Proceeding of the third Pacific Manufacturing Conference (PMC) conference held at Thailand, Nov.

2002

TOWARDS IMPLEMNTING THE VECTORIAL DIMEWNSIONING AND

TOLERANCING SCHEME
FOR THE INSPECTION OF FREE FORM SURFACES

Dr. Elsayed Orady, University of Michigan Department of Industrial and Manufacturing

Systems Engineering (orady@umich.edu)

Dr. Mohamed Gadalla, Cairo University (On leave), Kean University, Department of Technology,
(gadalla@kean.edu)

ABSTRACT assembly, its suitability for assembly and

finally manufacturing process capabilities
To guarantee minimum measurement errors and its conformance to regulations.
during the inspection of a free form surface Unfortunately, there are many problems that
(FFS), two different processes are carried are associated with the use of the CMM
out in sequence. The first process is the together with GD&T. These problems can
alignment process that is required to align be summarized as follows:
the machine coordinates with the workpiece
coordinates. The second process is the data ?? Conflicting interpretation of the
collection through proper sampling over the ANSI Y 14.5 Standards.
free surface. There are two common ?? Lack of standard measurement
aligning techniques used with FFS. The data practice.
collection is usually based on a sampling ?? Different performance of
strategy. This paper presents an overview of different CMM software.
the state-of-the-art of the different tolerance
scheme, alignment techniques and the A new geometric dimensioning technique
sampling strategies for measurement of free has been introduced by Professor Wirtz that
form surface. It also highlights some of a is referred to as Vectorial Dimensioning and
possible solution to maintain accurate and Tolerancing (VD&T). This technique could
efficient inspection for FFS. be used to avoid the aforementioned
problems and improve the inspection
efficiency of FFS.
1. INTRODUCTION
This paper presents the use of VD&T for
The use of CMM (Coordinate Measuring inspection of FFS on CMM. The work in
Machine) in the area of inspection and this paper is intended to explore new ideas
metrology has increased enormously in the in tolerancing and inspections of FFS. A
last two decades. Geometric Dimensioning trial experiment together with results are
and Tolerancing (GD &T) provides a mean presented for VD&T.
for specifying the shape requirements and
the interrelations between part features.
Shape requirements include the assurance of
functioning mechanical systems after
Proceeding of the third Pacific Manufacturing Conference (PMC) conference held at Thailand, Nov. 2002

2. TOLERANCING TECHNIQUES

There are three basic tolerancing techniques.

These are:
a. Conventional Tolerancing
b. Geometric Dimensioning and 2.2 Geometric Dimensioning and
Tolerancing (GD&T) Tolerancing (GD&T)
c. Vectorial Dimensioning and
Tolerancing (VD&T) Table 1 shows the historical highlight of
GD&T [2].
The following Sections provide brief
description of these techniques.
Table 1: Historical Highlight
2.1 Conventional Tolerancing
Year Milestone
1820 The artisan
Conventional tolerancing deals only with 1820 Gages Gaging
dimensioning of the part. It does not 1930 First Drafting Standard
support datum and datum precedence [10]. 1935 Tolerancing in Drafting standard
Fig. 1 shows the dimensioning and 1950 MIL-8,….MIL-STD-8A
tolerancing of a mechanical part based on 1966 ANSI Y14.5 1966,…1973,82,94
1985 Methods Divergence
conventional tolerancing method. It may be 1990 Y 14.5 Mathematization
Geometric
noticed that the un-toleranced dimension d12 Tolerance
2000 Math-Based standard
can be determined by two basic techniques:
(a) worst case conditions, and (b) statistical
method of the toleranced dimensions. GD&T ANSI Y14.5 M – 1982 enables
tolerances to be placed on attributes of
features. Geometric tolerancing handles
imperfect form through containment zones
where the part features or their resolved
geometries (centerplane, centerline,
counterpoint) are constrained to lie [3, 4]. It
also provides means to define the reference
system i.e. datum’s [2]. The tolerance
amendment ANSI 14.5.1 M 1994 provides
mathematical definitions of these tolerance
zones. Figure 2 shows the GD&T
presentations for datum’s, dimensions and
form tolerances.
Parameter limit zone

