Res Eng Design

DOI 10.1007/s00163-015-0203-2

ORIGINAL PAPER

Concurrent tolerance design

Wilma Polini1

Received: 19 September 2014 / Revised: 5 August 2015 / Accepted: 3 September 2015

 Springer-Verlag London 2015

Abstract Technical drawings are constituted by three 1 Introduction

components that are strongly correlated: the geometry
showing the part shape, the dimensions defining the part Geometric dimensioning and tolerancing (GD&T) is the
volume and the tolerances establishing the variability of the result of studies and teamwork among research institutions
two previously described components. A general method- and firms in order to define a complete design language. In
ology to assign the tolerances, especially geometric toler- particular, it is a tool to specify the requirements related to
ances, to all the components of an assembly has not been the design and to the technical representation of a part,
clearly defined up to now. This is probably due to the which takes into account functional and assembly princi-
complexity of the problem and to the existing gap between ples. GD&T consists of symbols, rules, definitions and
the existing standards and the industrial designers’ com- conventions. Moreover, it is a mathematical language that
mon practices. In this work, a new general methodology to may be used to specify the shape, the dimensions, the
assign dimensional and geometric tolerances to all the orientation and the position of part features. This language
components of an assembly with a concurrent design allows one to translate, in a logical and unequivocal way,
approach is proposed. It takes into consideration the rela- the designers’ ideas by eliminating the ambiguities of the
tionships between tolerances and a set of design principles implicit representation inherent to the previous coordinate
that have been naturally extracted from the standards and tolerancing system (Wilson 1996). GD&T improves the
literature and from a deep discussion with the Italian communication between product designer and manufac-
Association of Industrial Designers. In order to demon- turing planner, since it supplies the tools to unequivocally
strate and validate the proposed approach, the methodology interpret the design specifications of a drawing and, then, to
has been applied to two real case studies: a volumetric gear minimize the arbitrary assumptions of manufacturing. It
pump and a pneumatic actuator. leads to a better manufactured product, since the design,
the manufacture and the verification occur through the
Keywords Geometric tolerance
Tolerance assignment
same descriptive language. GD&T constitutes a technique
Concurrent design
Tolerance design that, if applied in the right way, guarantees an effective and
relatively inexpensive manufacture of the designed parts.
Therefore, GD&T is an international language that is used
to precisely describe parts with technical drawings.
Moreover, GD&T may allow the manufacture to increase
the width of the geometric tolerance zone, due to either the
exploitation of dimensional tolerance zone (called toler-
& Wilma Polini ance bonus) or the reduction in functional requirements in
polini@unicas.it light of manufacturing considerations. In this way, it is
1 possible to decrease the manufacturing costs.
Department of Civil and Mechanical Engineering, University
of Cassino and Southern Lazio, Via Gaetano di Biasio 43, All these advantages of GD&T help tolerance assign-
03043 Cassino, Italy ment when the concurrent design of product, process and

