Journal of Materials Processing Technology 123 (2002) 9399

Identifying tolerance chains with a surface-chain

model in tolerance charting
Jianbin Xue*, Ping Ji
Department of Manufacturing Engineering, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hum, Kowloon, Hong Kong
Received 26 November 2001

Abstract

A tolerance chart is an effective tool used to determine the working dimensions and tolerances in process planning. Its kernel are the
tolerance chains among the machining cuts through which the component will be manufactured. Identifying tolerance chains is a painstaking
job. In this paper, a coordinate system is set up for the component in question so that all surfaces of the component are expressed with their
coordinates and the tolerance chart is parameterised. Then an object-oriented model is developed so that each blueprint dimension is
represented as a blueprint object while each working dimension is expressed as a machining-cut object. Each object has a special attribute, the
surface chain, which is made up of all surfaces involved in the tolerance chart. The surface-chain model is very helpful in identifying the
tolerance chains. By establishing the linear equations of the working dimensions, the stock removals and the blueprint dimensions, the
tolerance chains among the machining cuts are derived automatically. The working dimensions and tolerances then can be determined easily
once the tolerance chains are identied. # 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Process planning; Surface-chain model; Tolerance charting; Tolerance stack-up

1. Introduction method [9]. An interesting method called the ``Maze chart''

When manufacturing a product with routed operations
over a series of machining cuts, process engineers should be
capable of recognising that a tolerance stack-up situation has
been created, which will affect how to assign the tolerances
to the machining cuts. To handle the tolerance stack-up
problem in manufacturing, the most effective way is to use a
tolerance chart. The tolerance chart is a graphic tool to
ensure an accurate development of the mean working
dimensions and the tolerances required by the manufactur-
ing process. The early work on tolerance charting [14] was
carried out manually. Since the 1980s, some researches have
been done on computer-aided tolerance-charting systems
[57]. The most essential task of tolerance charting is the
tolerance-chain identication, which is critical for the work-
ing dimensions determination and the tolerance allocation.
The manual-tracing method [6] is an efcient way of
identifying the tolerance chains, but it is very primitive
and has been proven to be time-consuming and error-prone.
Some more advanced methods have been reported in recent
works such as the matrix-tree-chain method [6], the graph
method [7], the tree approach [8] and the relationship matrix
*
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: 98901769r@polyu.edu.hk (J. Xue).
method [10] is also used to identify the tolerance chains,
and the tolerance-chain identication in angular-tolerance
charting has been investigated with the use of dummy cuts
[11]. Although these methods are capable of solving the
tolerance-charting problems with a computer-programming
technique, they are somewhat complex and difcult to
understand. In this paper, a surface-chain model is proposed
to identify the tolerance chains within a parameterised
tolerance chart. Without constructing any graphs, any
tree but some matrix, the tolerance chains are identied
automatically by some manipulations on the surface-chain
model. The working dimensions and their tolerances of all
machining cuts then can be determined easily.
2. A parametric object-oriented tolerance chart
An example tolerance chart for manufacturing a precision
sleeve shown in Fig. 1 is used to illustrate the surface-chain
method. The component has three blueprint dimensions,
which are achieved by 10 machining cuts listed in the
operation sequence. Some alternative operation sequences
may be possible, designed by process engineers or generated
in a CAPP (computer-aided process planning) system for
the component. In order to decide whether the operation

0924-0136/02/$ see front matter # 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 9 2 4 - 0 1 3 6 ( 0 2 ) 0 0 0 7 8 - X
94 J. Xue, P. Ji / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 123 (2002) 9399

Fig. 1. An example tolerance chart.

