Tolerance Design

© All Rights Reserved

0 views

Tolerance Design

© All Rights Reserved

- DOE Taguchi
- Chumacera SKF en Pulgadas
- Fits and Tolerances
- Sans 282
- Stainless Technical Information
- Measures of Dispersion
- Dimensional tolerances - ISO3302-1.pdf
- 9295
- gdtnt-8
- ppSpec - Chemflo
- US Size Range_R
- TH Design
- 539-542
- Vesconite Bushing Design
- Variance
- Metro Logy
- Zero Tolerancing Works
- 17-3-17
- en-b3f.pdf
- B508.PDF

You are on page 1of 35

ME222/424

MSC 424

TME 424

Tolerance Design

2

History

Absolute vs. Statistical tolerance as acceptable range

Summing tolerances

Worst-case

Statistical

More complex systems

Tolerancing based on variance control

Interchangeable parts

3

Inventor? Depends on your

interpretation. But maybe as

early as 1040’s AD (Chinese

moveable type).

the idea for the manufacture of

http://p2.img.cctvpic.com guns.

cornerstone of mass production.

fir together.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com

PD Funkenbusch (ME 222/424)

Tolerance as acceptable range

4

characteristic (e.g. part length).

LSL = Lower Specification Limit

USL = Upper Specification Limit

is midway between the LSL and USL.

Tolerance = D

LSL = m - D

USL = m + D

Range of values m ± D

m±D

5

Immediate sense of the values likely to be encountered.

Absolute

Statistical

Absolute (method one)

6

(m ± D)

Absolute limit

Statistical (method two)

7

deviation (s), and distribution.

will be outside of the range.

For simplicity here, we will assume that all distributions are normal.

Examples:

D = 1 s 68.3 % in tolerance average ± one standard deviation

D = 3 s 99.73 % in tolerance

D = 6 s 99.9999998% in tolerance

D = 4.5s 99.99966% in tolerance

Note: D = 4.5s (evaluated over an extended time period) is sometimes used as the

cut-off point for “Six Sigma Quality” less than 3.4 DPMO (defects per million

opportunities) “rule of thumb” to adjust for drift in product mean

Summing tolerances

8

Often concerned about how

to sum tolerances.

m2 ± D2 based on component

m1 ± D1 tolerances

component tolerances to

achieve a desired final

tolerance

Add in information on costs

to find the most cost

effective approach

?±?

PD Funkenbusch (ME 222/424)

Example

9

m1 ± D1 m2 ± D2 m3 ± D3 Fit three components

end to end into a slot

machined into a fourth

m4± D4 component.

“gap” remaining.

mg ± Dg Average length of gap

Tolerance on the gap

m2 ± D2

Gap

10

Average

add & subtract based on

geometry

mg ± Dg

mg = m4 - m1 - m2 - m3

Tolerance

always sum

Uncertainty increases with each

component included

“Worst case”

“Statistical”

“Worst-case” summation

11

Tolerance sum D’s

this ensures that all the

gaps will be within the

Dg = D1 + D2 + D 3 + D4 tolerance (i.e. mg Dg )

statistical tolerances. In

this case it is possible to

have product outside of

tolerance but the

probability will be small.

PD Funkenbusch (ME 222/424)

“Statistical” summation

12

Tolerance add D2 ‘s statistical tolerances.

are normal and that the

component tolerances are

mg ± Dg set to the same number of

s’s (e.g. D = 3s for all

components), then the

product tolerance should

correspond to that of the

components.

Where does this (summing squares) come from?

13

can be added:

stotal2 = s12 + s22 + s32 + s42 …

n2stotal2 =n2s12 +n2s22 +n2s32 +n2s42 …

so:

Dproduct2 = D12 + D22 + D32 + D42 …

Numerical example

14

m1 ± D1 m2 ± D2 m3 ± D3 Fit three components

end to end into a slot

machined into a fourth

m4± D4 component.

1 10 0.1

mg ± Dg 2 30 0.3

3 20 0.3

m2 ± D2

4 61 0.2

Average gap

15

geometry

1 10 0.1

2 30 0.3

mg = m4 - m3 - m2 - m1

3 20 0.3

4 61 0.2

mg

mg ± Dg

= 61 – 20 – 30 – 10

= 1 mm

Tolerance on gap

16

=0.1 + 0.3 + 0.3 + 0.2 = 0.9 mm = (0.1)2 + (0.3)2 + (0.3)2 + (0.2)2

= 0.23

mg Dg 0.1 to 1.9 mm Dg = 0.5 mm

mg Dg 0.5 to 1.5 mm

Tolerance type vs. summation method

17

Tolerance type

Summation

method Absolute Statistical

Some product out of

Worst-case All product within

tolerance (generally

(add D’s) tolerance

small %)

Fraction in tolerance

Statistical Difficult to estimate

related to components’

(add D2 ’s) (“depends”)

fraction in tolerance

Complications

18

shown in the example.

components with other “features” shape imperfections, roughness…

more complicated geometries 3-D, rotations…

properties other than length

variability caused by other sources (e.g. environmental conditions)

etc.

