Multidimensional Component Inspection Devices

Miltiadis A. Boboulos, Ph.D.
MULTIDIMENSIONAL COMPONENT INSPECTION DEVICES
ABSTRACT
The evaluation of the mechanical behaviour of a sample under conditions of tension and
compression can be performed to provide basic material property data that is critical for
component design and service performance assessment. The requirements for tensile and
compression strength values and the methods for testing these properties are specified in
various standards for a wide variety of materials. Testing as explained in this book can be
performed on machined material samples or on full-size or scale models of actual
components. These tests are typically performed using mechanical testing instruments.
Worn suspension bushings may also cause excessive side-to-side caster angle and toe
angle changes during steering, braking and acceleration driving modes. The best way to
inspect suspension bushings in a loaded condition is to place the vehicle on a drive-on lift.
During your inspection process, it's important to visualize exactly how the chassis loads
each bushing. When suspension loading is taken into account, it's easy to see why the
inner and outer bushing sleeves should appear to be concentric. If the bushing doesn't
appear to be concentric, the rubber inside the bushing has lost its resiliency and has taken
a "set" because of suspension system loading.
Many products and components are in addition subjected to torsional forces during their
operation. Products such as biomedical catheter tubing, switches, fasteners, and
automotive steering columns are just a few devices subject to such torsional stresses. By
testing these products in torsion, manufacturers are able to simulate real life service
conditions, check product quality, verify designs, and ensure proper manufacturing
techniques. In this publication torsion tests have been performed and explained by
applying only a rotational motion and torsional forces. Types of torsion testing such as
failure, and proof are being analyzed.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
A. INSPECTION DEVICE FOR BUSHING-TYPE COMPONENTS ___ 1

1. INTRODUCTION ________________________________________________ 1
2. REVIEW OF MULTI-DIMENSIONAL INSPECTION DEVICES FOR

INSPECTING BUSHING-TYPE COMPONENTS _____________________ 3
2.1 SCHEMATIC DIAGRAMS__________________________________________ 3
2.2 DESIGN SCHEMATICS ____________________________________________ 7
3. SELECTION OF A SCHEMATIC DIAGRAM _______________________ 10
4. CONSTRUCTION CALCULATIONS_______________________________ 12
4.1 FLAT SPRINGS__________________________________________________ 12
4.2 SPRING PARALLELOGRAMS _____________________________________ 12
4.2.1 Spring parallelograms supporting intermediate elements_______ 13
4.2.2 Spring parallelogram supporting the measuring bracket _______ 13
4.3 SPRING HINGE _________________________________________________ 13
4.4 CYLINDRICAL HELICAL SPRINGS ________________________________ 15
4.4.1 SPRINGS PROVIDING MEASUREMENT PRESSURE ______ 15
4.4.2 Clamp spring _________________________________________ 16
5. MEASUREMENT ERROR ANALYSIS _____________________________ 18

5.1 KINEMATICAL AND TECHNOLOGICAL ERRORS ___________________ 19
5.1.1 Kinematical errors_____________________________________ 19
5.1.2 Technological errors ___________________________________ 19
5.2 ERRORS OF THE MEASUREMENT UNIT (INSTRUMENT ERROR) _____ 20
5.3 ERRORS IN THE MEASUREMENT DIAGRAM _______________________ 21
5.3.1 Effect of surface roughness over errors of the
measurement diagram ___________________________________ 21
5.4 ERRORS DUE TO POSITIONING IN MEASUREMENT ________________ 21
5.4.1 Effect of the violation of the principle of unity of bases ________ 22
5.4.2 Errors of positioning during measurement of internal
cylindrical surfaces occurring as a result of the displacement of
measurement baseline in respect to the inspected diameter ______ 22
5.5 TEMPERATURE ERROR__________________________________________ 22
5.6 ERRORS DUE TO FORCES ACTING DURING MEASUREMENT ________ 24
5.6.1 Characteristics of measurement pressure ____________________ 24
5.6.2 Contact deformations ___________________________________ 25
5.7 ERRORS DUE TO ADJUSTMENT OPERATIONS _____________________ 25

