
The route went left and right and involved all related
features until loop was complete. The related feature list
includes four holes #1 thru #4, pins on left and right . Hole
radii were used because the pertinent dimensions binding
the gap to holes and holes to each other, went to the hole
centers.
The full pin diameters were used as the pins got trapped
between hole edge faces.
Key in this table the ve and +ve route
values 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
88 i2
Loop Diagram with values printed
89 i2
Can you Locate / Orient parts in an Assembly
to create MAX gap
90 i2
Loop Diagram for MAX gap with values
printed
91 i2
Calculate MIN and MAX Gap

for the assembly shown in
figure at left
92 i2
Session#6: Analyzing an Assembly with Tab
and Slot (Fixed Fastener)
93 i2
Session#6: Analyzing an Assembly with Tab
and Slot
l Objectives:
l Calculate assembly overall MAX and MIN dimensions

l Calculate MAX and MIN gaps within assembly as shown
l Calculate boundaries using various GD&T controls
94 i2
Steps involved in analyzing Tab -Slot
assembly
1. Calculate Virtual and Resultant Condition for Tab and Slot. They
work on similar principals as hole and pin and are controlled at
MMC.
2. 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 .
3. For Slot and Tab, add resultant condition and virtual condition
the mean width for either Slot or Tab (for analysis purpose)
4. Again, for Slot and Tab, take mean of values in step #2 and #3.
This new mean represents mean radius`mean radial tolerance
95 i2
through #4
Step #1: Calculate Virtual and Resultant Condition for Tab and Slot. They work on
similar principals as hole and pin and are controlled at MMC
96 i2
through #4
2. 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.
3. For Slot and Tab, add resultant
boundaries; and take mean of the
sum. This mean represents the
mean width for either Slot or Tab (for
analysis purpose)
4. Again, for Slot and Tab, take mean
of values in step #2 and #3. This
new mean represents mean
97 i2
Step #1: values printed in the chart
Step #1: Calculate Virtual and Resultant Condition for Tab and Slot. They work on
similar principals as hole and pin and are controlled at MMC
98 i2
Step #2,3,4: Values printed in the Chart
2. For Slot and Tab, calculate

difference between resultant
boundaries. This difference
represents total size tolerance for
Slot or Tab. Take half of the
difference which is represents equal
bilateral tolerance value.
3. For Slot and Tab, add resultant
mean width for either Slot or Tab (for
analysis purpose)
4. Again, for Slot and Tab, take mean
of values in step #2 and #3. This
99 i2
Locating parts in an Assembly to create MIN
overall Dimension and creating a Loop
Diagram
l Before we begin constructing loop

1 diagram for minimum overall
2 dimension, we must imagine the parts
being shoved together such that
configuration creates minimum overall
assembly dimension
l This means left side of tab is pushed
against left side of slot
l Loop Diagram follows this route
3
4 1. We know now to start with left
side face/edge of part#1 to the
center of slot.
2. Then back to the left side of slot
and tab
3. Then back to the center of tab
and then
4. To the right side face of part#2
100 i2
Loop Diagram with values printed
101 i2
Can you Locate parts in an Assembly to
create MAX overall dimension and create a
Loop Diagram?
102 i2
Loop Diagram for MAX Overall Dimension
with values printed
103 i2
Calculating MAX, MIN values for Lower-Left
and Upper-Right gaps
Case #1: Min Lower-Left Gap Case #3: Min Upper-Right Gap
104
Case #2: Max Lower-Left Gap Case #4: Max Upper-Right Gap
i2
Case #1: Min Lower-Left Gap
105 i2
Case #2: Max Lower-Left Gap
106 i2
Case #3: Min Upper-Right Gap
107 i2
Case #4: Max Upper-Right Gap
108 i2
Calculating MAX overall Diameter for a
coupling
Assembly
109 i2
Detailed Part Drawing with GD&T Controls
Notice the controls

used and study the
drawing
110 i2
Factors and Non-Factors in calculating
overall Diameter
lWill the controls and dimensions circled in

color will participate in overall diameter
calculations
OR
lWill the controls and dimensions circled in
color will participate in overall diameter
calculations
lOR
lWill dimensions circled in both colors

participate or None?
111 i2
Step #1: Calculate Virtual condition and
Resultant Condition boundaries for Threaded
holes
l Threaded Hole on Crank Shaft (consider a stud here now):

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
112 i2
Step #1: Calculate Virtual condition and
Resultant Condition boundaries for
Clearance holes
l Clearance Hole on Coupling:

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
Now, Calculate difference between biggest clearance hole diamete r and

biggest threaded hole diameter = n9.12-n8.44=n0.68= clearance
113 i2
Step #2: Calculate Clearances between
Datum Feature Diameters D and B
l 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.
l Center Bore on Crankshaft Datum feature D :

LMC = 50.10
l Center Shoulder on Coupling Datum feature B :
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
Step#3: Create a Loop Diagram
All Dimensions printed in the Loop are Nominal

(bolt holes are ignored now onward)
+115
-24.985
+25.05
+115
115 i2
Step#4: Chart the values
Bottom to Top to
Top Bottom
(+ve) (-ve) ` Tolerance Remarks
115 - `.15 (Size tol of ` 0.2/2 and Gtol of ` From start to center of
0.1/2) radial calculations crankshaft
25.05 - - From center of
crankshaft to edge of
center bore/shoulder
- 24.985 - From edge of center
bore/shoulder to center
of coupling
115 - `.15 (Size tol of ` 0.2/2 and Gtol of ` From center of coupling
0.1/2) radial calculations to end
255.05 24.985 0.30 Totals
255.05 - 24.985 = 230.065 230.065 + 0.30 = 230.365 Max Dimension
116 i2
Session #6: Exercise #1
117
Calculate MAX/MIN Overall dimensions, Calculate MIN/MAX Gaps
i2
Session #6: Exercise #2
Calculate MAX
overall diameter
of assembly
118 i2
Session #7: Analyzing a Rail Assembly
having Fixed fasteners
Assembly
119 i2
Part #1: Detailed Drawing
120 i2
121 i2
Session #7: Analyzing a Rail Assembly
having Fixed fasteners
l Objectives:
l Calculate Boundaries for Threaded features

l Work with multiple Geometric Controls on a single feature
l Determine effect of Projected Tolerance Zone on Stack-up
l GD&T Controls affecting and non-affecting stack-up
l Calculate Clearance and Interference
l Use product knowledge / experience and Assembly
conditions in stack-up analysis
122 i2
Observations from Assembly and Part
drawings
l A classic example of fixed fastener assembly: a threaded hole in

rail and a clearance hole in block
l Note that datum features B on both part are given a flatness
tolerance since they are mating
l Note the refinement frame for Datum feature B on rail.
l Consider objectives: to calculate max/min gap between rail and
block in assembled condition. This means we need to calculate
pertinent boundaries for features that affect objectives such as
boundaries for slot in rail, width of block, screws when mounted in
rail, clearance holes in block.
123 i2
Steps involved in analyzing Rail assembly
1. Calculate Inner and Outer Boundaries for Slot and Width of

block. (Will there be VCB or just RCBs?)
2. For Slot and Width of block, calculate difference between Inner
and Outer boundaries. This difference represents total size
tolerance for Slot or Width of block. Take half of the difference
which is represents equal bilateral tolerance value.
3. For Slot and Width of block, add Inner and Outer boundaries;
and take mean of the sum. This mean represents the mean
width for either Slot or Width of block (for analysis purpose)
4. Again, for Slot and Width of block, take mean of values in step
#2 and #3. This new mean represents mean radius`mean
radial tolerance
124 i2
Steps involved in analyzing Rail assembly
5. Calculate Inner and Outer Boundaries for Threaded Hole and