sequence can achieve the nal blueprint requirements, and ID;

more than that, which way is the easiest and most econom- Mean dimension;
ical to manufacture the component, it is necessary to con- Tolerance;
struct a tolerance chart for each operation sequence and a Start surface;
proper mathematical model should be established. For the End surface;
exibility of constructing tolerance charts, a parametric Surface chain;
object-oriented tolerance chart model is proposed here. }
In Fig. 1, all numerical data in the tolerance chart are
Each row of the operation sequence can be considered as a
represented with corresponding variables. The three blue-
machining-cut object. From the machining-cut objects, the
print dimensions are represented with the mean dimensions
machining-cut class can be expressed as follows:
B1, B2, B3 and their tolerances b1, b2 and b3: the order makes
no difference. The resultant dimensions are represented with Class machining_cut
the mean dimensions R1, R2, R3 and their tolerances r1, r2 and {
r3, respectively. Ten working dimensions are represented Sequence number;
with mean dimensions X1 ; X2 ; . . . ; X10 and their tolerances Operation name;
x1 ; x2 ; . . . ; x10 . The stock removals are represented with Machined surface;
mean dimensions Y1 ; Y2 ; . . . ; Y10 and their tolerances Datum surface;
y1 ; y2 ; . . . ; y10 . Now that the tolerance chart is parameterised, Mean working dimension;
the operation can be performed without any real case data. Working tolerance;
The data in the parentheses are just the example. Mean stock removal;
Every tolerance chart has two classes of information, the Stock-removal tolerance;
blueprint dimensions and the operation sequence. Each row Surface chain;
of the blueprint dimensions can be considered as a blueprint }
object. From the blueprint objects, the blueprint class can be
The number of the blueprint objects is given in the
expressed as follows:
blueprint, and the number of the machining-cut objects is
Class blueprint determined by the length of the operation sequence. Thus
{ whichever operation sequence for machining the given
 J. Xue, P. Ji / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 123 (2002) 9399 95

Table 1 balance dimension was employed to divide the whole tol-

The machining-cut objects erance chain into several simple tolerance chains, each of
Sq Name Mach Datum WD WT SR SRT SurChain which consists of only two constituent links and a close link,
which can simplify the manual computation in tolerance
1 RB A D X1 x1 Y1 y1 ABCD
2 RB C A X2 x2 Y2 y2 ABCD charting. Regardless of which method is used, only the
3 RT D A X3 x3 Y3 y3 ABCD correct tolerance chain identication can result in the proper
4 RT B A X4 x4 Y4 y4 ABCD tolerance allocation. The proposed method in this paper can
5 FB A D X5 x5 Y5 y5 ABCD ensure the determination of complete and accurate tolerance
6 FB C A X6 x6 Y6 y6 ABCD
chains in the tolerance chart.
7 FT D A X7 x7 Y7 y7 ABCD
8 FT B A X8 x8 Y8 y8 ABCD
9 G D A X9 x9 Y9 y9 ABCD
10 G B D X10 x10 Y10 y10 ABCD 4. The surface-chain model

Developing a surface-chain model should begin with the

Table 2 component sketch in the tolerance chart. The component
The blueprint objects sketch should be laid out on the basis of mean blueprint
ID BD BT StartS EndS SurChain dimensions in the correct left-to-right relationship. If not
done in this way, for certain conditions of design in which
1 B1 B1 B D ABCD
2 B2 B2 A B ABCD surfaces of different features are close together, faulty sur-
3 B3 B3 A D ABCD face relationships can lead to faulty numerical relationships
in the tolerance chart [1]. In Fig. 1, the component is set up in
a Cartesian coordinate system. Here, only a 1D tolerance
component is in question, the proper instances of the chart is concerned, thus the x-axis is sufcient. From the
machining-cut class should be rst initialised for the component sketch, four surfaces are involved in the toler-
machining cuts. All objects involved in the tolerance chart ance chart, forming a surface chain with the left-to-right
in Fig. 1 are listed in Tables 1 and 2. The abbreviations of the relationship AD.
column headers are explained as follows: Both two classes of the objects have a special attribute, the
Sq operation sequence surface chain, i.e. the surfaces AD and their left-to-right
Mach machine surfaces to which the working relationship. When machining cuts are made on the surfaces,
dimensions are measured the positions of those surfaces being cut are changed in the
Datum datum surface from which the working coordinate system. Here, the position of a surface means the
dimensions are measured distance of the surface to the origin of the coordinate system.
WD working dimensions As shown in Fig. 1, from top to bottom, each machining-cut
WT working tolerances object in the operation sequence has the same surface chains.
SR mean stock removals However, the positions of the individual surfaces among the
SRT stock-removal tolerances surface chain are different from each other. Thus, what need
SurChain surface chains to be traced are the position changes of the individual
BD blueprint dimensions surfaces being cut. As a result, the states of the surface
BT blueprint tolerances chain at each stage of the operation process are recorded.
StartS start surface of the blueprint dimension The working dimension is the absolute value by subtracting
EndS end surface of the blueprint dimension the ``machine to'' surface from the ``datum'' surface. The
stock removal is the amount that the surface changes
between two cuts.

