Article

Simultaneous optimal selection of design and manufacturing tolerances with alternative manufacturing process selection.

Computer-Aided Design (Impact Factor: 1.52). 02/2011; 43:207-218. DOI: 10.1016/j.cad.2010.10.001
Source: DBLP

ABSTRACT Tolerance specification is an important part of mechanical design. Design tolerances strongly influence the functional performance and manufacturing cost of a mechanical product. Tighter tolerances normally produce superior components, better performing mechanical systems and good assemblability with assured exchangeability at the assembly line. However, unnecessarily tight tolerances lead to excessive manufacturing costs for a given application. The balancing of performance and manufacturing cost through identification of optimal design tolerances is a major concern in modern design. Traditionally, design tolerances are specified based on the designer’s experience. Computer-aided (or software-based) tolerance synthesis and alternative manufacturing process selection programs allow a designer to verify the relations between all design tolerances to produce a consistent and feasible design. In this paper, a general new methodology using intelligent algorithms viz., Elitist Non-dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm (NSGA-II) and Multi Objective Particle Swarm Optimization (MOPSO) for simultaneous optimal selection of design and manufacturing tolerances with alternative manufacturing process selection is presented. The problem has a multi-criterion character in which 3 objective functions, 3 constraints and 5 variables are considered. The average fitness factor method and normalized weighted objective functions method are separately used to select the best optimal solution from Pareto optimal fronts. Two multi-objective performance measures namely solution spread measure and ratio of non-dominated individuals are used to evaluate the strength of Pareto optimal fronts. Two more multi-objective performance measures namely optimiser overhead and algorithm effort are used to find the computational effort of NSGA-II and MOPSO algorithms. The Pareto optimal fronts and results obtained from various techniques are compared and analysed.

1 Follower
 · 
84 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To cite this article: R.V. Rao & K.C. More (2014) Advanced optimal tolerance design of machine elements using teaching-learning-based optimization algorithm, Production & Manufacturing Research: An Open Access Journal, 2:1, 71-94
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Transmission components are the main mechanical elements in a machine system, the accuracy level of the transmission system is one of the major sources of the machining error of multiaxis machine tools. This article investigates motion error analysis, volumetric motion error model for transmission system and the accuracy allocation method for multiaxis machine tools during the early design stage. For this purpose, a transmission system volumetric motion error model, which is based on the motion error matrix and screw theory, is derived for mapping transmission components’ error parameters to the volumetric motion errors of machine tools. The volumetric motion error matrix combines motion errors along the machine tools’ kinematic chains. Subsequently, the volumetric motion error model is expressed as a volumetric motion error twist, which is formulated from the volumetric motion error matrix. Additionally, the transmission system volumetric motion error twist model is used as design criteria for accuracy optimum allocation, with constraints on the twist magnitude and design variable limits. Then, design optimization is performed by using a multiobjective nonlinear optimization technique to minimize the manufacturing cost and volumetric motion error twist pitch. To solve this multiple objective optimum problem, this study proposes an approach integrating Lagrange multiplier and gradient descent operator with non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm-II (NSGA-II). Modified non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm-II searches for an allocation scheme Pareto optimal front. Consequently, VlseKriterijumska Optimizacija I Kompromisno Resenje (VIKOR) determines the best compromise solution from the Pareto set. Finally, a numerical experiment for the optimal design of a numerical control machine tool is conducted, which highlights the advantages of the proposed methodology.
    ARCHIVE Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part C Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science 1989-1996 (vols 203-210) 12/2013; 227(12):2762-2779. DOI:10.1177/0954406213479723 · 0.59 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Geometric dimensioning and Tolerancing (GDT) constitutes the dominant approach for design and manufacture of mechanical parts that control inevitable dimensional and geometrical deviations within appropriate limits. The stack up of tolerances and their redistribution without hampering the functionality is very important for cost optimization. This paper presents a methodology that aims towards the systematic solution of tolerance stack up problem involving geometric characteristics.Conventional tolerance stack up analysis is usually difficult as it involves numerous rule and conditions. The methodology presented i.e. generic capsule method is straightforward and easy to use for stack up of geometrical tolerances of components and their assembly using graphical approach. In the work presented in this paper, angularity tolerance has been considered for illustration of the methodology. Two approaches viz. Worst Case (WC) and Root Sum Square (RSS) have been used. An example of dovetail mounting mechanism has been taken for purpose of stack up of angularity. This assembly consists of two parts i.e. dovetail male and dovetail female. Tolerance stack up has been done both for the components and their assembly. Need for computerisation of methodology for geometrical tolerance stack up of large assemblies has emerged out as the limitation of the proposed method.
    Procedia Engineering 12/2014; 69. DOI:10.1016/j.proeng.2014.03.075

Preview

Download
3 Downloads
Available from