Clearance hole. (Will there be VCB or just RCBs?)
6. For Threaded Hole and Clearance hole, calculate difference
between Inner and Outer boundaries. This difference represents
total size tolerance for Threaded Hole and Clearance hole . Take
half of the difference which is represents equal bilateral
tolerance value.
7. For Threaded Hole and Clearance hole, add Inner and Outer
the mean width for either Threaded Hole and Clearance hole (for
analysis purpose)
8. Again, for Threaded Hole and Clearance hole, take mean of
values in step #2 and #3. This new mean represents mean
125 i2
Step #1: Boundaries calculations for slot and
width
1. 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
Step #2,3,4: Calculating Mean Radius /
tolerance for slot and width of block
2. For Slot and Width of block,

Outer Boundary of Slot = Outer Boundary of Block = calculate difference between Inner
- Inner Boundary of Slot = - Inner Boundary of Block= and Outer boundaries. This
-------------------------------------- --------------------------------------
difference represents total size
Difference = Difference =
tolerance for Slot or Width of
Difference of Slot = Difference of Block= block. Take half of the difference
which is represents equal bilateral
Outer Boundary of Slot = Outer Boundary of Block = tolerance value.
+Inner Boundary of Slot = +Inner Boundary of Block =
-------------------------------------- -------------------------------------- 3. For Slot and Width of block, add
Sum = Sum = Inner and Outer boundaries; and
take mean of the sum. This mean
of Sum of OB & IB of Slot = of Sum of OB & IB of Block =
represents the mean width for
Sum ` Difference of Slot = Sum ` Difference of Block =
either Slot or Width of block (for
of Sum ` of Diff of Slot = of Sum ` of Diff of Block = analysis purpose)
4. Again, for Slot and Width of block,
take mean of values in step #2
and #3. This new mean
represents mean radius`mean
radial tolerance
127 i2
Step #1: Boundaries calculations: Values
printed in the chart
1. 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
tolerance : values printed in the chart
2. For Slot and Width of block,

Outer Boundary of Slot = 1.510 Outer Boundary of Block = 1.444
- Inner Boundary of Block = 1.436
calculate difference between Inner
- Inner Boundary of Slot = 1.502
-------------------------------------- -------------------------------------- and Outer boundaries. This
Difference = 0.008 Difference = 0.008 difference represents total size
tolerance for Slot or Width of
Difference of Slot = 0.004 Difference of Block = 0.004 block. Take half of the difference
which is represents equal bilateral
Outer Boundary of Slot = 1.510 Outer Boundary of Block = 1.444
+Inner Boundary of Block = 1.436
tolerance value.
+Inner Boundary of Slot = 1.502
--------------------------------------
-------------------------------------- 3. For Slot and Width of block, add
Sum = 3.012 Sum = 2.880
Inner and Outer boundaries; and
of Sum of OB & IB of Block = 1.440
take mean of the sum. This mean
of Sum of OB & IB of Slot = 1.506
Sum ` Difference of Slot = 1.506 Sum ` Difference of Block = 1.440 represents the mean width for
`0.004 `0.004 either Slot or Width of block (for
analysis purpose)
of Sum ` of Diff of Slot = 0.753 of Sum ` of Diff of Block =
`0.002 0.720 `0.002 4. Again, for Slot and Width of block,
take mean of values in step #2
and #3. This new mean
represents mean radius`mean
radial tolerance
129 i2
Step #5: Boundaries calculations for
Threaded and Clearance Hole
5. Calculate Inner and Outer Boundaries for Threaded Hole and Clearance hole.
(Why not VC and RC Boundaries?)
What is projected tolerance, why it is important? Explain
130 i2
tolerance for Threaded & Clearance Hole
6. For Threaded Hole and Clearance

Outer Boundary of Screw = Outer Boundary of Hole =
hole, calculate difference between
- Inner Boundary of Screw = - Inner Boundary of Hole =
Inner and Outer boundaries. This
-------------------------------------- --------------------------------------
Difference =
Difference =
tolerance for Threaded Hole and
Difference of Hole =
Clearance hole. Take half of the
Difference of Screw =
difference which is represents
Outer Boundary of Screw = Outer Boundary of Hole = equal bilateral tolerance value .
+Inner Boundary of Screw = +Inner Boundary of Hole =
-------------------------------------- --------------------------------------
hole, add Inner and Outer
Sum = Sum =
of Sum of OB & IB of Screw = of Sum of OB & IB of Hole =
Sum ` Difference of Hole =
mean width for either Threaded
Sum ` Difference of Screw =
Hole and Clearance hole (for
of Sum ` of Diff of Hole = analysis purpose)
of Sum ` of Diff of Screw =
8. Again, for Threaded Hole and
Clearance hole, take mean of
values in step #2 and #3. This
131 i2
Step #1: Boundaries calculations: Threaded
& Clearance Hole: Values printed in the chart
5. Calculate Inner and Outer Boundaries for Threaded Hole and Clearance hole.
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
tolerance for Threaded & Clearance Hole:
values printed in the chart

Outer Boundary of Screw = 0.2640 Outer Boundary of Hole = 0.301
hole, calculate difference between
- Inner Boundary of Screw = 0.2268 - Inner Boundary of Hole = 0.271
Inner and Outer boundaries. This
-------------------------------------- --------------------------------------
Difference = 0.030
Difference = 0.0372
tolerance for Threaded Hole and
Difference of Hole = 0.015
Clearance hole. Take half of the
Difference of Screw = 0.0186
difference which is represents
Outer Boundary of Screw = 0.2640 Outer Boundary of Hole = 0.301 equal bilateral tolerance value .
+Inner Boundary of Screw = 0.2268 +Inner Boundary of Hole = 0.271
-------------------------------------- --------------------------------------
hole, add Inner and Outer
Sum = 0.4908 Sum = 0.572
of Sum of OB & IB of Screw = 0.2454 of Sum of OB & IB of Hole = 0.286
Sum ` Difference of Hole = 0.286
mean width for either Threaded
Sum ` Difference of Screw = 0.2454
`0.0186 `0.015 Hole and Clearance hole (for
analysis purpose)
of Sum ` of Diff of Screw = of Sum ` of Diff of Hole =
0.1430 `0.0075 8. Again, for Threaded Hole and
0.1227 `0.0093
Clearance hole, take mean of
values in step #2 and #3. This
133 i2
Locating parts to create MIN Gap
Configuration
134 i2
Steps in Creating a Loop Diagram
1. The Loop begins on the left edge/face of

slot and proceeds in the +ve (right )
1 direction to the center of threaded hole (or
3 screw).
2. Then it continues in same (+ve) direction
until right side of outer boundary of the
threaded hole. Note that we must stay on
the same part until we have to jump to
next mating part
3. Now the loop reverses. Jumping to mating
part features in ve direction (left) to the
2 center of clearance hole.
4. Finally, from center of clearance hole we
4 continue in same ve direction to the end
of loop ie. Left edge/face of the block.
135 i2
Loop Diagram : Values Printed
Step 1: +0.753`0.002 Slot
1 Step 2: +0.1227`0.0093 Mounted Screw

