In pre-production, during assembly of newly produced components geometrical deviations, caused by form errors of the parts, are discovered that can cause either functional or esthetical problems. One commonly used way of solving this is to reposition the components by adjusting their locators, also known as trimming. Traditionally this is done by assembling a number of components, measuring the deviations to surrounding parts, adjusting the locator points, reassembling the components and measuring the result. This is repeated until the result is satisfactory, and is a quite time and effort consuming activity. This paper presents a method and a tool that simplifies this process. Based on inspection data from the initial components all trimming activities are performed in the computer tool presented. After the locators are adjusted, the result is presented directly, which eliminates the need for physical inspection in order to verify the result of the trimming. The presented tool also includes optimization of the trimming. By formulating the problem of minimizing the geometrical deviations as a linear least square problem a general optimization package can be used. The optimization handles both boundaries on the allowed trimming and weighting of the different inspection features. By using the method of influence coefficients, also compliant (non-rigid) components can be handled.

1.
Gao, J., Chase, K. W. and Magleby, S. P., 1995, Comparision of Assembly Tolerance Analysis by the Direct Linearization and Modified Monte Carlo Simulation Methods, ASME Design Engineering Technical Conference, Boston, p. 353–360.
2.
So¨derberg
R.
and
Lindkvist
L.
,
1999
, “
Computer Aided Assembly Robustness Evaluation
,”
Journal of Engineering Design
,
10
, pp.
165
181
.
3.
Lindkvist, L. and So¨derberg, R., 1999, “Concurrent Robust Product and Process Design,” Proceedings of the ASME Design Automation Conference, September 12–15, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA, DETC99/DAC-8687.
4.
Carlson, J. S., Lindkvist, L. and So¨derberg, R., 2000, “Multi-Fixture Assembly System Diagnosis Based on Part and Assembly Measurement Data,” Proceedings of the ASME Design for Manufacture Conference, September 10–13, Baltimore, Maryland, USA, DETC2000/DFM-14037.
5.
Liu
S. C.
,
Hu
S. J.
,
Woo
T. C.
,
1996
, “
Tolerance Analysis for Sheet Metal Assemblies
,”
ASME Journal of Mechanical Design
,
118
, pp.
62
67
.
6.
Sellem E., Rivie`re A., 1998, “Tolerance Analysis of Deformable Assemblies,” proceedings of ASME Design Engineering Technical Conference, September 13–16, 1998, Atlanta, USA.
7.
Long, Y., Hu, S. J. and So¨derberg, R., 2002, “Incorporating Fixture Variation in Compliant Assembly Variation Analysis,” 2002 Japan-U.S.A Symposium on Flexible Automation, Hiroshima, July 15–17, 2002, Hiroshima, Japan.
8.
So¨derberg, R., Lindkvist, L. and Dahlstro¨m, S., 2006, “Computer Aided Robustness Analysis for Compliant (nonrigid) Assemblies,” Journal of Engineering Design, 17, No 1.
9.
Ahlstro¨m, U., and Magnusson, J., 2004, “Utilizing RD&T Models to Solve Pre-production Problems,” Masters Thesis, Chalmers University of Technology, Go¨teborg, Sweden.
10.
RD&T Technology AB, 2002, RD&T Software Manual. (Mo¨lndal, Sweden).
11.
Kuntsevich, A. and Kappel, F., 1997, “SolvOpt: The Solver for Local Nonlinear Optimization Problems,” Institute for Mathematics, Karl-Franzens University of Graz, Graz, Austria.
12.
Mo¨ller, T. and Haines, E., 1999, Real-Time Rendering, AK Peters Ltd, Natick, MA, USA.
13.
Golub, G. H. and Van Loan, C. F., 1996, Matrix Computations, 3rd edition, Johns Hopkins University Press, London.
This content is only available via PDF.
You do not currently have access to this content.