0
Research Papers

Experimental and Theoretical Investigations of Mechanical Joints With Form Defects

[+] Author and Article Information
Hoài-Nam Lê

Danang University of Science and Technology,
University of Danang,
Danang, Vietnam

Yann Ledoux, Alex Ballu

University of Bordeaux,
I2M, UMR 5295,
Talence F-33400, France
CNRS,
I2M, UMR 5295,
Talence F-33400, France
Arts et Metiers ParisTech,
I2M, UMR 5295,
Talence F-33400, France

Contributed by the Manufacturing Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF COMPUTING AND INFORMATION SCIENCE IN ENGINEERING. Manuscript received February 20, 2013; final manuscript received July 7, 2014; published online September 10, 2014. Assoc. Editor: Vijay Srinivasan.

J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng 14(4), 041004 (Sep 10, 2014) (10 pages) Paper No: JCISE-13-1027; doi: 10.1115/1.4028195 History: Received February 20, 2013; Revised July 07, 2014

This article deals with the behavior of a planar joint taking surface defects into account. Two theoretical concepts are used: gap hull and difference surface. Gap hull represents the displacement space characterizing all possible relative displacements in a joint. Difference surface simplifies the study of contact between parts of that joint. A bijective relationship between these two concepts is developed and exploited. Two experimental methods are developed to validate these theoretical concepts. The first consists of measuring relative displacements between two parts of a planar joint using a measuring system designed specifically for this study. Results obtained from the first method are validated by comparing with the results of the second method in which the contacting surfaces of the planar joint are measured.

Copyright © 2014 by ASME
Topics: Hull , Displacement
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Bhushan, B., 1998, “Contact Mechanics of Rough Surfaces in Tribology: Multiple Asperity Contact,” Tribol. Lett., 4(1), pp. 1–35. [CrossRef]
Yu, M. M.-H., and Bhushan, B., 1996, “Contact Analysis of Three-Dimensional Rough Surfaces Under Frictionless and Frictional Contact,” Wear, 200(1–2), pp. 265–280. [CrossRef]
International Organization for Standardization, 1983, ISO 1101: Geometrical Tolerancing—Tolerancing of Form, Orientation, Location and Run-Out—Generalities, Definitions, Symbols, Indications on Drawings, ISO, Geneva, Switzerland.
ASME Standard, ASME Y14.5M-1994, 1994, Dimensioning and Tolerancing, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York.
Chase, K. W., Gao, J., and Magleby, S. P., 1995, “General 2-D Tolerance Analysis of Mechanical Assemblies With Small Kinematic Adjustments,” J. Des. Manuf., 5(4), pp. 263–274. [CrossRef]
Gao, J., Chase, K. W., and Magleby, S. P., 1998, “Generalized 3-D Tolerance Analysis of Mechanical Assemblies With Small Kinematic Adjustments,” IIE Trans., 30(4), pp. 367–377.
Giordano, M., and Duret, D., 1993, “Clearance Space and Deviation Space,” 3rd. CIRP Seminars on Computer Aided Tolerancing, ENS Cachan, France, Apr. 27–28, pp. 115–128.
Bourdet, P., and Clément, A., 1976, “Controlling Surface With a 3 Axis Measuring Machine,” Ann. CIRP, 25/1 (STC Me), pp. 359–361.
Bourdet, P., Mathieu, L., Lartigue, C., and Ballu, A., 1996, “The Concept of the Small Displacement Torsor in Metrology, Advanced Mathematical Tools in Metrology II, Series on Advances in Mathematics for Applied Sciences,” World Scientific, 40, pp. 110–122.
Davidson, J. K., and Shah, J. J., 2002, “Geometric Tolerances: A New Application for Line Geometry and Screws,” Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., Part C, 216(C1), pp. 95–104. [CrossRef]
Grandjean, J., Ledoux, Y., and Samper, S., 2012, “On the Role of Form Defects in Assemblies Subject to Local Deformations and Mechanical Loads,” Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., 65(9–12), pp. 1769–1778. [CrossRef]
Samper, S., Adragna, P.-A., Favreliere, H., and Pillet, M., 2009, “Modeling of 2D and 3D Assemblies Taking Into Account Form Errors of Plane Surfaces,” ASME J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng., 9(4), p. 041005. [CrossRef]
Greenwood, J., and Williamson, J., 1966, “Contact of Nominally Flat Surfaces,” Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. A, 295(1442), pp. 300–319. [CrossRef]
Ledoux, Y., Lasseux, D., Favreliere, H., Samper, S., and Grandjean, J., 2011, “On the Dependence of Static Flat Seal Efficiency to Surface Defects,” Int. J. Pressure Vessels Piping, 88(11–12), pp. 518–529. [CrossRef]
Neville, K. S. L., and Grace, Y., 2006, “The Modeling and Analysis of Butting Assembly in the Presence of Workpiece Surface Roughness Part Dimensional Error,” Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., 31(5–6), pp. 528–538. [CrossRef]
Stoll, T., Wittman, S., and Meerkamm, H., 2009, “Tolerance Analysis With Detailed Part Modeling Including Shape Deviations,” Proceedings of the 11th CIRP Conference on Computer Aided Tolerancing, Geometric Variations Within Product Life-Cycle Management, Annecy, France, Mar. 26–27, pp. 231–243.
Morière, S., Mailhé, J., Linares, J.-M., and Sprauel, J.-M., 2009, “Assembly Method Comparison Including Form Defect,” Proceedings of the 11th CIRP Conference on Computer Aided Tolerancing, Geometric Variations within Product Life-Cycle Management, Annecy, France, Mar. 26–27, pp. 245–257.
Bourdet, P., 1987, “Contribution à la mesure tridimensionnelle: Modèle d'identification géométrique des surfaces, Métrologie fonctionnelle des pièces mécaniques, Correction géométrique des machines à mesurer tridimensionnelles,” Ph.D. thesis, Université de Nancy. Lorraine, France.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Synoptic of the proposed methodology

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Unilateral planar pair with form defects

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Interpolation procedure

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Difference surface and convex difference surface

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Change of co-ordinate system

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Gap hull obtained from facets of convex difference surface

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Gap hull obtained from vertices of convex difference surface

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Perfect planar joint

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Determination of convex difference surface from gap hull

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Experimental device

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Illustration of surfaces measured with Altisurf©500

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Deviation measured by sensor k

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Measured surfaces. (a) Surface of the base and (b) surface of the bar.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Convex difference surface

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Theoretical gap hull

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Convex difference surface

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Comparison of gap hulls

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

Comparison of difference surfaces

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

Key results from the study of the second planar pair of surfaces. (a) Measurement of surface defects of the base; (b) measurement of surface defects of the bar; (c) gap hull from measurements of displacement; (d) gap hull from measurements of surfaces; (e) comparison of the gap hulls; (f) surface difference from measurement of displacements; (g) surface difference from measurement of surfaces; and (h) comparison of the difference surfaces.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 22

Synoptic view of the method

Tables

Errata

Discussions

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