2 Step 3: -0.1430`0.0075 Clearance Hole
Step 4: -0.720`0.002 Block
136 i2
Calculate MIN gap
MIN GAP 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)
0.8757- 0.8630 = 0.0127 = Mean Gap
0.0127 0.0208 = -0.0081 (Interference Max)
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
Locating parts to create MAX Gap
Configuration
138 i2
Steps in Creating a Loop Diagram
1. The Loop begins on the left edge/face of

slot and proceeds in the +ve (right )
4
direction to the center of threaded hole (or
3 screw).
2. Then it continues in opposite (-ve)
direction until left side of outer boundary
of the threaded hole. Note that we must
stay on the same part until we have to
jump to next mating part
3. Now the loop reverses. Jumping to mating
part features in +ve direction (left) to the
center of clearance hole.
2
4. Finally, from center of clearance hole we
1 continue in same ve direction to the end
of loop ie. Left edge/face of the block.
139 i2
Loop Diagram : Values Printed
Step 1: +0.753`0.002 Slot

4
Step 2: -0.1227`0.0093 Mounted Screw
3 Step 3: +0.1430`0.0075 Clearance Hole
Step 4: -0.720`0.002 Block
140 i2
Calculate MAX gap
MIN GAP MIN GAP

- + ` Tolerance - + `Tolerance
0.7530 0.0020
0.1227 0.0093
0.1430 0.0075
0.7200 0.0020
0.8427 0.8960 0.0208 (Totals)
0.8960 - 0.8427 = 0.0533 = Mean Gap
0.0533 0.0208 = -0.0741 (MAX GAP)
141 i2
Conclusions
l 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
l 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.
l 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.
l 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
l Therefore, if the parts are allowed to assembly naturally (not pushed to
extremes at the assembly stage), they will fit w/o interference.
142 i2
Looking at the case from Different Angle
l Once the WCB are proven compatible, another check

is to determine minimum airspace between WCOB of
mounted screw and WCIB of slot and the maximum
wall thickness between WCIB of clearance hole and
WCOB of block.
l If there is more airspace than wall thickness, no

interference should occur when assembled naturally.
143 i2
Min Airspace V/s Max Wall Thickness
The Loop analysis approach assumes

the airspace between screw and
clearance hole will be used to push the
parts in most undesirable assembly
conditions,
However, if we assume that this

airspace is used to push the parts into
most desirable and practical condition;
the analysis proves the parts will
assemble
144 i2
Steps involved in calculating MIN Air space
On Slot Part
1. MMC of the Screw =

+ Geo Tolerance for Threaded Holes =
Watch signs in this
--------------------------------------------------------------------- column
Sum = Virtual Condition of the Screw =
of Virtual Condition of Screw =
2. MMC of the Slot =

- Geo Tol for the Slot =
------------------------------------------------------
Difference = Inner Boundary Of Slot =
of Inner Boundary of Slot =
3. of Inner Boundary of Slot =

- of Virtual Condition of Screw =
--------------------------------------------------------------
Difference = Min Airspace between the screw surface & Slot wall =
145 i2
Steps involved in calculating MAX wall
thickness on Block Part
1. MMC of the Clearance Holes =

- Geo Tolerance for Holes = Watch signs in this
--------------------------------------------------------------------- column
Difference = Virtual Condition of the Hole (IB) =
of Virtual Condition of Hole =
2. MMC of the Block =

+ Geo Tol for the Block =
------------------------------------------------------
Sum = Outer Boundary of Block =
of Outer Boundary of Block =
3. of Outer Boundary of Block =

- of Virtual Condition of Hole =
--------------------------------------------------------------
Difference = MAX Wall thickness between the Hole surface & Block wall =
146 i2
Steps involved in calculating MIN Air space
and MAX wall thickness
Minimum Airspace =
- Maximum Wall Thickness =
-----------------------------------------------------
Difference = Clearance between Rail and Block per side =
147 i2
Calculated MIN Air space
1. MMC of the Screw = 0.250

+ Geo Tolerance for Threaded Holes = 0.014
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Sum = Virtual Condition of the Screw = 0.264
of Virtual Condition of Screw = 0.132
2. MMC of the Slot = 1.504

- Geo Tol for the Slot = 0.002
------------------------------------------------------
Difference = Inner Boundary Of Slot = 1.502
of Inner Boundary of Slot = 0.751
3. of Inner Boundary of Slot = 0.751

- of Virtual Condition of Screw = 0.132
--------------------------------------------------------------
Difference = Min Airspace between the screw surface & Slot wall = 0.619
148 i2
Calculated MAX Wall thickness
1. MMC of the Clearance Holes = 0.276

- Geo Tolerance for Holes = 0.005
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Difference = Virtual Condition of the Hole (IB) = 0.271
of Virtual Condition of Hole = 0.1355
2. MMC of the Block = 1.442

+ Geo Tol for the Block = 0.002
------------------------------------------------------
Sum = Outer Boundary of Block = 1.444
of Outer Boundary of Block = 0.722
3. of Outer Boundary of Block = 0.7220

- of Virtual Condition of Hole = 0.1355
--------------------------------------------------------------
Difference = MAX Wall thickness between the Hole surface & Block wall =
0.5865
149 i2
Now, calculate min clearance between rail
and block per side
Minimum Airspace = 0.6190

- Maximum Wall Thickness = 0.5865
-----------------------------------------------------
Difference = Clearance between Rail and Block per side = 0.0325
This value also represents Minimum clearance with parts adjusted optimally for Assembly
150 i2
MAX Gap calculation: Discussion on
Perpendicularity as factor
l MAX gap can be viewed in two ways:

First considers perpendicularity tolerance on both rail slot and block
Second, does not consider perpendicularity.
l Second approach assumes that more uniform maximum gap is

created only when both features (slot and block) are at their LMC
and are perfectly perpendicular to bottom faces.
l It seems logical that both are worth knowing.
151 i2
MAX Gap calculation: With & without
152 i2
MAX Gap calculation: without
- + Part/Feature
0.7540 Slot
0.1134 Mounted Screw
0.1505 Clearance Hole
0.7190 Block
0.8324 0.9045 Totals
(0.9045 - 0.8324) = Min Gap = 0.0721
153 i2
154 i2
Session #8: Tolerance Stack-up Analysis for
Single Part
Please read the part

drawing and write down
your findings
155 i2
Single Part
l Objectives:
Perform variety of single-part tolerance stack-up calculations using

l Two single stacked composite position controls
l Datum features referenced at MMC
l Profile of surface
Analyze envelopes of perfect form and geometric tolerances of
perfect orientation at MMC
Calculate minimum and maximum axial separations
Understanding SEP REQ notes effect on gaging requirements and
effect of multiple DRFs in accumulating tolerances
Determine MAX and MIN wall thickness using different approaches
156 i2
What are we trying to find out in single
part?
lWe are going to calculate minimum wall thickness between surface of

small hole in bottommost row and bottom edge of part as shown in figure
left.
lWhat factors control this wall thickness?
l From where the bottom most hole controlled from? Is it edge of
part? It is controlled from Datum feature B (a four way locator)
lNote that datum feature B also has positional tolerance of n0.050
at MMC. This tolerance grow up to n0.060 if datum feature B is
Min wall produced at LMC
lThis means datum feature B axis can lie anywhere in n0.060 max
when produced at LMC, lets assume it lies on circumference of
n0.060 position tolerance circle towards bottom edge of part (wor st
case).
lNotethat wherever datum feature B hole ends up; small hole is
measured from its (datum B s) axis.
lSmall hole has no positional tolerance if produced at MMC, but i ts
positional tolerance can grow up to n0.010 if hole is produced at
LMC. We will assume that it is worst case.
157 i2
part?
lThe FCF for bottommost hole references B and C datums at