In the tolerance zone shown in Fig. 2, the

width t is given by
? ? t
Tˆ ? ( P ? A) ?
2

Figure 1 Description of Conventional

and Statistical Tolerances
Proceeding of the third Pacific Manufacturing Conference (PMC) conference held at Thailand, Nov. 2002

where T̂ is the direction vector of the calculated from the assessed points
? using algorithms based on
centerline of the straightness zone, A Is a Gaussian method.
position vector locating the centerline of the ?? A system of co-ordinates is to be
straightness zone, P is any measured point. allocated to localize the substitute
GD&T standards also introduce the elements.
conformance principle. A feature conforms ?? Separate and independent vectors
to a straightness tolerance width t 0 if all determine the location and
points of the feature lie within some orientation of the substitute
straightness zone as defined above. elements.
?? The size of some substitute
elements may be described by
t A
scalar measures.

Special symbols and tables are necessary to

designate VD&T in the technical design.
Fig. 3 shows the principles of Vectorial
dimensioning and tolerancing as proposed
by Writz [ 2].
-A-

Size
In-spec part boundary Direction Vector
means
t
Position Vector

Figure 2 GT & T Principles

Orientation Tolerance
Zone
2.3 Vectorial Dimensioning and Position Tolerance Zone
Tolerancing (VD&T)

In 1991, Professor Wirtz, introduced VD&T Figure 3 Principles of Vectorial Tolerance

concept in Germany. The primary idea is
based on parameterizing and tolerancing
mechanical parts in terms that relate
naturally to manufacturing and inspection 3. INSPECTION OF FREE FORM
processes [2]. As mentioned in by Bialas, et SURFACES
al. [6 ], the VD&T is based on the following
principles: In order for a free form surface to be
?? The dimensioned feature is the inspected, two different processes should be
substitute element not the real carried out in sequence. The first process is
feature, where the substitute the alignment of the workpiece on the
element is identified by measuring CMM machine. Aligning the part is
the real workpiece surface and refereed to in the literature as part
Proceeding of the third Pacific Manufacturing Conference (PMC) conference held at Thailand, Nov. 2002

localization to determine a rigid body 3-2-1 principle. This process significantly

transformation matrix. The transformation contributes to the inspection cost since hard
matrix includes translation and rotational and accurate gauges are required to be
vectors that optimize the position and manufactured and be located very accurately
orientation of the workpiece on the CMM on the surface in order to establish a frame
table with respect to the CAD model. relationship between the manufactured and
The second process constitutes the the designed model. This problem can be
measurement and inspection of the free formalized as a minimization of the sum of
form surface in accordance with the standard the square distances of the measured
practices. coordinate from the CAD surface with
respect to six variables (rotation (x,y and z)
The current standards such as ANSI + translation (? ?? ?and ?). The least square
Y14.5M-1982 and Y14.5.1M-1994 define formulation of the Lp-Norm equation is [9]:
profile tolerance for surfaces as the outline
of an object in a given plane (two-dimension 2
m n
?1
figure). Profiles are formed by projecting a F? ? ? T r ?r ij
three dimensional figure onto a plane. The i ? 1 j ?1
ANSI Standard defines profile tolerance
zone as the volume or the area generated by where, rij is the jt h measurement point on the
offsetting each point on the nominal surface ith surface and r is the corresponding nearest
in the direction of the normal to the nominal point on the surface facet. T is the
surface at that point. The ISO Standard transformation matrix, to be determined,
defines a tolerance zone for the sculptured which contains a translation and rotation
surfaces (see Figure 4) as the zone which is vectors (i.e. six components). Menq et. al.
limited by two surfaces enveloping spheres indicated that this problem is highly
of diameter t, the centers of which are nonlinear and non-unique[9]. Other
situated on a surface having the true problems include region of convergence
geometric form. which are sometimes hard to detect.
Singularities and robustness are problems
that can be encountered during solution.
Iterative methods are always used to solve
this problem which adds to the computation
time. This is a factor to be considered.
Several techniques can be used to solve this
problem and achieve a global minimum
rather than local minimum and avoid regions
Fig. 4 The ISO Representation of Surface of divergence that can be summarized as
Form Errors follows:
? ? Improved methods to determine the
initial solution.
3.1 Part Localization ? ? Develop methods for perturbation to test
the local minimum and to exit the
Workpiece localization can be used to solution algorithm from the local
automate the process of workpiece setup. In minimum regions, if exits.
the manufacturing environment to inspect
FFS a hard gage is normally used using the
Proceeding of the third Pacific Manufacturing Conference (PMC) conference held at Thailand, Nov. 2002

