Due to manufacturing and assembly errors, the assembly accuracy of the spacecraft cabin is inevitably affected. To minimize these errors and improve operational performance, we apply a comprehensive assembly accuracy analysis method that accounts for non-ideal surfaces. First, a 3D model of the cabin’s non-ideal surfaces is developed using skin model shapes and small displacement torsor theory to represent form and positional errors, respectively. However, previous studies have often overlooked the impact of form errors. Next, an improved deviation propagation model is introduced to analyze the assembly of multi-segment cabins while considering surface imperfections. Finally, a simulation study is conducted using a cabin simulation component as the research object. The results confirm the method’s effectiveness in predicting the assembly accuracy of cabins with non-ideal surfaces.
YangWZhengYLiS.Digital twin of spacecraft assembly cell and case study. Int J Comput Integr Manuf2022; 35: 263–281.
2.
MaropoulosPZhangDRoltS, et al. Integration of measurement planning with aggregate product modelling for spacecraft design and assembly. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part B J Eng Manuf2006; 220: 1687–1695.
3.
LiuWDNingRXLiuJH, et al. Computer aided analysis for connection precision of spacecraft section. Jisuanji Jicheng Zhizao Xitong/Computer Integr Manuf Syst CIMS2011; 17: 732–739.
4.
CaoYLiXZhangZ, et al. Dynamic prediction and compensation of aerocraft assembly variation based on state space model. Assem Autom2015; 35: 183–189.
5.
FanJTaoHPanR, et al. Optimal tolerance allocation for five-axis machine tools in consideration of deformation caused by gravity. Int J Adv Manuf Technol2020; 111: 13–24.
6.
HallmannMSchleichBWartzackS.Process and machine selection in sampling-based tolerance-cost optimisation for dimensional tolerancing. Int J Prod Res2022; 60: 5201–5216.
7.
Lara-MolinaFADumurD.Fuzzy-interval approach and sensitivity analysis to assess dimensional tolerances of parallel manipulators. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part C J Mech Eng Sci2024; 238: 108–122.
8.
MarzialeMPoliniW.A review of two models for tolerance analysis of an assembly: vector loop and matrix. Int J Adv Manuf Technol2009; 43: 1106–1123.
9.
MarzialeMPoliniW.A review of two models for tolerance analysis of an assembly: Jacobian and torsor. Int J Comput Integr Manuf2011; 24: 74–86.
10.
CaoYLiuTYangJ.A comprehensive review of tolerance analysis models. Int J Adv Manuf Technol2018; 97: 3055–3085.
11.
BourdetP.The concept of the small displacement torsor in metrology. Ser Adv Math Appl Sci1996; 40: 110–122.
12.
DesrochersARivièreA.A matrix approach to the representation of tolerance zones and clearances. Int J Adv Manuf Technol1997; 13: 630–636.
13.
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.
14.
ChaseKWGaoJMaglebySP. General 2-D tolerance analysis of mechanical assemblies with small kinematic adjustments. J Des Manuf; 5: 263–274
15.
LiuZZhouSQiuC, et al. Assembly variation analysis of complicated products based on rigid–flexible hybrid vector loop. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part B J Eng Manuf2018; 233: 2099–2114.
16.
LaperrièreLElmaraghyHA.Tolerance analysis and synthesis using jacobian transforms. CIRP Ann2000; 49: 359–362.
17.
LaperrièreLGhieWDesrochersA.Statistical and deterministic tolerance analysis and synthesis using a unified Jacobian-torsor model. CIRP Ann2002; 51: 417–420.
18.
DesrochersAGhieWLaperrie’reL. Application of a unified Jacobian—torsor model for tolerance analysis. J Comput Inf Sci Eng2003; 3: 2–14.
19.
YangZYangWGaoT, et al. Tolerance analysis method considering multifactor coupling based on the Jacobian–torsor model. Adv Mech Eng2022; 14: 1–13.
20.
LiuYShenHZhaoG, et al. Improved Jacobian-Torsor model for optimizing mechanical product quality. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part B J Eng Manuf. Epub ahead of print 2024. DOI: 10.1177/09544054241244999.
21.
ZouZMorseEP.A gap-based approach to capture fitting conditions for mechanical assembly. Comput Des2004; 36: 691–700.
22.
DavidsonJKMujezinovićAShahJJ.A new mathematical model for geometric tolerances as applied to round faces. J Mech Des2002; 124: 609–622.
23.
SinghGAmetaGDavidsonJK, et al. Tolerance analysis and allocation for design of a self-aligning coupling assembly using tolerance-maps. J Mech Des; 135. Epub ahead of print 7February2013. DOI: 10.1115/1.4023279.
24.
TeissandierDCouetardYDelosV.Operations on polytopes: application to tolerance analysis. In: van HoutenFKalsH (eds) Global Consistency of Tolerances: Proceedings of the 6 th CIRP International Seminar on Computer-Aided Tolerancing. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 1999, pp. 425–434.
25.
Arroyave-TobónSTeissandierDDelosV.Tolerance analysis with polytopes in HV-description. J Comput Inf Sci Eng2017; 17: 1–9.
26.
ZhangZLiuJPierreL, et al. Polytope-based tolerance analysis with consideration of form defects and surface deformations. Int J Comput Integr Manuf2021; 34: 57–75.
27.
IslamMN.Functional dimensioning and tolerancing software for concurrent engineering applications. Comput Ind2004; 54: 169–190.
28.
ChenHJinSLiZ, et al. A comprehensive study of three dimensional tolerance analysis methods. Comput Des2014; 53: 1–13.
29.
AnwerNBalluAMathieuL.The skin model, a comprehensive geometric model for engineering design. CIRP Ann2013; 62: 143–146.
30.
SchleichBAnwerNMathieuL, et al. Skin model shapes: a new paradigm shift for geometric variations modelling in mechanical engineering. Comput Des2014; 50: 1–15.
31.
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 2022. DOI: 10.1007/s00170-022-09628-9.
32.
SchleichBQieYWartzackS, et al. Generative adversarial networks for tolerance analysis. CIRP Ann2022; 71: 133–136.
33.
LiuTZhaoQCaoY, et al. A generic approach for analysis of mechanical assembly. Precis Eng2018; 54: 361–370.
34.
ShenTHLuC.Assembly accuracy analysis of cylindrical parts based on skin model shapes considering form deviations and local surface deformations. Precis Eng2023; 80: 256–273.
35.
ShaoNLiuJGongH, et al. An improved tolerance analysis method for gear mechanisms considering form deviations and elastic-plastic contact behaviors. Precis Eng2024; 88: 742–758.
36.
MaSHuKHuT, et al. Two improved assembly deviation analysis methods based on Jacobian–Torsor matrix and skin model shapes with contact deformation effort. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part B J Eng Manuf2024; 238: 904–916.
37.
WangKLiuDLiuZ, et al. An assembly precision analysis method based on a general part digital twin model. Robot Comput Integr Manuf2021; 68: 102089.
38.
HuXZhaoQYangY, et al. Accuracy analysis for machine tool spindles considering full parallel connections and form errors based on skin model shapes. J Comput Des Eng2023; 10: 1970–1987.
39.
ShiSLiuJGongH, et al. Assembly accuracy analysis and phase optimization of aero-engine multistage rotors considering surface morphology and non-uniform contact deformation. Precis Eng2024; 88: 595–610.
40.
LiuTCaoY-LZhaoQ, et al. Assembly tolerance analysis based on the Jacobian model and skin model shapes. Assem Autom2019; 39: 245–253.