MMC
lThough FCF references C; the datum features C s role is to
prevent part rotation and since bottommost hole is
positioned from datum feature B, C is not a factor in
calculation. Datum C is two way control
lSince datum feature B is referenced at MMC, gage pin size
for datum B will be of size = virtual condition for B = n0.245.
If datum B is produced at n0.245, it will hug gage pin. But if
Min wall
datum B is produced at larger size (within size limits), the par t
may shift aside until Datum B feature surface hits the gage
pin.
lRemember gage pin axis is datum feature B and not axis of
AMS/AME.
lIfdatum feature B is produced at n0.255 (LMC), the part
can shift radially by 0.005 or diametrically 0.010
158 i2
part?
lThis means the bottommost hole can further shift towards

bottom most edge by 0.005; thus thinning wall further!
lSuch shift due to clearance between gage pin and datum
feature of size (FOS) is called as Datum Shift OR DRF
displacement.
lTherefore, the bottommost hole shifts downward towards part
edge by an amount equal to = datum shift/2+positional tolerance
of datum feature B at LMC/2= 0.010/2 + 0.060/2 = 0.035
Min wall lFind the resultant condition (outer boundary) size of bottom
most hole = (0.130+.01) = 0.140. Mean of this = 0.070.
lNow, add 0.070+0.035 = 0.105. This value indicates how far
the bottommost hole s surface can go from its true position
in worst case. Remember this number. Double of this = 0.210
which is outer boundary of hole in worst case.
159 i2
Begin the loop now
lStart 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,
We used fundamental principals to calculate min wall thickness
160
which accounted for datum shifts and bonus tolerances
i2
Same example, solved using traditional
approach of chart and loop
l We calculated worst
case outer boundary of
bottommost hole as
n0.210.
l Now, calculate worst
case inner boundary in
the same manner.
Expressed as equal bilateral

toleranced dimension as
n0.130`0.080 or in terms of radius
as R0.065`0.040
161 i2
Now construct Loop Diagram and print
values in chart
Using traditional loop

and chart method, you
can find both: minimum
and maximum wall
thickness!
162 i2
Using the same traditional approach to
calculate right-side wall thickness
We know by now that for all 28 hole

pattern, the mean radius`mean
tolerance is R0.065`0.040 and this
number will be used everywhere to
calculate wall thickness or separation
between holes
Can you calculate min and max distance

between center of hole and right side edge of
part?
163 i2
Using the same traditional approach,
calculate max/min wall thickness between
datum features B,C
Steps:
1. Calculate inner and outer WCB for
datum features B and C (consider
only lower segment in composite
position callout. Why not upper?)
2. How to calculate inner and outer
boundaries for Basic Dimension
2.000 between datum features B and
C??
3. Create a loop and make a chart
164 i2
datum features B,C
Now, calculate min and max axial separation
165 i2
datum features B and E
Steps:
1. Calculate inner and outer WCB for
datum features B and C (consider
only upper segment in composite
position callout. Why not lower?)
2. How to calculate inner and outer
boundaries for Basic Dimension
0.375 between datum features B and
E??
3. Create a loop and make a chart
166 i2
167 i2
168 i2
Same Example, but now with different GD&T
Scheme
169 i2
Calculating MIN and MAX axial separation
between datum features B and C
lThese two holes are controlled to each

other and datum plane A
lTheir relationship with datum A is simply
orientation, ie. The hole axis is
perpendicular to datum A
lThe analysis can be thought in terms of
tolerance zones or virtual conditions.
170 i2
between datum features B and C using
tolerance zones
lA cylindrical tolerance zone exists at each

end of basic dimension 2.000
lThe tolerance zone diameter is zero at
holes MMC (0.245)
lThe tolerance zone diameter can grow up
to 0.01 at holes LMC (0.255)
171 i2
tolerance zones
172 i2
Virtual Condition Boundaries
lThe Virtual Condition for each hole is

0.245
lSince functional gage would be made at
virtual condition size, we would consider
gage pins of 0.245 size and these gage
pins (virtual boundaries) would be 2.000
apart from center to center
lIf the holes are produced at 0.245, they
will hug the gage pins as shown.
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))
lIfthe holes are produced at LMC size (0.255), it could result i n following
configurations
173 i2
Virtual Condition Boundaries
OR
174 i2
Calculating MIN and MAX edge-axis
separation between datum feature B and left
edge of part
MIN- MAX
175 i2
edge of part
lThe profile control relates the outside surface of

part to two holes (datum feature B and C)
lConsider upper left corner of part and datum
feature hole B and also profile callout
lWe can think of profile (edge of part al around)
can grow or shrink by +/-0.025 per surface. This
could be thought of affecting two basic dimensions
by `0.025
lSo, just considering profile tolerance of 0.050, we
could see that the distance between the actually
produced edge of part (profile) and axis of the hole
is 0.500 `0.25 (0.475 - 0.525) and 0.375 `0.25
(0.350 0.400)
overall dimensions of 2.000 (1.625+0.375) and 3.125 a re affected by `0.025 per surface.
lSimilarly,
Therefore overall dimensions of the part are 2.000 `0.050 x 3.125 `0.050
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
edge of part
lBut,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 are the illustrations of extreme configurations:
OR
MAX DIST=0.025+0.500+0.005=0.530 MIN DIST=0.500- 0.025-0.005=0.470
177 i2
Calculating MIN and MAX wall thickness
between datum feature B and left edge of
part
MAX WALL THK=0.530-0.1275=0.4025 MIN WALL THK=0.470 -0.1275=0.3725
178 i2
between datum feature B and left edge of
part using Loop Diagram
179 i2
between bottommost small hole and right
edge of part
Calculations for
bottommost small hole
The Loop analysis can be

done with these numbers,
but we must consider that
the profile tolerance on right
edge is `0.025 with an
additional shift of 0.005 ;
which is a separate
requirement from the 28
holes on another `0.005
(since the edges could shift
one way and 28 hole pattern
shifts opposite way)
180 i2
between bottommost small hole and right
edge of part : Loop Diagram
OR
181 i2
Calculating MIN wall thickness between
bottommost small hole and right edge of part
: Alternate method
182 i2
Calculating MAX wall thickness between
bottommost small hole and right edge of part
: Alternate method
183 i2
1. Calculate MIN and MAX

wall thickness and axis
separation from left
edge of the part the
n0.125 `0.005 hole
closest to it.