123
 Res Eng Design

manufacturing system occurs in an integrated way. Func- evaluations. If the results are not satisfactory, one must
tional design of a product may need great effort in terms of modify the previous tolerance assignment. The whole tol-
time and cost, because it must take into account the set of erance design is usually defined as tolerance synthesis.
choices concerning the product, the process, the manufac- This work focuses on the tolerance assignment in the
turing and the inspection systems that are strongly related. detailed design, which is the third step of the design pro-
A concurrent approach emphasizes the complexity of the cess. In the literature, very few works dealing with this task
design process because it imposes that all the choices exist. This is due to the peculiar nature of this topic: it
mentioned above should be carried out at the same time. presents as many different problems as there are design
Functional, technological and economical requirements are projects. The solution of these problems is entrusted to the
simultaneously taken into consideration. Further elements designers’ experience. Lanzotti et al. (2000) assign the
that complicate the functional design are the large number dimensional and geometrical tolerances on the basis of a
of part components to treat. feature classification; they consider form and dimensional
Any changes in manufacturing process or system and tolerances of internal or external features. The concept of
evolutions in the performances of an existing product may relations between features is used to allow the extension of
require the redesign of the whole product. Even a small the product model from conceptual to detailed design
upgrade of existing products may need a long time and stages in Bradley and Maropoulos (1998): feature relations
many resources. Lastly, the rules of functional design are are an integrated representation system for dimensioning,
domain of the older designers at a company. They are often tolerancing and connectivity modelling. Ballu and Mathieu
not formalized and have a heuristic nature. In fact, these propose a model that allows one to express fully several
rules are the results of experience. Therefore, young points of view: functional, standards, inspection and man-
engineers engaged by a firm may not have enough time for ufacturing (Ballu and Mathieu 1995). A computer-aided
training, or they may learn directly on the job in the tolerancing system is shown in Tsai and Wang (1999): it
absence of the design experts of the firm. This results in assists the designer, especially in evaluating the tolerance
projects not satisfying the previously defined requirements. accumulation of an assembly. The method introduced in
GD&T reduces design complexity and young designers’ Clément et al. (1994), Salomons et al. (1996) and Weill
work. Moreover, the development of computer-aided tools (1997) generates tolerances from contact relations expres-
that use drawings, in a file format, to communicate among sed as associations between surfaces (Technologically and
product design and manufacturing planning minimizes Topologically Related Surfaces, TTRS). In Anselmetti
human interactions and consequently design time in an (2001), geometric specification on key component is gen-
automated environment. These tools must necessarily use a erated by rules involving the types of features and a user-
standardized language; they are becoming strategically defined priority order among them. Hu and Xiong (2005a,
critical in order to better exploit the design resources where b) identify constraints to the relative motion among parts
they are geographically placed: they may belong to dif- that they use to define suitable geometric control on fea-
ferent firms or to different centres of the same firm that are tures. Mejbri et al. (2003, 2005) decompose a global geo-
placed all around the world. metric functional requirement of a mechanism into
Tolerance design is a stage of product design. The geometric specifications defined on key components. The
research on tolerance design has defined an iterative tolerances are defined by the user as special geometric
method, starting from a first tolerance assignment and tolerances whose datums are all located on a single base
ending with the definition of optimal values (Zeid 1991). part of the assembly. For each requirement, a chain of
Once all tolerances have been assigned to the part features contacts is built from the toleranced part to the base part.
that are critical from a functional point of view (tolerance This allows to transform the original, external datums into
assignment), tolerance analysis is performed. This stage regular datums on the same part. More recently in Armil-
aims to evaluate how the combined effect of all the pre- lotta and Semeraro (2011), the methods available for the
viously established tolerances influences the assembly specification of geometric tolerances, from common engi-
characteristics in order to verify that all the design neering practice to the development of computer-aided
requirements are met. Subsequently the interactions support tools, are described and compared. In Panneer and
between the defined tolerances are analysed in order to Sivaramakrishnan (2012), an integrated methodology is
verify that the parts work correctly together. Therefore, the suggested for value specification and for checking the
critical functional requirements of the assembly are cal- coherence and completeness of position, symmetry and
culated as a function of the previously defined tolerances perpendicularity tolerances based on distribution of mini-
and are compared with the constraints due to assembly or mum allowance. In Saravanan et al. (2014), a nonlinear
use. Finally, feasible or economic aspects are considered combinatorial optimization problem is framed based on
on the basis of both available processes and cost assembly function requirement (AFR) in order to optimize

123
Res Eng Design

the tolerance values. In Lu et al. (2012), an optimization The second choice involves the identification of all the
algorithm is proposed to achieve concurrent tolerance technical functions that the product should perform, by
design with a game theoretic approach. analysing the product working.
All these approaches, shown in the literature, do not The third choice translates the functionality of the
develop a framework, generally effective, supporting the design assembly in all the couplings or kinematic con-
reasoning about tolerance choices. Moreover, they are straints among assembly components that are needed for
applied to assemblies constituted by few and simple-shape the assembly to work correctly. Then, it defines the pairs of
parts. assembly components involved in each technical function.
This work shows a new general methodology to The following steps from the fourth to the eighth choice
assign dimensional and geometric tolerances to all the that reason on the need of dimensional and geometric
components of an assembly with a concurrent design controls are implemented for each pair of components
approach. It takes into consideration the relationships belonging to each technical function. The features of each
between tolerances and a set of design principles that pair of components that are involved in each technical
have been naturally extracted from the standards and function are identified and processed as follows.
literature and from a deep discussion with the Italian The fourth choice assigns the dimensional tolerances to
Association of Industrial Designers (IAID). A collection each pair of features by evaluating whether the coupling
of rules to assign tolerances on the basis of the pursued should occur with an interference, with a clearance or in an
functionality is, therefore, defined. These rules enable uncertain way. The accuracy required by the design spec-
also to choose the necessary datum reference frames and ification is also considered. Many standardized kinds of
material modifiers. Those rules help designer during the couplings exist in the literature (Straneo and Consorti
detailed design, where classically the tolerance approach 1991): for each of them, dimensional tolerances are fixed.
is defined. In order to demonstrate and validate the The following four choices (from fifth to eighth) provide
proposed approach, the methodology has been applied to the geometric tolerances to characterize the functional
two real case studies: a volumetric gear pump and a aspects of each couple of features. They reflect the
pneumatic actuator. sequence of geometric controls supplied by the different
The paper is organized as follows. Firstly, the proposed classes of geometric tolerances. The order of geometric
methodology to tolerance design is presented together with controls is decreasing: this means that the tolerance class
some details on design rules. Then the application of the allowing the greatest control, i.e. location tolerance, is
proposed method to a volumetric gear pump and to a assigned first. Run-out and profile tolerances are assigned
pneumatic actuator is described in order to prove its effi- lastly, since they are scarcely used in practice, due to their
cacy and efficiency. peculiar nature.
The fifth choice evaluates whether it is needed to locate
the features of each pair of components. Therefore, the
2 Design methodology necessity of a location tolerance is checked and, in the case
of an affirmative answer, the datum reference frame
The proposed methodology to assign tolerances is a critical (D.R.F.), the need of the material modifier (M or L) on the
step of the functional product tolerance design. The pro- D.R.F., the tolerance kind (position, concentricity, or
posed method is a set of decisions for carrying out a first symmetry) and the need to use the material modifier (M or
assignment of tolerances, as shown in Fig. 1. It involves L) or the projected tolerance zone (P) on the tolerance
eight sequential choices that pass from the product per- feature are completely defined. The term ‘‘POSITION’’
formance to a promising set of dimensional and geometric near the material modifiers means that they may be applied
tolerances. It may be used for single parts or assemblies. on the datum reference frame or on the tolerance feature
The first choice concerns the definition of the nominal only for position tolerances.
geometry and the mechanical resistance, in terms of con- The sixth choice evaluated whether it is needed to orient
stitutive material, of a product, by taking into account the the features of each pair of components. This means that if
applied stresses, such as static or dynamic loads and tem- angular control of a feature greater than that due to a
perature gradients. The product shape is defined together previously assigned position tolerance is needed, an ori-
with its preliminary dimensions as a function of the chosen entation tolerance should be specified too. At the same
material in order to guarantee that the resistance require- time, if no position tolerance has been previously assigned,
ments are met. this step allows control of the feature orientation. An ori-
From the second to the eighth choice, there is the entation definition must provide a D.R.F., the need of the
assignment of the geometric tolerances on the basis of the material modifier (M or L) on the D.R.F., the tolerance type
newly proposed approach. (parallel, orthogonal or inclination) and the need to use the