5.7.1 Adjustment operation errors depending on the quality of the
adjustment unit _______________________________________ 25
5.7.2 Adjustment operation errors depending on the selected
adjustment technique____________________________________ 26
5.7.3 Adjustment operation errors related to operator’s state and
qualifications_________________________________________ 26
5.8 SUBJECTIVE ERROR ____________________________________________ 27
5.9 OPERATION ERROR _____________________________________________ 27
5.9.1 Measurement shoe wear ________________________________ 27
5.9.2 Rate of distortion of the adjustment of the measuring device____ 28
6. DEVICE ADJUSTMENT TECHNIQUE_____________________________ 28
REFERENCES ____________________________________________________ 29
B. A TENSION/PRESSURE LOAD TESTING DEVICE__________ 30
1. DEVICE OPERATION PRINCIPLE________________________________ 30
2. SAFETY REGULATIONS & ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS _ 31
3. TENSION TESTING RIG _________________________________________ 34
4. CLAMPING THREADS CALCULATIONS FOR FASTENING PLATES 39
REFERENCES ____________________________________________________ 44
C. A TORSION TESTING DEVICE___________________________ 45
1. INTRODUCTION _______________________________________________ 45
2. STATIC TESTS _________________________________________________ 45
3. MATERIAL TORSION TEST SYSTEM (ASSEMBLY DIAGRAM) _____ 49

3.1 Torsion testing equipment specification________________________________ 51
4. DESIGN & STRENGTH CALCULATIONS _________________________ 53
REFERENCES ____________________________________________________ 76
A. INSPECTION DEVICE FOR BUSHING-TYPE

COMPONENTS
1. INTRODUCTION
One of the most important factors determining technical progress in machine-
building production is increasing labour efficiency and product quality. One real
prerequisite to accelerate production process is building of new metal processing machines
and establishing new processing techniques. Likewise, quality improvement is associated
with precision of both processing and post-processing operations [1].
No matter how perfect may metal-processing machines be there are still a number of
technological factors which influence precision during product manufacturing and these
are tool wear, and the thermal and impact distortion of the technological system [1]. Errors
caused as a result of these factors have the character of accidental dimensional functions.
For this reason, it is very hard to compensate them by means of prior machine
adjustments. The problem of decreasing the influence of said technological factors is the
concern of the so-called active (technological) inspection.
When using precise connections like roller bearings, piston groups, it is a necessity
for a machine or a device-building to make economically justified components that are
totally interchangeable. Problems may arise with components requiring higher precision of
geometry and relative position of planes and axes [2]. In such cases it is necessary to
discard out of size components or sort them within tolerance groups to ensure product
quality. This is the purpose of the so-called passive (post-operational) inspection [2].
Passive inspection is performed via the following means, depending on the type of
the technological process:
- inspection devices;
- dimension measuring machines;
- inspection and sorting automated devices.
Inspection and sorting automated devices have got completely automated inspection
cycle. They are used to inspect the parameters of groups of similar components. Human
intervention is only possible when periodic loading of components is necessary while the
automated device is working fully independently [2].
Dimension measuring machines are a means of making universal measurements

automatically. Three-dimensional machines are used to inspect according to a previously
set programme dimensions of components, deviations in shape and relative position of
planes, complicated profiles, etc. with automated data processing. The task of the operator
is to initially position the component relative to the coordinate system of the machine.
Page 1
Inspection devices possess the lowest level of automation. They offer automation
only in inspection and data processing. All other operations (feed-in, positioning, sorting
of components) are manually performed [2].
Inspection devices can be single-dimensional (inspection of a single parameter) and

multi-dimensional (simultaneous inspection of several parameters). Usage of the latter
allows increase of productivity and inspection efficiency. The inspection device subject of
the present work is of the same multi-dimensional type. The possibility to perform
simultaneous inspection of several parameters, decrease of subjective errors in
measurement and their relatively low values provide for the high economic efficiency
ensured by the implementation of inspection devices.
Page 2
2. REVIEW OF MULTI-DIMENSIONAL INSPECTION