wall thickness from the
bottom edge of the part
to the n0.125 `0.005
hole closest to it.
184 i2

wall thickness between
B and C holes when
they are produced at
LMC
B hole to the top edge
of the part
lower right n04.0-4.3
hole to the right edge
and bottom edge of the
part
185 i2

wall thickness between
surface of one hole
n0.570-0.590 and the
Outside Diameter
186 i2
1. Calculate MIN wall

thickness between hole
pattern to Datum feature
C
187 i2
a Five part assembly
188 i2
a Five part assembly
Objectives:
l Calculating tolerance stack-ups on a five part rotating

assembly with a variety of geometric controls such as:
position, perpendicularity, parallelism, profile, flatness,
projected tolerance zones, runout, total runout,
concentricity, positional coaxiality
l Learn Simplifying a complex situation
l Calculate radial clearance and interference
189 i2
190 i2
191 i2
192 i2
193 i2
194 i2
Step#1: Check if housing inner width is
sufficient to house part #2,3,4
1. Shortest pertinent length on part#1 is 250-0.5 = 249.5

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. So, the only important factor is housings inner width of 249.5
4. The parallelism tolerance of 0.2 on datum E of part#1 is a factor
5. Profile tolerance of 0.2 on datum A of part#1 relative to Datum D is factor
since it controls attitude of datum A surfaces relative to datum D
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
195 i2
Step#1: Check if housing inner width is
sufficient to house part #2,3,4
lPart #2 has MMC size = 12.8

lPart #3 has MMC size = 100.0. Parallelism tolerance of
0.05 on datum plane B gets accommodated in MMC size
limit automatically
lPart #4 : Start from datum plane A, travel towards right
a basic dimension of 48.75 up to center plane of last
width feature of 15`0.1, and add of is outer boundary
= (15.1+0.0 (geo tol at MMC)) = 15.1; take of it = 7.55
lNow add all above: 12.8+100.0+48.75+7.55=169.1.
This is the minimum space needed to house parts 2,3,4
lComing back to inner width of housing; which is 249.5 -
0.2 (attitude tolerance due to leaning of walls) = 249.3
lSo, the clearance = 249.3 169.1 = 80.2, so we have plenty of clearance to house all three parts.
196 i2
Step#2: Check if housing inner height is
sufficient to house part #2,3,4: Radial gap
study
lParts 2,3,4 are pushed upward to

create a minimum gap configuration of
assembly
lNote one line places in assembly
where mating parts respective features
coincide.
lPart #4: Outer boundary =
(n251.0mmc+n0.2 geo tol) = n251.2,
of it = R125.5
lClearance hole: n8.8LMC = R4.4
lPart #3: Threaded hole treated as
mounted screw: inner boundary of
screw=n7.76 (LMC of screw)-n0.30 (geo
tol)=n7.46; n7.46-0.05 (pattern shift due
to Dm reference on threaded
hole)=n7.41 = inner boundary of screw
with pattern shift; of it = R3.705
lLMC of D = n99.95; of it =
R49.975
197 i2
Step#2: Check if housing inner height is
sufficient to house part #2,3,4: Radial gap
study
lPart #2: n100.05 (LMC of D)+n0.10

(positional tolerance on D at LMC) = n100.15.
Take of it = R50.075
ln115 (LMC of E), take 1/5 of it = R57.5
lPart#1: Center hole. n115.52 (LMC of hole) +
n0.20 (Geo tol at LMC) = n115.72 (outer
boundary of hole). Take of it = R57.86
198 i2
Create Loop and Print values in the chart.
199 i2
Challenges in this example were: Factors
and Non-factors in Gap analysis.
Factors / Non-factors in Part#1:
Is Datum C a factor? Yes, the

inner boundary of datum C needs
to be accounted since this will
decide amount of gap. R137.25
The outer boundary of center

clearance hole is also a factor,
since movement of this hole
affects the other parts related to it.
The outer boundary of this hole is
n115.72 or R 57.86. The outer
boundary allows the equal
movement of shaft (Part#2)
200 i2
Is Datum E a factor? Yes, The most

airspace between datum feature E and
clearance hole on part#1 would occur
when datum E is at LMC and perfect
perpendicular to C. So, perpendicularity
tolerance is not a factor in this analysis.
LMC of datum feature E is n115 or R57.5
Since datum feature D is alignment

feature between part #2 and #3, the
threaded holes are not factor in this
analysis. Datum D has two geometric
tolerances , but since location of datum
feature D will determine location of part#3,
the position callout is a factor and
perpendicularity is not. Since the largest
movement and largest size of D allows
largest movement of part#3, the outer
boundary of D is n100.05+n0.1 =
n100.15 or R50.075
201 i2
Is Datum D a factor? Yes, The most airspace

between datum feature D and bore on part#2
would occur when datum D is at LMC and perfect
perpendicular to C. So, perpendicularity
tolerance is not a factor in this analysis. LMC of
datum feature D is n99.95 or R49.975
Since datum feature D is alignment feature

between part #2 and #3, the clearance holes are
not factor in this analysis. The threaded holes
move the screws around and create alignment
between part#3 and part#4, therefore pattern of
four holes is a factor. If LMC screws are moved
by the threaded holes as a group off of the datum
axis D, it would eventually move part#4. Also
since pattern of threaded holes reference datum
feature D at MMC, the pattern may shift
additional amount if D is produced at LMC. So
the inner boundary of screws mounted in
threaded holes and shifting as a group would be
n7.76(LMC Screw)-n0.3 (geo tol)-0.05(pattern
shift)=n7.41 or R3.705
202 i2
The clearance holes connect part#4 to

threaded holes in part#3, but since these
clearance holes are positioned only to
each other and held perpendicular to
datum A, and other pertinent features are
related to axis of these four holes, the
position tolerance on these four holes is
not a factor. The movement between part
#3 and 4 is governed by clearance
between screws and clearance holes. The
LMC of clearance holes is n8.8; R4.4
The OD of part#4 is also a major factor.

The movement of this OD off the axis of
four hole pattern (datum B), effectively
increases the overall size, therefore
runout tolerance is a factor. Thus the
outer boundary of part#4 is
n251+0.2=n251.2 or R125.6
203 i2
l 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
l This way, many parts can be analyzed in a complex assembly witho ut

getting lost. Remember, its done ONE PART AT A TIME. Thats why
doing single part analysis helps engineer to do assembly analysi s.
l 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.
204 i2
205 i2
Trigonometry and Proportions in Tolerance
Stack-up Analysis
206 i2
Stack-up Analysis
l Objectives:
l Understanding the role of trigonometry and proportions in

tolerance stack-up and geometric tolerancing
l Understanding the effect of Rocking Datums
l Know how skewed vertical stacks affect horizontal housing
requirements.
l Mixing trigonometry and algebra determining stack-up
results
l Consider the rules in Y14.5.1 (Math Standard) for
constructing a valid Datum
207 i2
Stack-up Analysis
l The examples we worked up till included mainly addition and

subtraction; however many situation calls for trigonometric aspe cts
while calculating stack-ups.
l Consider flatness, which controls rocking of datum features can