123
 Res Eng Design

Fig. 1 New methodology

material modifier (M or L) on the tolerance feature or to This geometric characterization of each pair of compo-
apply the tolerance to a tangent plane (T). nents is carried out by means of design criteria. Design
The seventh choice specifies a form tolerance if a form criteria are rules, whose if-conditions make reasoning on
specification greater than that due to position or orientation the working of the analysed pair of parts and whose actions
tolerances is needed. A form tolerance assignment involves assign geometric tolerances to the part features. Examples
the definition of tolerance type (straightness, flatness, of design criteria are the assignment of flatness to planes
roundness or cylindricity) and the maximum material that must guarantee an adhesion, or the attribution of a
modifier M that is typically used for straightness. concentricity where a mass balance is required, or the
The eighth choice specifies run-out or profile tolerances definition of a projected tolerance zone where interferences
in peculiar applications. The assignment of a run-out or a among coupling parts must be avoided. Moreover, the
profile tolerance involves the definition of a D.R.F., the choice of a datum reference frame may follow some simple
need of the material modifier (M or L) on the D.R.F. and and unequivocal rules, such as a datum should be easily
the definition of the tolerance type (circular or total run- accessible for verification and it should be manufactured
out, line or surface profile). with the accuracy required by the design specifications.
All the steps of the design methodology are reported in Some details on these design criteria are described in the
Table 1, whereas the steps 4–8 should be repeated for each following paragraph.
couple of assembly features involved in each pair of Once a geometric tolerance is assigned to a pair of
assembly components, steps 3–8 should be repeated for assembly components, it is verified that this tolerance
each pair of assembly components involved in each tech- actually satisfies the functional requirements identified at
nical function, and steps 2–8 should be repeated for each the first and the second steps of the proposed method:
technical function. this comparison is shown as feedbacks in the flow chart

123
Res Eng Design

Table 1 Design methodology

Number Description Explanation

0 Product dimensioning To define the product shape together with its preliminary dimensions as a function of the chosen
material in order to guarantee that the resistance requirements are met
1 Product’s technical functions To identify all the technical functions that the product should perform by analysing product
identification working
For each technical function
2 Identification of the pairs of To identify the pairs of assembly components involved in each technical function that means
assembly components whose assembly allows the product to explicate that function
For each pair of assembly components
3 Identification of the couples of To identify all the couples of features involved in assembly
assembly features
For each couple of assembly features
4 Dimensional tolerance assignment To assign the dimensional tolerances by evaluating whether the coupling should occur with an
interference, with a clearance or in an uncertain way
5 Location tolerance assignment To check the necessity of a location tolerance. If yes, to define datum reference frame (D.R.F.),
material modifier (M or L) on the D.R.F., tolerance kind (position, concentricity, or symmetry)
and material modifier (M or L) or projected tolerance zone (P)
6 Orientation tolerance assignment To evaluate whether it is needed to orient the features. This means that if an angular control of a
feature greater than that due to a previously assigned location tolerance is needed, an
orientation tolerance should be specified too. If no location tolerance has been previously
assigned, this step controls orientation
If yes, to define datum reference frame (D.R.F.), material modifier (M or L) on the D.R.F.,
tolerance kind (parallel, orthogonal, or inclination) and material modifier (M or L) or tangent
plane (T)
7 Form tolerance assignment To evaluate whether it is need to assign a form specification. This means that if a form control
greater than that due to position or orientation tolerances is needed, a form tolerance should be
specified too
If yes, to define tolerance type (straightness, flatness, roundness or cylindricity) and material
modifier M for straightness
8 Profile or run-out tolerance To evaluate whether it is needed to assign run-out or profile tolerances
assignment If yes, to define datum reference frame (D.R.F.), material modifier (M or L) on D.R.F. and
tolerance type (circular or total run-out, line or surface profile)