3. The tolerance chains

The tolerance chains are inherent and hidden among the
machining cut and the blueprint objects. They can be
denoted with the linear relationships among the variables
in the tolerance chart. In general, the blueprint dimensions
and the stock removals are the closing links of the chains,
whilst the working dimensions are the constituent links.
Each constituent link shall be properly assigned with a
tolerance, which will eventually contribute to the closing
link. One tolerance chain usually consists of one closing link
and several constituent links. In Wade's work [1], the
5. Analysis of surface change
Now that the surface-chain model has been built, the next
step is to nd how the surface changes when a cut is made on
it. Look at surface A in Fig. 2. Xa is the position before the
machining cut and Xa' is the position after the machining
cut. SRa is the amount of the stock removal. When the cut is
made on surface A, Xa is sure to increase along the positive
direction of the x-axis to Xa'. However, the change of
surface A is considered backwards from the last machining
cut to the rst one, and so before the machining cut, surface
96 J. Xue, P. Ji / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 123 (2002) 9399
Fig. 2. Illustration for the surface changes for a machining cut.
A should be attached to a stock. The coordinates of surface
A will decrease along the x-axis, which means that surface A
is negative. With the same derivation, surface B is positive.
Coincidentally, the normal of surface A is opposite to the
positive direction of the x-axis, while the normal of surface B
is consistent. Thus, a conclusion can be drawn that in the
surface-chain model, if the normal of a surface is consistent
to the positive direction of the x-axis, then the surface is
positive; and if it is opposite to the positive direction of the
x-axis, then the surface is negative.
In general, the surface change can be expressed as
LS1 LS0 C  SR
where LS1 is the position of surface S before the machining
cut is made on it, LS0 the position of surface S after the
machining cut is made on it, C the direction of surface S in
the coordinate system and SR the stock removal of the
machining cut.
With this equation, the new position of each surface in
each machining can be obtained easily when a machining
cut is made on the surface. Every machining-cut object has a
surface-chain ABCD, a ``machine to'' surface and a
``datum'' surface in the tolerance chart. The ``machine
to'' surface will change its position when a machining cut
is made.
It is very easy to obtain the working dimensions from the
surface-chain model. The working dimension is the distance
between the ``datum'' surface and the ``machine to'' surface.
Both surfaces are the ingredients of the surface chain in the
machining-cut object. They have their own position values
in the coordinate system. Thus by subtracting the position
value of the ``machine to'' surface from that of the ``datum''
surface, the absolute value is the working dimension.
When deriving the working dimensions for the machining-
cut object, the reverse tolerance chains are then easily
determined.
6. Identifying the tolerance chains
with the surface-chain model
The process of identifying tolerance chains with the
surface-chain model can be divided into three steps.
Step 1. First, determine which surfaces will be involved
in the tolerance chart by analysing the blueprint drawing, and
then obtain their initial positions. Here, in Fig. 1, surfaces
AD are involved in the tolerance chart. A coordinate system
is set up for the component. Surface A is set as the origin of
the x-axis, and so A 0. Other surfaces positions in the
coordinate system are obtained from the blueprint dimen-
sions. Because the blueprint dimension equals the distance
between two surfaces in the blueprint drawing, i.e. the
absolute value of subtraction of two surface positions, the
following set of equations (1) is obtained from the blueprint
dimensions:
jC Bj B1 ; jB Aj B2 ; jD Aj B3 ; A 0
(1)
In the surface-chain model, D > C > B > A, and so the
above equations can be rewritten as
C B B1 ; B A B2 ; D A B3 ; A0
(2)
The linear equations can be neatly expressed in vector and
matrix format. The blueprint dimensions can be represented
by vector B B1 ; B2 ; B3 ; 0T and the surfaces can be repre-
sented by vector S A; B; C; DT. Detaching the coef-
cients from the variables in the linear equations to form a
coefcient matrix, Eq. (2) can be written as follows:
2 30 1 0 1
0 1 1 0 A B1
6 1 1 0 0 7B B C B B 2 C
6 7B C B C
4 1 0 0 1 5@ C A @ B 3 A (3)
1 0 0 0 D 0
With the coefcient matrix and the blueprint vector, the
surface positions can be worked out easily as
A 0; B B2 ; C B1 B2 ; D B3 (4)
By now, the initial positions of all surfaces have been
calculated from the blueprint dimensions.
Step 2. The positions of the surfaces in each operation cut
object must be updated step-by-step. As discussed above,
each machining cut is made on the ``machine to'' surface.
Thus only the ``machine to'' surfaces change their positions.
Other surfaces are frozen as nothing happens on them. The
surface position must be updated from the last machining-
cut object to the rst one in the operation sequence. In each
machining cut, the amount of stock removal is just added to
or subtracted from the ``machine to'' surface, depending on
the direction of the ``machine to'' surface. The evolution of
the surface positions of all machining-cut objects is shown in
Fig. 3. The surface positions in the last operation should be
the same as those in the blueprint, which were obtained
in Step 1. However, in this last cut, the ``machine to'' surface
is B, while the stock amount is Y10, and B is positive, so in
Operation 9, the B's position is changed from the old B2 to
B2 Y10 . Other surface changes are similar, as shown in
Fig. 3.
Step 3. The working dimension is the absolute value of
the distance between the ``machine to'' and the ``datum''
surfaces. In order to obtain the absolute value, the left
 J. Xue, P. Ji / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 123 (2002) 9399 97