affect stack-up analysis
l Y14.5M states that the datum feature is to be rocked to an

optimum assembly condition, in other words, if it rocks, rock it until
the part checks good to simulate the manner in which assembler
would rock the part until it is assembled.
l 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.
208 i2
Stack-up Analysis
l If the rock point is at the center of part, it is difficult to d etermine

that one is to rock the part one way or other which way the
assembler will choose?
l To summarize, if rocking is the option chosen, (over say,

shimming it up to equalize the work), that even if there were only
two ways to rock the part, there is only 50% chance that the
assembler and the inspector will choose the same way.
209 i2
l In normal GD&T approaches, it is assumed that these
chance will workout optimally. However, in tolerance
stack-up analysis, the approach is exactly opposite. If
datum feature has rock, the part is to be rocked until it
interferes! So, how much a rock would allow part to
lean (imperfect orientation) must be calculated to
determine the amount it would contribute to the
possibility of say, interference.
210 i2
Example of Rocking Datum and proportions

lOut of flatness is shown on datum A on one

side of part center; since this is worst case
than flatness tolerance being evenly spread
on entire surface
lY14.5.1 states that in order to be a valid
primary datum feature, the points used to
construct a datum plane (3 high points of
contact minimum) must not lie solely in one
of the outer thirds of the surface. So its
possible to conceive of slightly worse
situation than this, but we are restricting to
rocking at center point of part
lThe illustration shows that flatness
tolerance allows datum A to lean by an
amount equal to flatness tolerance = 0.002. If
the part is inspected on surface that does not
lean; but assembled on surface that leans,
the pin will be forced to lean with with it, by
an amount = 0.006
211 i2

lNormally this is ignored while calculating

worst mating conditions of features like 6.000
length pin. We normally calculate worst
mating condition diameter = MMC size + geo
tol at MMC = 1.010+0.005 = 1.015.
lBut with additional radial lean of 0.006, the
worst mating condition can be seen as 1.015
+ 2x0.006=1.027
lAlso, while calculating the minimum gap
between this shaft and the housing into which
it fits, as per procedure we used in previous
sessions, we would probably be working with
radii, therefore of 1.027 = R0.5135
212 i2

lParallelism is also a factor that can be

related to the problems that flatness creates.
Parallelism when used on planer surfaces,
controls flatness and angle to datums
referenced.
lIn the illustration on left, produced part has
crest in middle (rock point) and surfaces
sloping on either side of rock point.
lSo, when two or more such parts are
stacked on top of one another, and each
having problem as shown, such assembly
would exhibit a problem of not fitting other
assemblies/housings or closing holes on parts
into which pins ore screws had to fit. (see next
slide)
213 i2

lInitially,
the three parts were aligned with
center, left edge and right edge aligned,
then the parts are either to left or right
lThis would assume that interior part
features such as holes (not shown here)
have been positioned from one of these
features as secondary datum feature.
lEach part during inspection has been
adjusted 9shimmed up) to allow high point
shown at the bottom center of part 1 and
2 to establish the datum plane, but during
This much space assembly parts have been rocked instead
would be needed
of equalized.
if parts were
stacked this way lThis is just one speculation as what can
and allowed to happen due to out of flatness of bottom of
rock this way
parts 1,2. Many such scenarios are
possible.
214 i2

lUnlike previous configuration, this configuration

calculates the space needed to house these parts if
they were stacked with their edges aligned and then
rocked in either direction.
This much space would be

needed if parts were stacked
this way and allowed to rock in
either direction
215 i2
Calculating overall housing dimension
requirements
lTo calculate overall housing space

requirements, visualize parts stacked as
shown.
Part #1 lWe need to calculate offset of bottom left
most point on part #3 from the bottom left
most point on part #1
lSince part may rock on either side, the
Part #2
offset calculated must be doubled then
added to length (400mm) of part#1.
Part #3
216 i2
requirements
217 i2
requirements
218 i2
requirements
219 i2
requirements
l Therefore offset = a2+a6 = 0.04995+0.100=0.14995

(say 0.150)
l Hence, housing size must increase by 0.150 on each

side = 400 + (2 * 0.150) = 400.300
220 i2
Simplified Summary of previous Example
221 i2
Conclusions from the Exercise
l Purpose of exercise was to show how complex the

calculations can be when one assumes certain
flatness, parallelism and perpendicularity problems
may occur.
l You may want to use computer software to simulate

such situations, but you must study the software to
make certain that they are sufficient to simulate wide
range of possibilities that may occur and concerns you
most
222 i2
Removing out-of-flatness from our
example
lAssume we have three parts assembly

and all parts are cylindrical.
lIn a situation, where we had a shaft
that passes / fits through the center hole
of all these three parts, the parallelism
of top and bottom of part sandwiched
between other two would be a factor.
lThe virtual condition of hole in part#3
would have to be increased beyond
0.240 virtual condition boundary shared
by part#1, part#2 because of out-of-
parallelism between top and bottom of
part#2.
223 i2
Removing out-of-flatness from our
example
lThis amount in increase in virtual

condition diameter is directly
proportional to parallelism tolerance and
can be expressed as:
lPtol/dia of part#2 = increase in VC for
part#3/thickness of part#3
lSo, in this case, 0.002/7=x/1; ie.
0.0002857 increase in VC of part#3s
hole.
lSo, the ? size in part#3s position
callout is = 0.2400+0.0003=0.2403
lAs is sometimes the case, the
increase is so small, it may be that once
calculated, may be ignored.
224 i2
Calculate the increase and the

VC for the hole in part#3,
given following changes to
figure in previous slide:
The parallelism tolerance

on part#2 to datum A =
0.020
The diameter of part#2 =
36.000
The thickness of part#3
= 16.000
225 i2
Session#11 : The Theory of Statistical
Probability
226 i2
The Theory of Statistical Probability
l Objectives:
l Convert arithmetically calculated tolerances to statistically

calculated tolerances.
l Use Root Sums Square (RSS) formula
l Comparing Worst-case and Statistical tolerances
l Reintegrating statistical tolerances into the assembly
227 i2
Background
l 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!
l 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.
l 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.
l 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)
l For example, in mating features that have size dimensions and also have
position tolerances, all four would affect their worst case.(see next slide)
228 i2
Background
l Under ASME Y14.5M-1994, size tolerance also controls feature s form

within size limits on all rigid parts. Position controls both: o rientation
(within position tolerance) and location.
l A part feature having size tolerance, consequently form, which i s also

positioned has to span all of its size tolerance, shape, angle a nd location
to be made at the worst case assembly conditions.
229 i2
Background
l Manufacturers that use Statistical Process Control, are generall y

believed to be in statistical control instead of Statistical cha os that
it would take to produce features at their worst!
l Such manufacturers will produce parts which when measured; will
found to follow a natural variation which forms a natural bell c urve
distribution of part dimensions.
l Such distributions will depict that large % of produced parts
measure close to average (nominal) dimension. The magnitude
and spread of dimensions will vary from the nominal by an amount
that can be represented in a graph known as Gaussian Frequency
Curve; where in the area under the curve represents 100% of the
parts produced. The height of the curves represents the times
dimensions have been produced for variable individual component
230 i2
Background
l The dispersion of dimensions

under the curve is described as
standard deviation and often
represented by letter s (sigma),
and calculated as:
lThe arithmetic mean +or- one

standard deviation (`1 s ) is often
described as containing 68.26% of the
produced parts under this normal curve.
By the same logic `2 s is 95.46% of
the total production and `3 s is
99.73%
231 i2
Root Sum Squares (RSS) Method
l So, the statistical probability can be applied to tolerance stac k-up analysis for
assemblies both with and without geometric tolerances.
l 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:
l Statistical probability has been practiced for many years and we ll

documented. Statistical approaches are more reliable for volume production.
For small production runs, the frequency curve tends to be skewe d from its
normal shape.
232 i2
Applying RSS: Steps Involved and Examples
l Steps: Once the worst case calculations (lets

call it as 100% tolerance stack-up analysis)
are done;
1. Using the RSS formula, calculate assembly tolerance

