Managing physical dependencies through location system design

Many geometrical quality problems that arise during production and assembly can be traced back to the way parts are designed and located to each other; that is, how the interface geometry and locating schemes are designed and selected. Today, locating schemes are often generated after the geometry has been set, or as a consequence of the part geometries being designed. In many situations, locating schemes are not deliberately designed or defined at all. This often results in assembly and positioning situations that are not clearly defined, analysed or understood by the designer. Since the way parts are located to each other is critical for how geometrical variation will propagate and cause variation in critical product dimensions, more emphasis should be put on this activity in early design phases in order to avoid assembly and production problems later on. This work proposes a structured top-down procedure for selecting locating systems for parts and subassemblies, and presents design guidelines to assist assembly modelling. The procedure can be seen as a first step in robust design and tolerance analysis in the area of geometry design and assurance. The proposed procedure utilizes an assembly dependency matrix, a locating scheme library, a number of different part-sensitivity analyses and a set of design guidelines.

[1]  Rikard Söderberg,et al.  Assembly Root Cause Analysis: A Way to Reduce Dimensional Variation in Assembled Products , 2003 .

[2]  J. Dixon,et al.  Engineering Design , 2019, Springer Handbook of Mechanical Engineering.

[3]  J. S. Carlson,et al.  Quadratic Sensitivity Analysis of Fixtures and Locating Schemes for Rigid Parts , 2001 .

[4]  Rikard Söderberg,et al.  Locating Scheme Analysis for Robust Assembly and Fixture Design , 1999, DAC 1999.

[5]  Steven D. Eppinger,et al.  Integration analysis of product decompositions , 1994 .

[6]  John H. Sheesley,et al.  Quality Engineering in Production Systems , 1988 .

[7]  Hans L Johannesson.  On the Nature and Consequences of Functional Couplings in Axiomatic Machine Design , 1996 .

[8]  Daniel E. Whitney,et al.  The Datum Flow Chain: A systematic approach to assembly design and modeling , 1998 .

[9]  Rikard Söderberg,et al.  Spartial Incompatibility - Part Interaction and Tolerance Allocation in Configuration Design , 1998 .

[10]  Rikard Söderberg,et al.  Structure and Matrix Models for Tolerance Analysis from Configuration to Detail Design , 2000 .

[11]  Michael Yu Wang,et al.  Optimizing fixture layout in a point-set domain , 2001, IEEE Trans. Robotics Autom..

[12]  Tobias Holmqvist.  Managing Product Variety through Product Architecture , 2004 .

[13]  Nam P. Suh,et al.  Axiomatic Design: Advances and Applications , 2001 .

[14]  Rikard Söderberg,et al.  Tolerance Chain Detection by Geometrical Constraint Based Coupling Analysis , 1999 .

[15]  Stefan H. Thomke,et al.  The Role of Flexibility in the Development of New Products , 1997 .

[16]  Rikard Söderberg,et al.  Computer Aided Assembly Robustness Evaluation , 1999 .

[17]  Kosuke Ishii,et al.  Design for variety: developing standardized and modularized product platform architectures , 2002 .