Fig. 3. The evolution of surface changes in the surface chain.

surface is just subtracted from the right surface, i.e. the small equation is obtained:
value is subtracted from the large value to ensure that the
dimension value is positive regardless of whether the surface
is ``machine to'' or ``datum''. Thus

X1 D A B 3 Y 7 Y5 Y3 ;
X2 C A B1 B 2 Y9 Y 6 Y5 ;
X3 D A B 3 Y 7 Y5 ;
X4 B A B2 Y10 Y8 Y5 ;
X5 D A B3 Y 7 ;
X6 C A B 1 B 2 Y9 ;
X7 D A B3 ;
X8 B A B2 Y10 ;
X9 C A B1 B 2 ;
X10 C B B1 (5) (6)

Similarly, by detaching the coefcients from the variables in In Eq. (6), all the variables in the tolerance chart are
the equation set to form a coefcient matrix, the following included. In the coefcient matrix, three columns have zero
98 J. Xue, P. Ji / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 123 (2002) 9399

elements and their corresponding stock removal variables applied to the component sketch, the output tolerance chains
are Y1, Y2 and Y4. Thus these three stock removals are must be different. Here, the tolerance chains in the tolerance
solid, and they play no role in the tolerance chains because chart shown in Fig. 1 are
their coefcients are zero: they can be eliminated from
B1 X10 ; B2 X9 X10 ; B3 X7 ;
the coefcient matrix. Correspondingly, Y1, Y2 and Y4 are
eliminated from the variable column so that Y3 X1 X3 ; Y5 X3 X5 ;
0 1 2 30 1 Y6 X2 X3 X5 X6 ; Y7 X5 X7 ;
X1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 B1
B X2 C 6 1 Y8 X3 X4 X5 X8 ; Y9 X6 X 9 ;
B C 6 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 07B
7B B2 C
C
B C 6 7B C Y10 X8 X9 X10
B X3 C 6 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 7B B3 C
B C 6 7B C
B X C 60 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 17 B C With these tolerance chains, the resultant dimensions can be
B 4C 6 7B Y3 C
B C 6 7B C calculated with Eq. (8) to check whether the component can
B X5 C 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 7B Y5 C
B C 6 7B C be made into the required product when the working dimen-
B X C 61 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 07B C
B 6C 6 7B Y6 C sions and stock removals are all known. Of course, as long
B C 6 7B C
B X7 C 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 07 B C as the blueprint dimensions and the tentative stock removals
B C 6 7B Y7 C
B X C 60 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 7
0 1 7B Y8 C
B for the machining-cut objects are all given, all working
B 8C 6 C
B C 6 7B C dimensions can be calculated with Eq. (7). The tolerance-
@ X9 A 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5@ Y9 A chain model has enhanced the capability of the tolerance
X10 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y10 chart.
(7) The tolerance chains obtained here are very useful for
tolerance allocation. In the tolerance chain, regardless of
Here, the coefcient matrix shows the backward-chain whether the constituent links are increasing or decreasing,
matrix, also named as a reverse tolerance chain [12]. If their tolerances are all added together. Thus when using
its inverse matrix is used to express the relationships Eq. (8) to calculate the tolerance stack-up, the absolute value
between the working dimensions and stock removals and of the coefcient matrix is applied, as shown in Eq. (9). If the
the blueprint dimensions, then tolerances are assigned to the working dimensions, then
0 1 2 3 0 1 Eq. (9) can be used to obtain the resultant dimensions to
B1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 X1 check whether or not the tolerance stack-up violates the
B B2 C 6 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 07 B X2 C blueprint requirement:
B C 6 7 B C
B C 6 7 B C
B B3 C 6 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 07 B X3 C 0 1 2 30 1
B C 6 7 B C b1  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1  x1
0
B Y C 60 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 17 B X4 C  
B 3C 6 7 B C B b2 C  6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 117B C
B C 6
B Y5 C 6 0
7 B C B C 6 7B x2 C
0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 07 B X5 C B C 6 7B C