DEVICES FOR INSPECTING BUSHING-TYPE
COMPONENTS
Multi-dimensional inspection devices are built up on the basis of schematic
diagrams of single-dimension devices for inspection of the corresponding parameters
incorporated in a single construction. Therefore, a wide variety of designs are available
based on the objectives laid out.
The present review is a survey of several kinematical diagrams of single-dimension

devices for inspection of diameters (both outer and inner) and heights. It also provides
some practical implementations of several of them and also, some developments of multi-
dimensional devices.
Universal inspection and measurement devices are developed mainly for inspection
of external and internal cylindrical surfaces, shaft lengths and geometry deviations. This is
only a small part of inspected parameters of machine components but the complexity and
specificity of inspection processes limit the possibilities for a wider normalization [3].
Moreover, the percentage of this type of inspection is too high and there are more
developments made for it due to this.
2.1 SCHEMATIC DIAGRAMS

Fig. 1 shows an inspection location for shaft diameters. It represents a double-
contact adjustable bracket the bottom shoe 7 of which is fixed (throughout the
measurement process) to the tube 2. The upper shoe 6 is floating and supported on flat
springs 5 thus transmitting measurement signal to the transducer 4. The entire bracket is
floating, too. It is mounted to the body of the device by means of a spring parallelogram
that in this case is a special hinge l. Clamping of the bottom shoe to the component is by
means of the spring 3.
The schematic diagram shown on Fig. 2 can be used for inspection of holes. A
double-contact bracket having one fixed shoe 3 is also used here which is at the same time
used as a stop for positioning the component l along its inner surface. The other shoe 2 is a
floating type and mounted on the strip 4, which in turn is mounted on flat springs. The
strip transmits via the contact tip 5 the measurement signal to the transducer 6. To achieve
higher precision in positioning of the component so the measurement line coincides with
the diameter, the fixed shoe can be made provided with two contact points similar to the
inside dial gauge. This way, the schematic diagram of a universal unit for simultaneous
inspection of inner and outer diameters was also developed, as shown in Fig. 3.
The design developed is used for the measurement of bushing-type components. The
device comprises a base plate l with two diametrically moving against each other
measuring slides 2 and 3. One slide 2 carries four sensor elements (6, 7, 8 and 9) and the
other measurement slide 3 carries two sensor elements 10 and 11. All four sensor elements
are located in pairs symmetrically against the axis 12 running along the other two sensor
elements 10 and 11 and in the same axis of symmetry 13 with the inspected component.
The use of the contact pairs 6-7 and 8-9 is implied by the fact that when sensor elements
Page 3
contact the wall in two points it is not always possible to achieve precise preliminary
adjustment, which adversely effects measurement accuracy.
The principle of action of the device shown is the following: The component to be
measured 14 is positioned over the measurement plate 18, which is located above sensor
elements 6 thru 11. By descending the plate the component is positioned at the height of
measurement. Measuring slides 2 and 3 are moved out (or in, respectively) by means of
spindle-drive nut 4 and the sensors 8, 9 and 10 (6, 7 and 11, respectively) perform three-
point contact. Thus, an independent component positioning in the measuring location is
achieved. The inspection device described can easily be included in an automated
production process thanks to the fact that the component is a self-positioning. Another
development design for a device for measurement of inner and outer diameters is shown in
Fig. 4. One significant advantage here is the possibility to work without any preliminary
adjustment of a defined dimension. The basic elements of the device are the body 8 having
a radial guide on which the measurement fork l is situated with several sensor elements 2
mounted on its arms 3. The device is moved by means of the driving element 5 and
driving module 6. Movement is effected against the fixed receiver of measurement values
7.
Fig. 4a shows measurement of an outer diameter. The measurement fork l is moving