As examples,

variability in the output voltage of an electrical circuit because of differences in

component properties (resistances, capacitances, etc.) and geometry/assembly

variability in engine performance due to component wear, ambient temperature,

fuel quality, etc.

Approaches to dealing with more complex systems

19

Modeling

Need a good mathematical model

May be able to solve analytically, depending on complexity

Alternatively use the model to “test” different combinations of

component /environment values

Monte Carlo random sampling based on frequency of occurrence.

Generally requires large numbers of samples (1,000s or 10,000s)

must be practical with the model

Various systematic approaches, e.g. Tolerance design

Experimental

Need to be able to identify and monitor or adjust sources of

variability

Analyze data collected “in the field” is suitable data available?

Systematic testing, e.g. Tolerance design

Random sampling (Monte Carlo) example

20

P

trabecular

t

cortical

is taken from a “Case Study” in Bartel, Davy, and

Keaveny’s Orthopedic Biomechanics textbook.

However, it is just an isostrain model for uniaxial

compression.]

Random sampling (Monte Carlo) example

21

Pc, is given by:

cortical shell, D is the diameter of the trabecular

centrum, and Ec and Et are the modulus of the cortical

and trabecular bone, respectively.

Because of each of the terms in this equation will vary

from person to person, the load on the cortical bone will

also vary.

22

parameters.

Parameter Average value Coefficient of variance

Et (Pa) 3.0e8 20%

Ec (Pa) 1.7e10 10%

t(m) 3.5e4 25%

D (m) 3.0e-2 25%

and are nominally for vertebra. The rest of the values are

“stand-ins” (more or less made up), just to illustrate.

Results (different each time!)

23

1.20E+03 1.40E+05

1.20E+05

1.15E+03

1.00E+05

1.10E+03

MSE (N*N)

8.00E+04

Load (N)

6.00E+04

1.05E+03

4.00E+04

1.00E+03

2.00E+04

9.50E+02 0.00E+00

1 10 100 1000 10000 1 10 100 1000 10000

N N

Compare with a tolerance design (8 TC)

24

1.20E+03 1.40E+05

1.20E+05

1.15E+03

1.00E+05

1.10E+03

MSE (N*N)

8.00E+04

Load (N)

6.00E+04

1.05E+03

4.00E+04

1.00E+03

2.00E+04

9.50E+02 0.00E+00

1 10 100 1000 10000 1 10 100 1000 10000

N N

Tolerance Design

25

TOLERANCE AS VARIABILITY

Taguchi’s approach to quality

26

quality “guru”, responsible for many innovations

developed many tools and methods

Tolerance design was Taguchi’s last resort method for improving

quality

Taguchi equated “quality” with reducing the variance (s2) in the final

product

Didn’t believe in using fixed “tolerances” (i.e. cutoff values)

So Tolerance design focuses on reducing s2 , without considering %

in/out of tolerance

Can be applied to non-normal distributions, but need to be cautious

about converting to a “D” and estimating % in tolerance

Tolerance Design concept

27

components and final (product) variance still holds, but

with a proportionality constant (sensitivity) added

stotal2 = h1s12 + h2s22 + h3 s32 + h4 s42 …

Experiment

estimate variance for the product

determine contribution of each component variance to the total

decide how to best improve tolerance (i.e. reduce variance) as needed

h values show sensitivity of final product variance to tolerance

(variance) of each component think about the units…

Tolerance design experiment

28

For each component, input

specific values

TC measured

match variance of component

...

A B C response

(“levels” -1 ,+1) m ± s

1 -1 -1 -1 Y1

2 -1 -1 +1 Y2 Experiment tests different

3 -1 +1 -1 Y3 combinations of component

4 -1 +1 +1 Y4 levels

... +1 -1 -1 …

product

TC = Treatment condition, one variation in these values

“run” of the experiment provides estimate of the total

A, B, C = different components product variance.