?? Develop intelligent search techniques to 3.3 Sampling of Free Form Surface

solve the high non-linearity of this
problem. CMM is referred to as coordinate metrology.
The actual shape of a workpiece is obtained
It is also of interest to expand the knowledge by probing its surface at certain points with
and algorithms developed by Orady et al. [5] the CMM touch probe. The collected data is
to investigate this problem. then fed to fitting algorithm to determine the
shape of the worpkice and determine
3.2 Offset Surface Representation whether the part meets the design
specifications. The effect of selecting a
As discussed in the pervious section and measurement sampling strategy has been
according to the ISO Standard the surface recognized as a major component of
form errors should comply to a tolerance measurement uncertainty [11]. It has been
zone that is bounded by an offset surface. proven also that the part form errors have a
The offset value is equal to the tolerance great impact on the fitted features. It might
zone width. Unfortunately, this operation in be intuitively that increasing the number of
parametric surface representation does not points will decrease the measurement errors.
yield an exact solution [9]. It has to be However, the time spent for inspection is an
approximated thus introducing another important factor that affects the inspection
source of error that depends on the cost and consequently the product cost.
approximation technique. For more details Therefore, it is desirable to perform the
refer to ref. [9]. A brief description is given inspection with the lowest possible number
in the next paragraph. of sample points (sample size). On the other
hand it is of a great importance to locate the
A parametric surface is expressed as a sample points in suitable locations so as to
function of two parameters normally know represent the feature being inspected, and to
as u, and v and can be represented by the reduce the error component due to the
following equations: sampling strategy.

The sampling strategies that are common in

Q (u , v ) ? B (u , v ) ? d ? n literature are: uniform (equi-parametric
B u(u , v ) ? B v(u , v ) sampling), equidistant sampling, mean
n (u , v ) ? curvature based sampling, randomized
B u(u , v ) ? B v(u , v )
sampling, and stratified sampling. Figure 5
shows the sampled points in case of an equi-
where, B (u, v) is a point on the surface, d is paramteric and mean curvature methods [1].
the offset value. The offset value d is
dependant on the diameter of the probe and Although many attempts for CMM
the tolerance value t. It is very difficult to inspection planning show that many areas
express the offset surface in terms of the have been extensively investigated for
same basis of the original surface because of specific case. For instance, sampling of
the square root term in the normalization of prismatic and conical shapes has received
the surface normal vector. To overcome this significant attention from the researchers.
problem approximation a new technique has However many other problems remain
been developed. unsolved for other geometric elements.
Among these problems are the optimization
Proceeding of the third Pacific Manufacturing Conference (PMC) conference held at Thailand, Nov. 2002

of the sampling plan, and sampling of free tolerance FFS as an initial experimental
form surfaces. Therefore, the objective of attempt. According to the principles of the
work in this area would be as follows: vectorial tolerance, there are a position
vector, orientation vector and form error
?? Examine the effect of different tolerance zone (as shown in Figure 3).
sampling strategies on the accuracy Figure 6 shows a surface patch that have
of free form surfaces. been inspected based on the vectorial
? ? Develop a set of criteria to determine tolerancing principles i.e the measured
the optimum number of sampling surface error has been divided into location
points. error, orientation error and form error.
? ? Develop algorithms to automate the Figure 7 shows the calculated and measured
sampling of free form surfaces. errors. It can be seen that they are in very
good agreement which is a promising results
for further investigation.

