Assembly deviation analysis methods, which have been studied and improved over the past 30 years, are necessary and effective for checking functional requirements before manufacturing. Contact deformation was not negligible and significantly affected the final assembly deviation, which prevented the application of the current assembly deviation analysis methods. Considering the contact deformation, we aimed to improve the precision of the 3D deviation analysis methods, which are based on the Jacobian-Torsor matrix and skin model shape (SMS), respectively. In this study, the contact deformation was quantified based on the Hertzian contact theory. The unified Jacobian-Torsor matrix is modified with the location points and contact deformation to increase the precision of the stack-up assembly deviation. In the SMS-based method, the assembly components are represented as non-nominal SMS models. The final posture of each component and stack-up assembly deviation were solved by iteratively mimicking the physical assembly process. The practicality of the improved deviation analysis method was successfully demonstrated through two case studies. The modified Jacobian-Torsor matrix-based method is efficient. However, the improved SMS-based method can provide more precise results by mimicking tight fitting on mating surfaces.
SunCChenDLiC, et al. A novel constrained optimization-build method for precision assembly of aircraft engine. Assem Autom2020; 40(6): 869–879.
4.
LiuZZhouSQiuC, et al. Assembly variation analysis of complicated products based on rigid–flexible hybrid vector loop. Proc IMechE, Part B: J Engineering Manufacture2018; 233(10): 2099–2114.
5.
PoliniWCorradoA. Geometric tolerance analysis through Jacobian model for rigid assemblies with translational deviations. Assem Autom2016; 36(1): 72–79.
6.
DingSZhengXBaoJ, et al. An improved Jacobian-Torsor model for statistical variation solution in aero-engine rotors assembly. Proc IMechE, Part B: J Engineering Manufacture2021; 235(3): 466–483.
7.
AjaniILuC. Optimal tolerance allocation for non-rigid assembly considering the effect of deformation on functional requirement and quality loss cost. Int J Adv Manuf Technol2023; 125(1–2): 493–512.
8.
ZouZMorseEP. Applications of the GapSpace model for multidimensional mechanical assemblies. J Comput Inf Sci Eng2003; 3(1): 22–30.
9.
SinghGAmetaGDavidsonJK, et al. Tolerance analysis and allocation for design of a self-aligning coupling assembly using tolerance-maps. J Mech Des2013; 135(3): 3.
10.
ZhangZLiuJPierreL, et al. Polytope-based tolerance analysis with consideration of form defects and surface deformations. Int J Comput Integr Manuf2021; 34(1): 57–75.
11.
LuoCFranciosaPCeglarekD, et al. A novel geometric tolerance modeling inspired by parametric space envelope. IEEE Trans Autom Sci Eng2018; 15(3): 1386–1398.
12.
YiYLiuXLiuT, et al. A generic integrated approach of assembly tolerance analysis based on skin model shapes. Proc IMechE, Part B: J Engineering Manufacture2021; 235(4): 689–704.
13.
MantripragadaRWhitneyDE. Modeling and controlling variation propagation in mechanical assemblies using state transition models. IEEE Trans Robot Autom1999; 15(1): 124–140.
14.
HuangWKongZ. Simulation and integration of geometric and rigid body kinematics errors for assembly variation analysis. J Manuf Syst2008; 27(1): 36–44.
15.
CaiNQiaoL. Rigid-compliant hybrid variation modeling of sheet metal assembly with 3D generic free surface. J Manuf Syst2016; 41: 45–64.
16.
GhieWLaperrièreLDesrochersA. Statistical tolerance analysis using the unified Jacobian–Torsor model. Int J Prod Res2010; 48(15): 4609–4630.
17.
CaoYLiuTYangJ, et al. A novel tolerance analysis method for three-dimensional assembly. Proc IMechE, Part B: J Engineering Manufacture2019; 233(7): 1818–1827.
18.
GuoJLiBLiuZ, et al. Integration of geometric variation and part deformation into variation propagation of 3-D assemblies. Int J Prod Res2016; 54(19): 5708–5721.
19.
TlijaMKorbiALouhichiB, et al. A computer-aided design-based tolerance analysis of assemblies with form defects and deformations of nonrigid parts. J Comput Inf Sci Eng2023; 23(2): 021001.
20.
YanXBalluA. Tolerance analysis using skin model shapes and linear complementarity conditions. J Manuf Syst2018; 48: 140–156.
21.
LiuJZhangZDingX, et al. Integrating form errors and local surface deformations into tolerance analysis based on skin model shapes and a boundary element method. Comput Aided Des2018; 104: 45–59.
22.
MaSHuTXiongZ. Precision assembly simulation of skin model shapes accounting for contact deformation and geometric deviations for statistical tolerance analysis method. Int J Precis Eng Manuf2021; 22(6): 975–989.
23.
YiYLiuTYanY, et al. A novel assembly tolerance analysis method considering form errors and partial parallel connections. Int J Adv Manuf Technol. Epub ahead of print 5July2022. DOI: 10.1007/s00170-022-09628-9.
24.
HuCYuHXiaZ, et al. Flexible assembly research for cylindrical interference fit with form error in shaft-hole structures. Proc IMechE, Part B: J Engineering Manufacture2023; 237(1–2): 203–215.
25.
KangHLiZMLiuT, et al. A novel method to design tolerance of aero-engine casing by integrating 3-D assembly tolerance with performance instability. Proc IMechE, Part B: J Engineering Manufacture2022; 236(8): 1052–1070.
26.
LafondPLaperrièreL. Jacobian-based modeling of dispersions affecting pre-defined functional requirements of mechanical assemblies. In: Proceedings of the 1999 IEEE international symposium on assembly and task planning (ISATP’99) (Cat. No.99TH8470), Porto, Portugal, 24 July 1999.
27.
JinSDingSLiZ, et al. Point-based solution using Jacobian-Torsor theory into partial parallel chains for revolving components assembly. J Manuf Syst2018; 46: 46–58.
28.
ZhangMAnwerNStockingerA, et al. Discrete shape modeling for skin model representation. Proc IMechE, Part B: J Engineering Manufacture2013; 227: 672–680.
29.
YanXBalluA. Generation of consistent skin model shape based on FEA method. Int J Adv Manuf Technol2017; 92(1–4): 789–802.
30.
SchleichBWartzackS. Evaluation of geometric tolerances and generation of variational part representatives for tolerance analysis. Int J Adv Manuf Technol2015; 79(5–8): 959–983.
31.
ChenHJinSLiZ, et al. A solution of partial parallel connections for the unified Jacobian–Torsor model. Mech Mach Theory2015; 91: 39–49.