shown in Fig. 1. If the functional requirements are not 3 Design criteria

satisfied, refine the technical functions and reiterate the
proposed methodology. Otherwise, the following step of Design criteria put functional requirements in touch with
the tolerance design process may be carried out, i.e. the dimensional or geometric tolerances. The great difficulty in
tolerance analysis. Tolerance analysis aims to determine defining design criteria is that there are so many different
the variability of a design function that depends on the problems in mechanical design that it may not make any
assembly, when the previously fixed tolerances are var- sense to define general rules. At the same time, having a set
ied. If all the tolerances assigned to the assembly com- of criteria may help young designers to approach the design
ponents do not satisfy the design constraints, adjust the process. This is fundamental, especially for geometric
design by remaking the tolerance assignment. Otherwise, tolerances whose standards are often not well known and
it is possible to carry out the last step of the design whose application may be very hard due to the unknown
process. This stage takes into account the manufacturing relationships between tolerances and functional perfor-
or economic constraints related to the tolerances previ- mances. Therefore, the design criteria are a collection of
ously assigned on the basis of functional reasoning. rules that establish the tolerances to assign on the basis of
Reiterate the design process if the constraints are not the pursued functionality. Moreover, this set of rules
satisfied. At the end of this process, a set of dimensional includes some principles to choose both the datum refer-
and geometrical tolerances, optimal in terms of func- ence frame and the material modifiers. These design cri-
tionality, manufacturing and cheapness, are obtained. teria have been defined by collecting information of the

123
 Res Eng Design

literature (Meadows 1995; Clément et al. 1994; Cross et al. FOS must be within. When specified on an MMC or least
1996; Creveling 1996) and by discussion with the Italian material condition (LMC) basis, a position tolerance con-
Association of Industrial Designers (IAID). The design trol defines a boundary, often referred to as the virtual
rules collected up to now are many, but they need to be condition that may not be violated by the surface or sur-
further widened and updated in time by discussing con- faces of the considered feature. In comparison with coor-
tinuously with mechanical designers. dinate tolerancing, a tolerance of position offers many
As concerns the dimensional tolerances, the assignment advantages, such as it provides larger tolerance zones by
is simplified by the existence of tables where the application using cylindrical tolerance zones in spite of squared ones
fields of the most common couplings, basic hole or basic and it permits additional tolerances taken by dimensional
shaft, are shown (Lee and Woo 1990). Analysing these one and datum shift. Moreover, it prevents tolerance
tables, it is possible to note that the shafts are generally accumulation, since the position errors of each FOS are
characterized by tolerances more narrow than those pro- defined with respect to the datums; it permits the use of
vided for holes. This is due to the fact that shafts are functional gauges that simplify the part inspection. All
inexpensive, but have low tolerances compared to holes. these reasons contribute to a clear interpretation and a
Actually, the basic hole is preferred by precision industry, decrease in manufacturing lubricants costs. Position toler-
such as automotive, aeronautic manufacture, machine tool, ance is commonly used to control four types of part rela-
internal combustion engines and pumps. This is due to the tionships: the distance between features of size, such as
fact that a hole inspection is generally carried out by gauges holes, bosses, slots and tabs, the location of features of size
that are more easier to manufacture than fork gauges used or patterns of features of size, the coaxiality between fea-
for shaft. The basic shaft is used where the least accuracy is tures of size and the symmetrical relationship between
required, such as agricultural or textile machines. features of size. When designing products with fasteners,
As concerns the form tolerances, a flatness control is fixed and floating fastener schemes are a convenient design
generally used to provide a flat surface for a gasket or seal, tool. A fixed fastener assembly is one where the fastener is
to attach a mating part or to make better contact with a held in place by one of the components of the assembly.
datum plane. Moreover, straightness control is preferred if This means that the holes in one component of the
associated with a maximum material condition (MMC), assembly are clearance holes, while the hole in the other
when it is needed to guarantee a right functional relation- component is threaded or a press fit, like a dowel pin. The
ship between parts to couple, such as a pin or a shaft and a floating fastener assembly is where two (or more) com-
hole. Finally, a common reason for using a circularity or ponents are held together with fasteners (such as bolts and
cylindricity control on a drawing is to limit the out of round nuts), and both components have clearance holes for the
of a shaft diameter. In certain cases, lobbing of a shaft fasteners.
diameter will cause bearings or bushings to fail prema- When specifying a position control, the designer must
turely. The value of the form tolerance range may be specify under which material condition the control is to
decided with the help of a rule-of-thumb that is based upon apply. The MMC symbol is advantageous when mating is
the norms of production and probabilities: a design form most important. The least material concept is usually used
tolerance requirement on a stable rigid part should be equal for features when the preservation of material is of great
to, or less than, one-half of the overall size tolerance for importance and cost is a significant factor. It is used when
justification as a specified form tolerance. wall thickness is thought to be endangered and the holes
Orientation tolerances control the angular position of a stand a chance of approaching a breakout condition. It is
plane surface or of a feature of size (FOS). An interesting also used on casting drawings to assure that in subsequent
application of orientation tolerances is with the tangent machining operations, enough material is available to
plane modifier. The tangent plane modifier denotes that allow a machine cut to clean up the part surface. The RFS
only the tangent plane established by the high points of the concept preserves balance better than either the MMC or
controlled surfaces must be within the parallelism tolerance LMC symbol concepts, protects mating as well as the
zone. When the tangent plane modifier is used in orienta- MMC symbol concept (but not as well as the LMC con-
tion call-outs, the orientation of the toleranced surfaces is cept) and creates tighter, more restrictive tolerances on the
not controlled. This specification may be usefully applied average produced part. This runs the risk of increasing the
to mating planes, since it is less strong than the orientation cost of the overall product and should be used only when it
tolerance applied to the whole surface. is determined that the use of the MMC or LMC concepts
A position tolerance defines the location of a FOS from may endanger part function. Further design principles are
its true position. When specified on regardless of feature related to the use of a projected tolerance zone or a zero
size (RFS) basis, a position tolerance control defines a tolerance at MMC. A projected tolerance zone modifier
tolerance zone that the centre, axis or centre plane of the should be specified in bolted joint applications, whenever