B C 6 7 B C B b3 C  6 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 7B x3 C
B Y C 61 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 07 B X6 C B C 6 7B C
B 6C 6 7 B C B y C 6 1 0 B C
B C 6 7 B C B 3 C 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 77B x4 C
B Y7 C 6 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 07 B X7 C B C 6 7B C
B C 6 7 B C B y5 C 6 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 7B x5 C
B Y C 60 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 7
0 17 B X8 C B C 6 7B C
B 8C 6 B C B y C 6 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 B C
B C 6 7 B C B 6 C 6 0 0 77B x6 C
@ Y9 A 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 @ X9 A B C 6 7B C
B y7 C 6 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 7 B C
Y10 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X10 B C 6 7B x7 C
B y C 6 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 7B
7 C
B 8 C 6 B x8 C
B C 6 7B C
@ y9 A 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 5@ x9 A
2 30 1 
y10  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1  x10
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 X1
60 2 30 1
6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 17B
7B X2 C
C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 x1
60 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 7
0 7B X3 C
B 60 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6 C 6 1 1 7 B x2 C
7B C
61 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7B C
6 7B X4 C 6
60 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
7B C
0 0 7B x3 C
60 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 7
0 7B X5 C
B 6 7B C
6
60
C 6 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 B C
6 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 7B
7B X6 C
C 6 7B x4 C
60 6 7B C
6 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 7B X7 C
7B C 6 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 7B x5 C
60 0 7B C 6
6 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0
7B C
6 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 7B X8 C 6 0 0 7 B C
7B x6 C
40 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 5@ X9 A 6 7B C
6 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 7 B C
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 X10 6 7B x7 C
6 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 7
0 0 7B C
(8) 6 B x8 C
6 7B C
4 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 5@ x9 A
This matrix exposes the (forward) tolerance chains in the
tolerance chart. Each row of the matrix represents a toler- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 x10
ance chain. Obviously, if a different operation sequence is (9)
 J. Xue, P. Ji / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 123 (2002) 9399
7. Discussion
The surface-chain model begins with the analysis of the
blueprint. The blueprint dimensions must not include refer-
ence, duplicate or double dimensions. Violation of this rule
is a major source of charting problem. To ensure that this
condition is satised, the listed blueprint dimensions were
checked with a method of seven steps in Wade's work [1]. Ji
[8] also proposed the blueprint tree model to check whether
the blueprint dimensioning is correct or not. Here the blue-
print dimensions can also be checked with the surface-chain
model. Considering the coefcient matrix in Eq. (3), if the
rank of the matrix equal the number of the surfaces, then the
equation set has a unique solution, which indicates that the
blueprint dimensions are correct. If the rank of the matrix is
less than the number of the surfaces, then the equation set
has multiple solutions: one or more surface positions cannot
be determined with the blueprint dimensions, thus the blue-
print dimensions should be reorganised and corrected. If the
rank of the matrix is larger than the number of the surfaces,
then the equation set has no solution. There must be some
over-dimensioning, with dimensions contradicting each
other. In such a case, the blueprint dimensions should be
reorganised and corrected also.
This surface-chain model in the tolerance chart takes the
surface chain as one attribute of the blueprint and machin-
