Research Papers

Comparison of Two Similar Mathematical Models for Tolerance Analysis: T-Map and Deviation Domain

[+] Author and Article Information
Max Giordano

e-mail: Max.Giordano@univ-savoie.fr
Laboratoire S.Y.M.M.E.,
5 chemin de Bellevue,
Annecy-le-vieux 74 940, France

Joseph K. Davidson

Department of Mechanical and
Aerospace Engineering,
Arizona State University,
Tempe, AZ 85287
e-mail: j.davidson@asu.edu

Contributed by the Design for Manufacturing Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF MECHANICAL DESIGN. Manuscript received January 4, 2013; final manuscript received July 5, 2013; published online September 5, 2013. Assoc. Editor: Rikard Söderberg.

J. Mech. Des 135(10), 101008 (Sep 05, 2013) (7 pages) Paper No: MD-13-1004; doi: 10.1115/1.4024980 History: Received January 04, 2013; Revised July 05, 2013

The major part of production cost of a manufacturing product is set during the design stage and especially by the tolerancing choice. Therefore, a lot of work involves trying to simulate the impact of these choices and provide an automatic optimization. For integrating this modeling in computer aided design (cad) software, the tolerancing must be modeled by a mathematical tool. Numerous models have been developed but few of them are really efficient. Two advanced models are “T-map” model developed by Joseph K. Davidson and “deviation domain” developed by Max Giordano. Despite the graphical representation of these two models seems to be similar, they have significant differences in their construction and their resolution method. These similarities and differences highlight the needs of tolerancing modeling tool in each kind of problems, especially in case of assembly with parallel links.

Copyright © 2013 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.



Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Size and position tolerances specified for a round boss [7] according to the ASME representation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Limiting configurations of the axis in its tolerance zone in the case of MMC. The circles have diameter t [7].

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

T-map model of the axis localization tolerancing in the case of MMC. The circles have diameter t, which is the position tolerance [7].

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Projection of the T-map modeling the maximal material specification tolerancing [7]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Illustration of the deviation domain in the (P; Q; L′) space

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Self-aligned coupling assembly [7] according to the ASME representation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Positional variation for one pin-slot assembly (adapted from [7])

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Geometry to determine the variations in the position of the point P (adapted from [7])

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Application of the Minkowski sum to obtain the accumulation T-map [7]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Accumulation T-map included in the functional T-map [7]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Deviation domain of the #1 engaged pin-slot

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Accumulation deviation domain for the 3pin-slot assembly




Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In