123
Res Eng Design

the height of the clearance hole is greater than the depth of 4 Application examples
the threaded hole. A zero tolerance at MMC should be
considered whenever the function of a FOS is assembly. 4.1 Gear pump
Many further design criteria are related to the datum ref-
erence frame, to coaxial features and to noncylindrical The newly proposed methodology to tolerance assignment
features (Creveling 1996). has been applied to the volumetric gear pump shown in
The design criteria are summarized in Table 2. Fig. 2. It is commonly used to draw up different types of

Table 2 Design criteria

Assignment rule Scope Authority

To provide a flat surface for a gasket or seal Flatness tolerance Foster (1994)
To attach a mating part Flatness tolerance Foster (1994)
To make better contact with a datum plane Flatness tolerance Foster (1994)
Applied to a FOS with a MMC to guarantee a right functional relationship Straightness tolerance Foster (1994)
between parts to couple, such as a pin or a shaft and a hole
To limit the lobes (mass balance) that will cause bearings or bushings to fail Circularity or cylindricity Foster (1994)
prematurely
Form tolerance range on a stable rigid part should be equal to, or less than, Form tolerance range Foster (1994)
one-half of the overall size tolerance
To control mating planes, since it is less strong than the same tolerance Orientation tolerance and tangent plane AIPI
applied to the whole surface modifier
A datum should be easily accessible for verification Datum AIPI
A datum should be manufactured with the accuracy required by the design Datum AIPI
specification
Specify all the needed datum Datum AIPI
Prefer to choice as datum the mating features of the two coupling parts Datum AIPI
To control the distance between FOS, such as holes, bosses, slots and tabs Position tolerance Krulikowski
(1998)
To control the location of FOS or pattern of FOS Position tolerance Krulikowski
(1998)
To control the coaxiality between FOS Position tolerance Krulikowski
(1998)
To control the symmetrical relationship between FOS Position tolerance Krulikowski
(1998)
It is helpful when mating is most important Maximum material condition Foster (1994)
It is usually used for features when the preservation of material is of great Least material condition Foster (1994)
importance and the cost is a significant factor
It is used when wall thickness is thought to be endangered and the holes stand Least material condition Foster (1994)
a chance of approaching a breakout condition
It is also used on casting to assure that in subsequent machining operations, Least material condition Foster (1994)
enough material is available to allow a machine cut to clean up the part
surface
It preserves mass balance for rotating parts Regardless of feature size Foster (1994)
It protects mating as well as MMC Regardless of feature size Foster (1994)
It creates tighter, more restrictive tolerances, and, therefore, it increases the Regardless of feature size Foster (1994)
product cost
To avoid interferences among coupling parts (for example: in bolted joint Projected tolerance zone Meadows (1995)
when the height of the clearance hole is greater than the depth of the
threaded hole)
To assemble a mechanism, it is enough that the surfaces, resulting from virtual Assembling principle Meadows (1995)
boundary conditions, are coupled