-1, +1 = represent two different also determine

component values to be used in contribution of each

experimentation component to total

Matrix selection

29

Design Of Experiments (DOE)

Usually 2-level

Can include other (non-component) sources

Between ~ (n+1) and 2n

n = number of components

Much smaller than Monte Carlo style methods

Large matrix provides more/better data (rare)

But smaller sizes are still useful (common)

Example (Throttle handle)

30

From “Designing experiments Components

for tolerancing assembled Knob, handle, and tube

products”, Soren Bisgaard. But multiple dimensions on

Technometrics (1997), 142- the knob (three), and handle

152 (three)

Total of seven dimensions to

Friction in a throttle handle tolerance

of outboard motors too

much or too little need to Matrix size

improve the tolerance Minimum size 8

Maximum size 128

Tracked friction by measuring Chose to use 64

torque to turn the handle Relatively

conservative/expensive

Three components in the

assembly

Throttle handle (experimental details)

31

Knobs (dimensions A, B, C)

m - s and m + s for each dimension

Eight possible combinations

Manufactured all eight combinations

Handles (dimensions D, E, F)

m - s and m + s for each dimension

Eight possible combinations

Manufactured four of the combinations

Tube (dimension G)

Manufactured two tubes, one with m - s and one with m + s

8 x 4 x 2 = 64 combinations 64 TC

Treatment condition assembled one combination of components and

measured torque

Throttle handle (key results)

32

Source s Variance % A, B, C knob

(contrib.

to stotal2) dimensions

A 0.0028 29.50 4.36 D, E, F handle

B 0.0023 56.91 8.40 dimensions

C 0.0024 10.04 1.48 G tube dimension

D 0.0037 107.33 15.83

E 0.0030 45.16 6.67

G is main contributor to

F 0.0043 86.27 12.74

variance (>50%)

G 0.0040 342.25 50.52

Best bet to improve

Total -- 677.46 100.00 performance

But also depends on

relative costs

Part tolerances Variance of torque

(length) (force-length)2

PD Funkenbusch (ME 222/424)

Throttle handle (predicting improvement)

33

Source s Variance % Consider the effect of

(contrib.

to D2) halving the tolerance (i.e.

A 0.0028 29.50 7.01

s) for G

B 0.0023 56.91 13.52

Variance of G (s2 ) will be

C 0.0024 10.04 reduced to ¼

2.38

D 0.0037 107.33 Contribution from G to

25.49 total with, therefore also

E 0.0030 45.16 10.73 be reduced to ¼

F 0.0043 86.27 20.49

G 0.0040 342.25

Total Variance for the

0.0020 85.56 20.32

Total -- 677.46

throttle torque should be

420.77 99.95 reduced to ~ 421

677 – ¾ (342) = 421

Predictive equation

34

Source s Variance % stotal2 = hA sA2 + hBsB2 + hCsC2

(contrib. + h D s D2 …

to D2)

A 0.0028 29.50 7.01 hG sG2

B 0.0023 56.91 13.52 = contribution of G to total =

C 0.0024 10.04 SSG = 342.25

2.38

D 0.0037 107.33 25.49 hG = 342.25/ sG2

E 0.0030 45.16 10.73 = 342.25/(0.0040) 2

F 0.0043 86.27 20.49 = 2.14 x 10 7

G 0.0040 342.25

0.0020 85.56 20.32 Reduce sG to 0.0020

Total -- 677.46 SSG= hG sG2

420.77 99.95

=2 .14 x 10 7 x (0.0020) 2

Part tolerances Variance of torque

= 85.56

(length) (force-length)2

PD Funkenbusch (ME 222/424)

Summary

35

Definitions of tolerance

Based on % in/out of tolerance

Absolute all in tolerance

Statistical known % out of tolerance

Summation of tolerances

“worst-case” summation of tolerances

“statistical” summation of the squares

Tolerance design

Based on reducing the product variance

Assumes product variance is proportional to component variances

DOE to estimate total product variance, component contributions,

and the effects of changing component tolerances

- DOE TaguchiUploaded bycarcrazykannan
- Chumacera SKF en PulgadasUploaded byFredy Quispe Valverde
- Fits and TolerancesUploaded byPrithviraj Daga
- Sans 282Uploaded byNolan Pillay
- Stainless Technical InformationUploaded bykedarnage17
- Measures of DispersionUploaded byHayati Aini Ahmad
- Dimensional tolerances - ISO3302-1.pdfUploaded byDibujantes Proyectistas
- 9295Uploaded byRathish Viswanathan
- gdtnt-8Uploaded bygthulasi787126
- ppSpec - ChemfloUploaded byMOHAMMAD ASIF
- US Size Range_RUploaded bylucidbase
- TH DesignUploaded byLina Gan
- 539-542Uploaded byrefei
- Vesconite Bushing DesignUploaded byKarthick Durai
- VarianceUploaded byLaura Allen
- Metro LogyUploaded byJimitesh Singla
- Zero Tolerancing WorksUploaded byAnonymous 7ZTcBn
- 17-3-17Uploaded byAnonymous UP5RC6JpG
- en-b3f.pdfUploaded byJennifer Jane Aquino
- B508.PDFUploaded byGrato Jr Singco
- Chapter 03 Descriptive Statistics Numerical MeasuresUploaded byHoang Ha
- Quality Engineering Productivity_The Future of QualityUploaded byFriska Juliana Hutauruk
- Cha18sec437Uploaded byJuan Carlos Diego
- UKP6053 L3 Descriptive StatsitcsUploaded byFiq Razali
- ACTIVITY DELAY QUANTUM METHOD (ADQM).Uploaded byIJAR Journal
- 04015Uploaded bycami_s2001
- titleUploaded byMaysie Angily Tapia
- 3952Uploaded byAnonymous i6zgzUv
- users10&name=5 August Statistical AnalysisUploaded byChintan Manek
- Sample DataUploaded byburuga