Fig. 6 Surface Being Inspected

Calculated Vs. Measured Errors

Location Errors Orientation Errors

1.6

1.4

1.2

0.8

0.6

0.4
Fig. 5 NURBS Surface Sampled using
equiparamteric and Mean Curvature Sampling 0.2

Methods [1] 0

Inspected Surface Points

4. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
Fig. 7 Result of Initial Experiments to Define
Free Form Surface Errors
After a careful examination of the different
tolerancing schema the authors have
selected the VD&T to be applied to
Proceeding of the third Pacific Manufacturing Conference (PMC) conference held at Thailand, Nov. 2002

5. CONCLUSIONS

The purpose of this paper was to investigate 5. Orady, E. A, Li, S., Chen, Y., 1997, “ Minimum
the application of VD&T for inspection of Zone Cylindricity Evaluation using Improved
FFS. Sn overview of tolerancing of free Nonlinear Optimization Method (NOM)”,
form surfaces and different related issues Transactions of the North American
such as alignment and sampling strategies Manufacturing Research Institution of SME, pp.
287-292
has been presented together with a thorough 6. Bialas, s., Humienny, Z., Kiszka, K., 1997, “
for the parametric tolerancing, GD&T, and Relations Between ISO 1101 Geometric
VD&T. It appeared that there is a need for Tolerances and Vectorial Tolerances-
the examination of the effect of different Conversion Problems” The 5th CIRP Seminar on
sampling strategies on the accuracy of free Computer-Aided Tolerancing, Toronto, April 27-
29, pp. 88-99.
form surfaces, developing a set of criteria to
7. Requicha, A. G., “Mathematical Meaning and
determine the optimum number of sampling Computational Representation of Tolerance
points and developing algorithms to Specifications”, CRTD-Vol. 27, International
automate the sampling of free form surfaces. Forum on Dimensional Tolerancing and
It is also suggested to investigate the pros Metrology, pp. 61-67.
and cones of different alignment techniques 8. Farouki, R. T., 1986 “ The Approximation of
for FFS. The VD&T presents a well Non-Degenerate Offset Surfaces” Computer
Aided Geometric Design, Vol. 3, pp. 15-43.
organized schema to handle the inspection 9. Menq, C. H., Yau, H. T., Lai, G. Y., 1992,
of FFS. But more work still needed to “Automated Precision Measurement of Surface
support these proposals. Profile in CAD-Directed Inspection”, IEEE
Transaction on Robotics and Automation, Vol. 8
No. 2.
REFERENCES 10. Zeid, I., "CAD/CAM theory and Practice”,
McGraw-Hill, Inc, 1991.
1. Elkout, D., ElMaraghy, H., ElMarghy, W. 1999, 11. Orady, E., Chen, Y., Ma, C., "Sampling
“Sampling for free form surfaces inspection Strategies for Measurement of Circular Features
planning”, Proceedings of The1999 ASME Using Coordinate Measuring Machines (CMM),"
Design Engineering Technical Conferences, Proceedings of the 1996 Canadian Society of
September 12-15, 1999, Las Vegas, Nevada. Mechanical Engineering (CSME) Forum, 13th
2. Voelcker, H., B., 1993, “ A Current Perspective Symposium on Engineering Applications of
on Tolerancing and Metrology”, CRTD-Vol. 27, Mechanics , Manufacturing Science and
International Forum on Dimensional Engineering, May 7-9, 1996, pp. 488-494.
Tolerancing and Metrology, pp. 49-59.
3. Walker, R. K., Srinivasan, Vijay, “ Creation and
Evolution of the ASME Y14.5.1M Standard”,
CRTD-Vol. 27, International Forum on
Dimensional Tolerancing and Metrology, pp. 19-
30.
4. Nigam, S. D., Turner, J. U, “ Review of
Statistical Approaches to Tolerance Analysis”,
Computer Aided Design, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp. 6-
14.