123
 Res Eng Design

cover. A perpendicularity tolerance is assigned to the

internal surface of the cover related to the axis of the
hole with 18.5 mm diameter (see Fig. 3). This orien-
tation control implies indirectly a flatness control useful
for the third technical function. Moreover, it is
necessary to add the parallelism of the internal surface
and the external one, to correctly transfer the motion
from outside. As concerns with the two supports, the
coaxiality of the 20-mm holes with the 18.2-mm holes
(see Fig. 4) must be guaranteed, in order to assemble
and to make the pump working correctly. Therefore, the
roundness and the parallelism of the old design (Fig. 4
on the left) have been replaced by the coaxiality of the
two holes coupling with the shaft of gear wheel, as
shown in Fig. 4 in the right. These changes have been
approved by designers of IAID too.
A further perpendicularity tolerance is also needed
among the hole mounting the pinion axis and the plane
Fig. 2 Gear pump [Courtesy (Straneo and Consorti 1991)]
surface in contact with the internal surface of the front
cover, in order to avoid obliqueness between the axis of
oil, fuel or lubricants. As known, it is constituted of a case the pinion with respect to the surface mating with the
(6) inside which a pair of toothed gears is housed: a pinion front cover. To transmit the movement between the two
that takes the motion by a shaft connected with an engine toothed gears, a parallelism control between the axes of
(9), and a gear wheel (8) that is driven by the pinion. The the two hole coupled with the gears is necessary. The
case is joined to suction and outlet tubes on the two sides of toothed gears require a circular run-out on the tooth
the gears. Fluid is trapped laterally inside the hollow space surface in order to guarantee mass balance and minimize
between two consecutive teeth and the case, and it is car- the eccentricity during the movement of the two gears
ried from suction to outlet by the rotation of the gears. At (see at the top of Figs. 5, 6). The case needs a parallel
the same time, the fluid does not come back to the suction tolerance among the surfaces mated with the front and the
side because of the seal between the two engaged teeth of end covers in order to guarantee the assembly and the
the gears. A fixed clearance among case and gears is not correct working of the pump (see at the bottom of Fig. 7).
able to preserve the lateral clearance of the gears, thus Moreover, a perpendicularity tolerance assigned to the
reducing the volumetric efficiency. Two mobile supports surface mated with the internal surface of the front cover
(7) that are moved near to the gear sides guarantee a assures a correct power drive.
minimum lateral clearance. A front cover (1) and an end • The second technical function involves the front cover
one (4) complete the components of the designed pump. In and the two mobile supports. Two bushings are
this case, the newly proposed methodology has been used provided between the shafts and the supports. The
to define the required dimensional and geometric toler- dimensional tolerances are fixed for each coupling on
ances that have been compared with those of the literature the basis of tables found in the literature: the hole on
(Straneo and Consorti 1991). Once the nominal pump the supports has a dimensional tolerance of
geometry has been defined, four technical functions that the 18.2?0.05
?0 mm (see Fig. 4), while the gear shaft has a
pump must perform have been identified. The first is the dimensional tolerance of 18-0.01
-0.02 mm (see Figs. 5, 6).

power drive between two parallel gears, the second is No further geometric specification is needed to guar-
guiding of the two rotating shafts holding pinion and gear antee this guide function.
wheel, the third is the seal at the entrance shaft connected • The third technical function, i.e. the seal at the entrance
with the engine, and the fourth is the axial compensation of shaft connected with the engine, involves the front
the clearances. cover whose hole has a dimensional tolerance of
18.5?0.02
?0 mm and couples with the shaft of the driving
• The first technical function involves many components wheel that has a dimensional tolerance of 18-0.01 -0.02 mm
of the pump: the front cover, the supports, the pinion, (see Figs. 3, 5).
the wheel gear and the case. In order to transmit the • Finally, the fourth technical function, i.e. the axial
correct motion, it is convenient to avoid the rotation compensation of the clearances, involves the two
axis of the pinion being oblique with respect to the front supports. The plane surfaces of the supports go into

123
Res Eng Design

Fig. 3 Tolerance assignment to the front cover [Courtesy (Straneo and Consorti 1991)]

(a) (b) 0
0,01 D
25-0,01

21
0,01 A
B 0,03 B

+ 0,02
Ø20+ 0,01

0,01
Ø18,2+0 0,05

C 0,03 C

A 0,02 A

Fig. 4 Tolerance assignment to the support: a old design [Courtesy (Straneo and Consorti 1991)]; b new design

contact with the flanks of the wheels, with one of the run-out tolerance that substitutes the circular run-out and
internal sides of the covers and with internal side of the the straightness tolerances of the previous design, to take
pump casing. Therefore, a dimensional tolerance is into account the run-out of the flanks of the wheels during
applied to the depth of each support equal to 250-0.01 mm. their revolution. The total run-out should be assigned to
Moreover, a parallelism tolerance of 0.02 mm is applied the flanks of the toothed wheels, but generally the flanks
as regards the datum A on the surface of the support that are machined by grinding; this manufacturing process
goes into contact with the flank of the wheel (see Fig. 4). limits the run-out deviations. The coupling between
Finally, it is needed to consider that it is applied a total support and pump casing involves a dimensional

