The quality of an assembly largely depends on the predictive accuracy of the assembly deviation model in the selective assembly process. Presently, three-dimensional deviation analysis methods only offer tolerances that indicate the overall deviation of a part feature. This limitation fails to accurately represent the fit of the parts during the assembly process, resulting in initial inaccuracies in the selective assembly model. To address this issue, an improved Jacobian-Torsor model is proposed that incorporates measured data from part assembly features into the deviation analysis model. Initially, the actual contact state of the assembly is determined by measuring the contact surface of the plane fit and the shaft-hole fit. Next, the Jacobian matrix, representing the transmission path of assembly deviation, is constructed by analyzing the assembly connection diagram. Subsequently, by integrating the actual contact state characterized by small displacement torsor (SDT) into the unified Jacobian-Torsor model, the advantage of high credibility tolerance propagation is provided. Finally, the feasibility of the proposed improved Jacobian-Torsor model is verified using the double-joint manipulator.
ZhengPWangHSangZ, et al. Smart manufacturing systems for industry 4.0: conceptual framework, scenarios, and future perspectives. Front Mech Eng2018; 13: 137–150.
2.
ZhengPXiaLLiC, et al. Towards self-x cognitive manufacturing network: an industrial knowledge graph-based multi-agent reinforcement learning approach. J Manuf Syst2021; 61: 16–26.
3.
AntonioCCGirolamoDS. An economic decision model for selective assembly. Int J Prod Econ2019; 207: 56–69.
4.
KongFSunTGengY, et al. Measurement method of Wolter-i type mandrel based on a contact-type profilometer. Proc IMechE, Part B: J Engineering Manufacture2019; 233: 2173–2182.
5.
CaputoACDi SalvoG. An economic decision model for selective assembly. Int J Prod Econ2019; 207: 56–69.
6.
LiuLZhuFChenJ, et al. A quality control method for complex product selective assembly processes. Int J Prod Res2013; 51: 5437–5449.
7.
KannanSMJayabalanV. A new grouping method for minimizing the surplus parts in selective assembly. Qual Eng2002; 14: 67–75.
8.
RajMVSankarSSPonnambalamSG. Maximising manufacturing system efficiency for multi-characteristic linear assembly by using particle swarm optimisation in batch selective assembly. Int J Prod Res2011; 49: 6491–6516.
9.
TaguchiG. Quality engineering in japan. Commun Stat Theory Methods1985; 14: 2785–2801.
10.
KannanSJayabalanVJeevananthamK. Genetic algorithm for minimizing assembly variation in selective assembly. Int J Prod Res2003; 41: 3301–3313.
11.
QianJZhangZShiL, et al. An assembly timing planning method based on knowledge and mixed integer linear programming. J Intell Manuf2023; 34: 429–453.
12.
WangHSarkerBRLiJ, et al. Adaptive scheduling for assembly job shop with uncertain assembly times based on dual q-learning. Int J Prod Res2021; 59: 5867–5883.
13.
HanYChenXXuM, et al. A multi-objective flexible job-shop cell scheduling problem with sequence-dependent family setup times and intercellular transportation by improved NSGA-II. Proc IMechE, Part B: J Engineering Manufacture2022; 236: 540–556.
14.
KannanSMJeevananthamAKJayabalanV. Modelling and analysis of selective assembly using Taguchi’s loss function. Int J Prod Res2008; 46: 4309–4330.
ChuXXuHWuX, et al. The method of selective assembly for the RV reducer based on genetic algorithm. Proc IMechE, Part C: J Mechanical Engineering Science2018; 232: 921–929.
17.
JeevananthamAKChaitanyaSVRajeshkannanA. Tolerance analysis in selective assembly of multiple component features to control assembly variation using matrix model and genetic algorithm. Int J Precis Eng Manuf2019; 20: 1801–1815.
18.
PanRYuJZhaoY. Many-objective optimization and decision-making method for selective assembly of complex mechanical products based on improved NSGA-III and Vikor. Processes2021; 10: 34.
19.
HongYSChangTC. A comprehensive review of tolerancing research. Int J Prod Res2002; 40: 2425–2459.