(lets call it as statistical probability tolerance)
2. Determine the percentage (%) ratio between statistical
probability tolerance and 100% assembly tolerance
3. Determine the increased statistical probability tolerances
to be re-distributed to the assembly s individual
components.
233 i2
RSS Calculations: Example#1
234 i2
235 i2
lSo, 259.08 254.00 = +5.08 = Mean Gap

lNow, take square root of 7.096760 = 7.096760
=2.6639744 = Statistical (RSS) tolerance.
lNow, determine % ratio between statistical
tolerance and worst case tolerance:
l2.6639744 (tolerance likely to be consumed) / 5.08
(worst case tolerance) = 0.5244044, so 2.6639744 is
approx. 52% of 5.08
l1 / 0.5244044 = 1.9069252 and 1.9069252 x
2.6639744 = 5.08 (original worst case tolerance)
lThusthe worst case calculations allow a gap of
5.08`5.08; ie. Max gap of 10.16 and min gap of 0.
lWhile the statistically calculated assembly
tolerance allows a gap of 5.08`2.66 and this is
amount of tolerance likely to be consumed in a
volume production scenario.
236 i2
l With the newly assigned statistically calculated tolerances,

l So, if we want to consume `5.08 tolerance, the
with each piece part given a tolerance of `0.485 for parts
piece part tolerance should be increased to 191% of
part#11 thru part#2, for a total of `4. 85 and part#1 with a
its initial value. Thus the `.254 (the tolerance
tolerance of `4. 85 , we have probability of `9.7.
originally given to part#11 thru part#2) becomes
1.91x`0.254 = `0.485. Similarly tolerance on part#1 l So,we would have a gap of 5.08`9.7 for a max gap of 14.78
becomes `4. 851 and min gap of 4.62. In other words, max interference of 4.62,
l This is the answer to the problem of what the but unlikely.
statistical tolerances for each part in the likely is that out of `9.7 , only `5.08 tolerance will be
l Most
assembly would be if calculated by RSS method consumed
l As per the statistical methods, the tolerance 0.485 = 0.235225 (part#2 thru part#11 tolerance)
originally assigned would not be fully consumed, the
worst case gap calculations given, 5.08`5.08, 0.235225 x 10 = 2.35225
becomes statistical probability within `3 s of 4.85 = 23.5225 (part#1s tolerance)
consuming only 5.08`2.66. This results in max gap
2.35225 + 23.5225 = 25.87475
of 7.74 and min gap of 2.42
Square root of 25.87475 = 25.87475 = 5.08
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
Bottom Left MIN Gap Calculations:

lWe converted all dimensions to equal
bilateral toleranced dimensions.
lAll basic dimensions had zero
tolerances.
lWe had slot and tab having both size
and geometric tolerance of position
which we converted to +/ - toleranced
dimension.
238 i2
l So, 158.385 154.595 = +3.790 = Mean Gap

l Now,take square root of 0.50605 = 0.50605
=0.7113719 = Statistical (RSS) tolerance.
l Now, determine % ratio between statistical
tolerance and worst case tolerance:
l 0.7113719(tolerance likely to be consumed) /
0.910 (worst case tolerance) = 0.7817273, so
0.7817273 is approx. 78% of 0.910
l1 / 0.7817273 = 1.2792184 and 1.2792184 x
0.7113719 = 0.910 (original worst case tolerance)
l Thus the worst case calculations allow a min gap
of 3.790-0.910 = 2.88.
l While the statistically calculated assembly
tolerance allows a min gap of 3.790-0.71=3.08
and this is amount of gap likely to occur in a
volume production scenario.
239 i2
l With the newly assigned statistically calculated tolerances,

l So, if we want to consume `0.910 tolerance, the
with each piece part given a tolerance as 0.070 (slot), + 0.070
piece part tolerance should be increased to 128% of
its initial value. Thus the `.0.055 (the tolerance (tab) + 0.128 (wall) + 0.896 (overall dim) = `1.164
originally given to slot and tab) becomes l So, we would have a min gap of 3.790-1.164 = 2.626, but
1.28x`0.055 = `0.0704. Similarly tolerance on wall unlikely.
becomes 1.28x`0.100= `.128. And the tolerance on
l Mostlikely is that out of `1.164 , only `0 to.910 tolerance will
overall dimension becomes 1.28 x `0.7= `0.896
be consumed
l This is the answer to the problem of what the
0.070 = 0.0049 (slots new tolerance squared)
statistical tolerances for each part in the
assembly would be if calculated by RSS method 0.070 = 0.0049 (tabs new tolerance squared)
l As per the statistical methods, the tolerance 0.128 = 0.016384 (walls new tolerance squared)
originally assigned would not be fully consumed, the
worst case MIN gap calculations given, 3.790-0.910 0.896 = 0.806404 (overall dims new tolerance squared)
= 2.88, becomes statistical probability within `3 s of Add all above = 0.832588
consuming only 3.790-0.71=3.08 MIN gap
Square root of 0.832588 = 0.832588 = 0.910
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
Assumptions Under RSS Calculations
l 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!
l Those not employing statistical process control in manufacturing should not use
the RSS tolerancing methodology described now.
l RSS method also assumes that parts produced for assembly have be en mixed and
components are picked randomly for assembly.
l The logic of RSS model is interesting it basically allows more tolerance for those
manufacturers that need it least : those using SPC controls!
l 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 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.
241 i2
Assumptions Under RSS Calculations
l The 100% tolerancing scares many engineers and they are

uncomfortable when they see that a line fit possibility exist be tween
mating features. Such possibility exists when inner boundary (of
holes/slots) are same as outer boundary of mating parts such as
shafts/tabs.
l If that makes them uncomfortable, then allowing more tolerances using

RSS calculations, and consequently a greater possibility of interference
should make them even more restless!
242 i2
Benderizing Tolerances
l In 1968, a statistician: A. Bender wrote a paper for SAE entitled