123
 Res Eng Design

Fig. 5 Tolerance assignment to gear wheel [Courtesy (Straneo and Consorti 1991)]

4.2 Pneumatic actuator

The second example is a pneumatic actuator with twelve

pistons that are actuated by pneumatic valves. It is a part of
a machine to manufacture wood.
The original design is shown in Fig. 9.
• Proceeding as made for the gear pump, the func-
tional requirements of the part are identified. In
particular, the pistons, once coupled with further
elements, have to press an abrasive paste on a plane
surface to machine. To do this, a guide for the
pistons that involves a coupling H7-g6 between the
piston’s axis and the guide was designed (see
Fig. 10). The guide has an O-ring in poly-tetra-
fluorine-ethylene (PTFE) charged by carbon fibres
with a slide to reduce the friction. There is a gasket
of polyurethane to avoid the compressed air going
out of the down side of the part, whereas the pistons
Fig. 6 Tolerance assignment to pinion shafts [Courtesy (Straneo and are seated. To limit the deviation of the piston’s axis
Consorti 1991)] during its movement, a perpendicularity tolerance of
0.05 mm that originally was applied as regard to
tolerance H6-e5, a circular tolerance of 0.015 mm for the datum C has been applied.
support (see Fig. 4) and of 0.01 mm for the pump (see • The second requirement is to rightly assemble the part that
Fig. 7) in order to guarantee the contact between the means to define clearly the location of the 24 threaded
coupled surfaces. Finally, a flatness tolerance of holed M5, of the pistons, of the rods, of the four threaded
0.08 mm is applied to the side of the back cover (see holes M6 on the side surfaces of the part. The new design
Fig. 8). put location tolerances on the axes of the holes and pistons

123
Res Eng Design

Fig. 7 Tolerance assignment to pump case [Courtesy (Straneo and Consorti 1991)]

Fig. 8 Tolerance assignment to end cover [Courtesy (Straneo and Consorti 1991)]

(see Fig. 10), whereas the original design used dimen- datum D (i.e. the bottom surface of the part that is
sional tolerances. The rods and the four holes M6 remain called A in the original design) that is constrained to
unchanged, since they do not constitute a pattern and they datum A (the up surface of the part) by a parallelism
have different values of tolerances. tolerance, see Fig. 10. In this way, the surface to use
The new procedure has introduced a new datum for locating the part during manufacturing and inspec-
reference system of the part that is constituted by tion was clearly defined.