- Mastering Meta Stock ManualUploaded bylaxmicc
- Okuma Encoder SettingUploaded byNatKTh
- Q-Balde GuidelinesUploaded byNatKTh
- QBlade_ShortManual_v08Uploaded byLodewykbronn
- Henkel SelectionUploaded byNatKTh
- B_61863E_12 PMC Ladder LanguageUploaded byScott Jethro Hardwick
- QBlade PosterUploaded byNatKTh
- guideline_en simotion.pdfUploaded byqaisarharis
- บรรยายสรุปcompbm602 Feb 1 2010 01Uploaded byNatKTh
- LabView Thai ManualUploaded byNatKTh
- Vs-5ed Varicam NsdUploaded byNatKTh
- Centerless Grinding TrobleshootingUploaded byNatKTh
- Ho PosthocUploaded byNatKTh
- Atmosphere in furnaceUploaded byNatKTh
- Plc Transmit Instruction Mov Smov Cmov Bmov FmovUploaded byNatKTh
- MISUMI Technical DataUploaded byNatKTh
- HDS Powersports User GuideUploaded byNatKTh
- 65002e เล่มนี้ดี เอกสารเก่า.pdfUploaded byNatKTh
- Table TennisUploaded byGodisgreate
- Thoughts on Table TennisUploaded byNatKTh
- Centerless Grinding ManualUploaded byNatKTh
- Degrees of Freedom TutorialUploaded byNatKTh
- Psychrometric Properties on a CalcUploaded byNatKTh
- Gettingstarted ManualUploaded byTribhuvan Chetty
- Technical Data (Thai) 4Uploaded byNatKTh
- Technical Data (Thai) 3Uploaded byNatKTh
- Technical Data (Thai) 2Uploaded byNatKTh
- Technical Data (Thai) 1Uploaded byNatKTh
- 1- Tool Holders and Their MaintenanceUploaded byNatKTh

- EEE 1207 021 6 DOF Robotic Arm ManipulatorUploaded byUNsha bee kom
- Introduction to Green DesignUploaded byshatakshi_1
- SF-25 ManualUploaded byRobert Kostenbader
- scheme-hp-pavilion-dv6-quanta-lx6-lx7.pdfUploaded byCriss Albu
- MONO Rail FlyerUploaded bydjgiumix
- FX-7102_4L3469A_CEUploaded bymanmaerkle
- ATEX Advisory - Simple ApparatusUploaded byPeter Allison
- The Cause and Effect SutraUploaded byers_chan
- apendicitis pediatriaUploaded byCristi Rojas
- NLL_Elementary_Coursebook 2019.pdfUploaded bygilmolto
- Phys QuUploaded byKelvin Chen
- PilatesUploaded byJustina Bates
- NHTSA-Toyota EDR Pre-crash ValidationUploaded bysinasayedana
- ppt on public distribution system of indiaUploaded byadityahongkong
- SRAM_DRAM_FLASH.pdfUploaded byVishnu Vardhan Reddy
- Pharoh's ChariotsUploaded byKeithStewart
- TechTIP3 Purge Steam Requirements for the DeltaGuardUploaded bySinto Gendeng
- ch08Uploaded byIngi Abdel Aziz Srag
- An Investigation Into the Effect of Rice Husk ASh on Mortar When Added in Varying Proportions - Andrew WoodUploaded byNarayan Singhania
- Cape Maths SyllabusUploaded byDavia Dee-chan Deacon
- Medical Tribune July 2012 HKUploaded byKarena Sabado
- Laboratory waste management guideUploaded byMei Yee
- 5Uploaded byshelly87
- Vinoth ResumeUploaded byfvijayami
- Food Oral Processing Some Important Underpinning Principles of Eating and Sensory PerceptionUploaded byCostaEdvaldo
- The Basic Transistor AmplifierUploaded byPaul Senen Didulo
- worksheet on hydrocarbons for IIT JEEUploaded byrajput1287
- l1 Overview ExplicitUploaded byEAB
- eco pitch plan 7 redo 11 29 18Uploaded byapi-167131864
- kmmlUploaded byHarikrishnan