20.
ShenZAmetaGShahJJ, et al. A comparative study of tolerance analysis methods. J Comput Inf Sci Eng2005; 5: 247–256.
21.
DavidsonJKMujezinovic’AShahJJ. A new mathematical model for geometric tolerances as applied to round faces. J Mech Des2002; 124: 609–622.
22.
GaoJChaseKWMaglebySP. Generalized 3-d tolerance analysis of mechanical assemblies with small kinematic adjustments. IIE Trans1998; 30: 367–377.
23.
DesrochersARivireA. A matrix approach to the representation of tolerance zones and clearances. Int J Adv Manuf Technol1997; 13: 630–636.
24.
DesrochersAGhieWLaperrie‘reL. Application of a unified Jacobian—Torsor model for tolerance analysis. J Comput Inf Sci Eng2003; 3: 2–14.
25.
GhieWLaperrièreLDesrochersA. Re-design of mechanical assemblies using the unified jacobian-torsor model for tolerance analysis. In: Models for computer aided tolerancing in design and manufacturing. Dordrech: Springer Netherlands, 2007, pp.95–104.
26.
ChenHJinSLiZ, et al. A solution of partial parallel connections for the unified Jacobian–Torsor model. Mech Mach Theory2015; 91: 39–49.
27.
GhieWLaperrièreLDesrochersA. Statistical tolerance analysis using the unified Jacobian–Torsor model. Int J Prod Res2010; 48: 4609–4630.
28.
ZengWRaoYWangP, et al. A solution of worst-case tolerance analysis for partial parallel chains based on the unified Jacobian-Torsor model. Precis Eng2017; 47: 276–291.
29.
BoschettoABottiniL. Design for manufacturing of surfaces to improve accuracy in fused deposition modeling. Robot Comput Integr Manuf2016; 37: 103–114.
30.
ChenZDuFTangX. Position and orientation best-fitting based on deterministic theory during large scale assembly. J Intell Manuf2018; 29: 827–837.
31.
SchleichBWartzackS. Novel approaches for the assembly simulation of rigid skin model shapes in tolerance analysis. Comput Aided Des2018; 101: 1–11.
32.
YiYLiuTYanY, et al. A novel assembly tolerance analysis method considering form errors and partial parallel connections. Int J Adv Manuf Technol2022; 131: 1–22.
33.
SunQZhaoBLiuX, et al. Assembling deviation estimation based on the real mating status of assembly. Comput Aided Des2019; 115: 244–255.
34.
ShangKWuTJinX, et al. Coaxiality prediction for aeroengines precision assembly based on geometric distribution error model and point cloud deep learning. J Manuf Syst2023; 71: 681–694.
35.
MuXWangYYuanB, et al. A new assembly precision prediction method of aeroengine high-pressure rotor system considering manufacturing error and deformation of parts. J Manuf Syst2021; 61: 112–124.
36.
JinSDingSLiZ, et al. Point-based solution using Jacobian-Torsor theory into partial parallel chains for revolving components assembly. J Manuf Syst2018; 46: 46–58.
37.
ClementABourdetP. A study of optimal-criteria identification based on the small-displacement screw model. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol1988; 37: 503–506.
38.
DesrochersA. Modeling three dimensional tolerance zones using screw parameters. In: ASME 1999 Design Engineering Technical Conferences 1999; Volume 1: 25th Design Automation Conference, pp. 895–903.
PengJPengSHuY. Partial least squares and random sample consensus in outlier detection. Anal Chim Acta2012; 719: 24–29.
41.
ZhangTZhangZJinX, et al. An innovative method of modeling plane geometric form errors for precision assembly. Proc IMechE, Part B: J Engineering Manufacture2016; 230: 1087–1096.
42.
DebKJainH. An evolutionary many-objective optimization algorithm using reference-point-based nondominated sorting approach, part i: solving problems with box constraints. IEEE Trans Evol Comput2014; 18: 577–601.
43.
DasIDennisJE. Normal-boundary intersection: a new method for generating the pareto surface in nonlinear multicriteria optimization problems. SIAM J Optim1998; 8: 631–657.