Statistical Tolerancing as it relates to Quality Control and Des igner.
l In his paper, he suggested a safety factor added to RSS formula.
l Instead of taking mere square root of sum of squares of individu al feature
tolerances; he suggested a factor of 1.5 be multiplied by the answer of
RSS calculations. In other words 1.5 times the square root of the sum of
squares of individual feature tolerances
l Why? .. It was so that additional tolerance given to features of part in
assembly was not so risky. It is known that, most cases, produci ng
features at their worst case condition is unlikely, but it is also known that it
happens!
l Some studies have shown that the RSS methodology doesnt accurately
reflect the production scenario, so having cushion would be wise.
243 i2
Reintegrating the Statistical Tolerance into
the Assembly
l Once the statistical tolerance is calculated, it has be integrated

back (re-distribute to individual components and features) into
assembly which we have done in previous examples.
l In case of first example of 12 parts assembly, we had only +/-
tolerances and therefore reintegration was a simple process the
mean dimension remains the same and each tolerance gets
multiplied by 1.91, ie. Tolerance of `0.254 got changed to
`0.485.
l In second example, the process of reintegrating statistical
tolerance is slightly difficult; since the inner and outer bound aries
for slot and tab are calculated from collective effects of size and
geometric tolerance (position); we need to apportion the statistical
tolerance to both: size and position.
244 i2
the Assembly
l 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.
l Now, we need to apportion this increased tolerance to size and p osition. To do this, we simply
reverse the process
l Slot:
6.095 x 2 = 12.19 = slot width
` 0.07 x 2 = `0.14 = tolerance on slot width
12.19 `0.14 are the slot dimensions.
Therefore inner boundary of slot = 12.19 0.14 = 12.05
And, outer boundary of slot = 12.19+0.14 = 12.33
Since original TOP on slot was 0.05m, we will increase this also by 128%=0.064 m
Similarly, TOP at slot LMC was 0.11l, which when increased by 128% becomes 0.1408 l.
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
245 i2
the Assembly
l Cross check the reintegration .

The inner boundary = 12.114 (MMC) 0.064 (geo tol at MMC) = 12.05
The outer boundary = 12.189 (LMC) + 0.0.064 (geo tol at LMC) + 0 .075
(bonus tolerance at LMC = 12.189-12.114) = 12.33
So, the reintegration was successful.
l The key in this process was to use the % that all tolerances wer e
increased to 128% in this case.
l 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.
246 i2
Using Statistical Tolerances on Drawings
l The statistical tolerances thus calculated are

identified with <ST> symbol. When both the statistical
tolerance and the smaller arithmetic tolerance are
shown, only those facilities using SPC controls are to
be allowed the larger <ST> tolerance.
247 i2
Methods for calculating Statistical
Tolerances
l Methods for calculating statistical tolerances vary from company to

company and in case of complex assemblies, its done with the
help of computer software.
l One such known method is Monte` Carlo method and relates to

simulating random nature of manufacturing process with random
number stream generation which will in turn simulate dimensions
of the part of an assembly. Given a knowledge of manufacturing
capability, random numbers are generated to simulate process
results. Thereafter careful averaging and multiple simulations with
varying samples, one arrives at the likely amount of tolerance t hat
will be consumed.
248 i2
Summarizing Reintegration of Statistical
Tolerances into Assembly
Final Answer
249 i2
Calculate Statistical Tolerances for the Wall, Slot,

Tab and Overall dimension using RSS
methodology
250 i2
Using the drawing below from Session #5, Calculate Statistical T olerances to be reintegrated
into assembly for all features used in minimum gap calculation. Instead of using the
standard RSS formula, use the following RSS formula with a 1.5 safety correction factor.
TA = 1.5 x T12+ T 22+ T 32+ T 42+ T 52+ T 62
251 i2
Miscellaneous
252 i2
GD&T Reference Chart
253 i2
Dimensioning Habits (?)
254 i2
Suggested Readings & References
l ASME Y14.5M-1994 Geometric Dimensioning and Tolerancing

l ASME Y14.5.1M-1994 Mathematical Definition of Dimensioning and Tolerancing Pri ncipals
l Geometrics IIIm - Lowell W. Foster - The best book on GD&T from a technical point of view.
l Geometric Dimensioning and Tolerancing: Applications and Techniq ues for Use in Design,
Manufacturing, and Inspection - James D. Meadows - Not so in depth but more practical
l Tolerance Design: A Handbook for Developing Optimal Specificatio ns Clyde M. Creveling -
More general approach, very academic but still a reference on the subject of tolerance analysis
l CAD/CAM Theory and Practice : Ibrahim Zeid (Dedicates a chapter on Mechanical
Tolerancing) A good reference book.(< Rs.500/-)
l Interpretation of Geometric Dimensioning and Tolerancing : Danie l Puncochar. Good examples
and explanation on various Geometric Tolerances.
l Dimensioning & Tolerancing Handbook : Paul Drake Jr.
l References from ETI Mailbag
All books are priced in US$ 40 -US$125 range.
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

Olerance Stackup Course PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Olerance Stackup Course PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Welcome to a Course On

Tolerance Stack-up Analysis using Co-ordinate

Satyam Venture Engineering Services

l CAD Data InterOperability : Consistent

l InterChangeability: Predicting Dimensional

CAD Data InterOperability:

Software Solutions For:

Quality Services for:

Software Solutions For:

Quality Services for:

l Training Programs Launched:

Fundamentals of GD&T based upon ASME Y14.5M : ~36hrs

l Training Programs Under Development (Tentative release by Oct 05)

l Total 11 Sessions; 3days (June 23,24 and 25 , 2005)

How to calculate mean dimensions with equal

Tolerance Stack-up Analysis (also called as Gap

Its a logical process broken in few steps

l Step #4 (Basic Rules):

l Step #5 (Basic Rules):

The Designer must deduce what factors are pertinent through

The judgment of designer is critical in these determinations.

l Add all +ve and ve dimensions which will calculate your

l Then we must add sum of equal bilateral tolerances (1/2

l Then we must subtract the sum of equal bilateral

l Again any ve value for minimum or maximum gaps

l Maximum gaps are maximum clearance (or in case of

l Minimum gaps are minimum clearance (or in case of

l Few Important Concepts of Tolerance Stack-up

There is NO difference between equal, unequal or unilaterally

Convert following Dimensions to an equal bilateral toleranced dimensions

Boundaries are generated by collective effects of

There are two types of boundaries

l Virtual Condition boundary (VCB)

l FCFs that use m (MMC symbol), generate constant

VCB for internal FOS such as hole = MMC Size Boundary

VCB for external FOS such as pin = MMC Size boundary +

VC Boundaries are Constant and do not vary based upon actual

l FCFs that use l (LMC symbol), generate constant

VCB for internal FOS such as hole = LMC Size Boundary +

VCB for external FOS such as pin = LMC Size boundary -

VC Boundaries are Constant and do not vary based upon actual

l RC Boundaries are non constant in nature and

l When RFS (Regardless of Feature Size)

Hole MMC Concept

Hole LMC Concept

Hole RFS Concept

Since its a RFS Callout, no virtual condition

Only if the hole has a significant

Therefore we are ignoring

Shaft MMC Concept

Shaft LMC Concept

Shaft RFS Concept

In case of RFS Callout, one may want to consider

This applies only if shaft length is significant. For

Therefore we are ignoring out-of-straightness

For Internal FOS controlled at MMC / LMC:

For External FOS controlled at MMC / LMC:

To determine min and max gap for a simple

l Perform the calculations

l Cavity in part#1 has limit dimensions (392.43

Add limit dimensions : 392.43 + 384.81=777.24

parts MMC (1)

parts LMC (2)