ing-cut objects. Each machining-cut object seems to be an
independent entity, but inter-related relationships exist in the
tolerance chart. The interaction among these objects is made
up of the tolerance chains. The approach to identifying the
tolerance chain is similar to the algebraic approach [13].
However, the blueprint dimensions and the stock removals
must all be known in the algebraic approach, and the solid
stock removals all known before the tolerance chart is
constructed. With this surface-chain model, what must be
known rst are the operation sequence and the component
sketch. The working dimensions, the stock removals and the
blueprint dimensions are all denoted with variables. Given
the blueprint dimensions and stock removals, the working
dimensions can be obtained easily with the surface-chain
model. If the working dimensions are given, the resultant
dimensions can be calculated easily with the surface-chain
model to check whether or not the requirement in the
blueprint can be met.
8. Conclusions
This paper presented an efcient approach to identify the
tolerance chains with a surface-chain model in the para-
meterised tolerance chart. The surface-chain model plays an
important role in the tolerance chart throughout the whole
process. As to the nature of the machining cuts, only position
changes of the machined surfaces in the coordinate system
99
occur during the machining process. By tracing the state of
the surface-chain model, the solid-stock removals and the
reverse-tolerance chains are obtained. By inversing the
reverse-tolerance-chain matrix, the (forward) tolerance-
chain matrix is also obtained.
After the tolerance chains are identied, the remaining
work to be done in the tolerance chart is simplied. When
analysing a tolerance chart, process engineers may want to
relax an unnecessarily tight working tolerance, in which case
they can use Eq. (9) to check whether or not their trials are
workable. In a more complex situation, when an additional
operation is inserted into the operation sequence, just one
more set of variables is needed to be added for that opera-
tion, i.e. the working dimensions Xi, xi and stock removals Yi
and yi. It is easy to obtain the new solution by using the
approach described in this paper.
The method discussed in this paper can also be applied to
the 2D tolerance chart for some more complex parts such as
parts with angular features.
Acknowledgements
The work described in this paper has been supported by
the Research Grants Council of Hong Kong, China (Project
No. PolyU-5142/98E).
References
[1] O.R. Wade, in: T.J. Drozda, C. Wick (Eds.), Tolerance Control, Tools
and Manufacturing Engineers Handbook, Vol. 1, Machining, ASME,
New York, 1983, pp. 160 (Chapter 2).
[2] C.J. Marks, Tolerance charts control production machining, Am.
Machinist 97 (1953) 114116.
[3] C.T. Mooney, How to adjust tolerance charts, Tool Engr. 3 (1955)
7581.
[4] J.K. Matter, Tolerance charts forecast accuracy, Am. Machinist 4
(1947) 114118.
[5] R.S. Ahluwalia, A.V. Karolin, CATCa computer-aided tolerance
control system, J. Manuf. Syst. 3 (1984) 153160.
[6] X.Q. Tang, B.J. Davies, Computer-aided dimensional planning, Int.
J. Prod. Res. 26 (1988) 283297.
[7] S.A. Irani, R.O. Mittal, E.A. Lehtihet, Tolerance chart optimisation,
Int. J. Prod. Res. 27 (1989) 15311552.
[8] P. Ji, A tree approach for tolerance charting, Int. J. Prod. Res. 31
(1993) 10231033.
[9] B.K.A. Ngoi, O.C. Teck, A complete tolerance charting system, Int.
J. Prod. Res. 31 (1993) 453469.
[10] B.K.A. Ngoi, C.S. Tan, Graphical approach to tolerance chartinga
maze chart method, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 13 (1997) 282
289.
[11] Y.R. Pan, G.R. Tang, Computer-aided tolerance charting for products
with angular features, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 17 (2001)
361370.
[12] P. Ji, Determining dimensions for process planning: a backward
derivation approach, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 11 (1996) 5258.
[13] P. Ji, An algebraic approach for dimensional chain identification in
process planning, Int. J. Prod. Res. 37 (1999) 99110.