123
123
275,6± 0,03
48,5+0 0,05
N° 12+ 12 fori M5
0,05 C 10+0 0,1
2

28,8
E

Ø18 h7
0,02 C

CH= 17

5,5± 0,025
1,5

44,5± 0,025
33+0 0,05
Ø16 H8
M20X1

Ø10
5+0 0,2 19 +0 0,05 14+0 0,1

Ø14 H9
9+0 0,05
41 +0 0,1

34,3± 0,03
57,3± 0,03
80,3± 0,03

11,3± 0,03
Sez. A-A

218,3± 0,03
241,3± 0,03
264,3± 0,03

103,3± 0,03
126,3± 0,03
149,3± 0,03
172,3± 0,03
195,3± 0,03
10+ 0,5
0

1,7 Particolare E
Gola UNI4386-E 0,4x0,2
0,8± 0,05

N° 2+ 2 fori M6
0,6
Ø7 g6

Ø10 g6

8,9± 0,05
Ø5± 0,05

0,5± 0,03X30°
Ø6± 0,05

A 0,5± 0,03X45°

0,05 A

10 corsa: 9,5± 0,2 42± 0,2 43,5± 0,3

= = 10± 0,03
C

1,5
Ø2
50± 0,3
43,5± 0,3

Ø2

3,8
N° 12+ 12 fori M3 filetto utile 7,5 mm 7± 0,2
B 60± 0,3
12± 0,2

25± 0,025

Fig. 9 Original design of pneumatic actuator

Res Eng Design
Res Eng Design

Fig. 10 New design of pneumatic actuator

To control the position, the new procedure introduces a A clear frame to reason on tolerance usefulness carries
perpendicularity tolerance of 0.02 mm and a paral- advantages in terms of communication between designer
lelism tolerance of 0.05 mm. The first tolerance is and manufacturing planner, or of economic design, since it
applied to the longitudinal plane of the part that is used provides the maximum manufacturability of the part
to locate the pistons. The second is applied to the axes through the maximum tolerance values (see tolerance
of the threaded holes and of the pistons. In this way, it bonus concept), and even in terms of design, since it allows
is assured the right alignment of the parts. to characterize in a correct way all the functional require-
ments of the part to be produced. The proposed method-
ology may be easily translated into an expert system that,
interacting with designer, supports the design process.
5 Conclusions
Moreover, it may be easily integrated into computer-aided
design tools. Finally, it may be a teaching instrument to
The analysis of the application examples underlines some
cover the analysis of tolerance applications.
important considerations strictly connected with the pro-
The definition of the tolerance zone and the widening of
posed methodology of tolerance assignment. A careful
the design criteria are currently matter of further study.
examination of the technical functions that must be imple-
mented and the knowledge of the relationships between
geometric tolerances allow us to correctly define the geo-
metric controls that are effective for the designed device and References
to avoid a useless overlapping of tolerances that imply an
Anselmetti B (2001) Generation of functional tolerancing based on
increase in the manufacturing and inspection costs.
positioning features. Comput Aided Des 38:902–919
Examples are the modifications of the design of the Armillotta A, Semeraro Q (2011) Geometric tolerance specification.
pump support in order to guarantee the correct imple- In: Colosimo BM, Senin N (eds) Geometric tolerances. Springer,
mentation of a technical function. pp 3–37

123
 Res Eng Design

Ballu A, Mathieu L (1995) Univocal expression of functional and IEEE international symposium on assembly and task planning.
geometric tolerances for design, manufacturing and inspection. Besançon, France, pp 235–240
In: Kimura (ed) Proceedings of the 4th CIRP design seminar. Mejbri H, Anselmetti B, Mawussi K (2005) Functional tolerancing of
Chapman & Hall, London, pp 31–46 complex mechanisms: identification and specification of key
Bradley HD, Maropoulos PG (1998) A relation-based product model parts. Comput Ind Eng 49:241–265
for computer-supported early design assessment. J Mater Process Panneer R, Sivaramakrishnan V (2012) An integrated methodology
Technol 76:88–95 for geometric tolerance analysis and value specification based on
Clément A, Rivière A, Temmerman M (1994) Cotation Tridimen- arithmetical, graphical and analytical methods. In: Sathiyamoor-
sionelle des Systèmes Mécaniques; PYC thy S (ed) Emerging trends in science, engineering and
Creveling CM (1996) Tolerance design: a handbook for developing technology. Springer, Berlin, pp 362–371
optimal specifications. Addison-Wesley, Reading Salomons OW, Jonge Poerink HJ, Haalboom FJ, van Slooten F, van
Cross N, Christiaans H, Dorst K (1996) Analysing design activity. Houten FJAM, Kals HJJ (1996) A computer-aided tolerancing
Wiley, New York tool I: tolerance specification. Comput Ind 31:161–174
Foster LW (1994) Geo-metrics III. Addison-Wesley Longman Inc., Saravanan A, Balamurugan C, Sivakumar K, Ramabalan S (2014)
Reading Optimal geometric tolerance design framework for rigid parts
Hu J, Xiong G (2005a) Concurrent design of a geometric parameter with assembly function requirements using evolutionary algo-
and tolerance for assembly and cost. Int J Prod Res rithms. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 73(9–12):1219–1236
43(2):267–293 Straneo SL, Consorti R (1991) Machine design. Principato Editore,
Hu J, Xiong G (2005b) Dimensional and geometric tolerance design Milano
based on constraints. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 26:1099–1108 Tsai JC, Wang WW (1999) Development of a computer-aided
Krulikowski A (1998) Fundamentals of geometric dimensioning and tolerancing system in CAD environment. In: van Hoten, Kals
tolerancing. Delmar Publishers, Boston (eds) Proceedings of the 6th CIRP international seminar on
Lanzotti A, Catalano S, Podda G (2000) Functional dimensioning and computer-aided tolerancing. Kluwer Academic Publisher, Dor-
ASME dimensioning: actual situation and perspectives. In: drecht, pp 47–54
Proceedings of the III Seminario Italo-Espanõl de Diseño. Weill RD (1997) Dimensioning and tolerancing for function. In:
Bilbao, pp 1–17 Zhang HC (ed) Advanced tolerancing techniques. Wiley, New
Lee WJ, Woo TC (1990) Tolerances: their analysis and synthesis. York, pp 329–354
J Eng Ind 112:113–121 Wilson BA (1996) Design, dimensioning and tolerancing based on the
Lu C, Zhao WH, Yu SJ (2012) Concurrent tolerance design for ASME Y14.5M-1994 standard. The Goodheart-Willcox Com-
manufacture and assembly with a game theoretic approach. Int J pany, Tinley Park
Adv Manuf Technol 62(1–4):303–316 Zeid I (1991) CAD/CAM theory and practice. McGraw-Hill Inc.,
Meadows JD (1995) Geometric dimensioning and tolerancing: New York
applications and techniques for used in design, manufacturing
and inspection. Dekker
Mejbri H, Anselmetti B, Mawussi B (2003) A recursive tolerancing
method with sub-assembly generation. In: Proceedings of the

123