until the component 4 positioned between the arms 3 consecutively contacts the sensors 2.
Thus, the values of the measuring device 7 are read and the diameter is determined in the
“rest” position of the component.
Page 4
Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Page 5
Fig. 3
Similar is the method used for the measurement of inner diameters shown on Fig.
4b. In this case the component is located on the table 9 and positioned against the stop 10.
The basic difference from the measurement of outer diameters is in the fact that the
sensors 2 are located on the same arm 3. To perform the measurement, it is necessary that
the sensors 3 consecutively contact the component. Reading is similar to the previous
measurement.
Page 6
2.2 DESIGN SCHEMATICS
A first design represents a design schematic of a universal measurement unit for the
inspection of outer diameters. It is made according to the schematic diagram of Fig. 1. The
unit is capable of measuring various diameters and adjustment is made by means of
moving the shoe 1 and the carriage 2. Thanks to the suspension of flat springs 3 the
bracket is a self-adjusting one and no arresting unit is necessary for the positioning and
removal of the inspected component. Similar is the arrangement used for the present
development.
In a device for measuring hole diameters, the unit is used to inspect the opening for
the piston pin of the piston. The principle of action is as follows: the piston is inserted
over the mandrel having welded hard-alloy strips. The strip presses the piston against the
upper hard-alloy support of the mandrel under the action of the springs. The dimensional
deviation of the diameter is transmitted to the measurement head or sensor tip via the arm
with spherical and flat tip. The present design uses a similar mandrel for positioning the
component to be inspected and transmitting measurement signal via a flat and spherical tip
arm.
In a device for inspecting holes: Mounted on the flat springs to the body are the
location pins and the measurement tips. They can be moved along T-shaped groove guides
and fixed in position by means of screws 6 thus changing measuring range from φ15 to
φ60 mm.
The plate’s lapped surface is used for face positioning of inspected components. The
arm 8 arrests measuring and location pins simultaneously. It has two end positions
determined by a ball catch. A screw is used to coincide the measurement line with the
diameter of the inspected component. The screw is used for the fine adjustment of the
built-in inductive transducer. A cable is used to connect the inductive unit to the
intermediate transducer.
Page 7
Fig. 4 a)
Fig. 4 b)
For the inspection of light components – bushings the adjustment for coincidence of
the measurement line with the hole diameter is only performed a single time and each
component is automatically positioned afterwards at a location deviation of less than
±0.2µm.
A multi-dimensional inspection device is used to inspect three diameters and two
Page 8
heights of a bushing-type component. The component is positioned on the mandrel 1,

pressed into the carriage that can move in reciprocating manner with the handle via the
tooth section and the rack. Thus, the component is moved into measuring position and
positioned on (off) the mandrel. Diameters are inspected by means of double-contact
brackets, suspended on a spring parallelogram. The electrical contact transducers are
mounted on the brackets. The measuring tip of the transducer receives data for the
inspected diameter via an intermediate bar suspended on flat springs and mounted to the
bracket. Suspension of brackets on spring parallelogram eliminates errors resulting from
eventual run-out of inspected cylindrical surfaces against the base cylindrical plane. Both
heights are inspected using single-contact units comprising the intermediate transmission
elements and the electric contact transducers.
Recently often used are inspection and measurement devices built on modular
principle. Normalized assemblies and elements used to build a universal, adjustable multi-
dimensional device for the inspection of components like shafts and pins for diameters up
to φ 100mm and lengths up to 750mm. The quantity, type and inter-positioning of
assemblies and elements used to build up the device are determined by the construction of
the inspected component. The set includes four basic groups:
I - Measuring brackets.
II - Assemblies for positioning and locating the inspected components: prisms,
centers, and pin stops.
III – Fastening elements: plates, pins, stands and arms for positioning and
supporting above elements in a given arrangement
IV - Tips and transmission assemblies – aids for suitable location of measurement
devices and transducers on brackets.
Layouts for multi-dimensional devices based on MPV are the vertical layout with
positioning between centers and the horizontal with positioning over two pins in locating
brackets.
The Swiss company TESA also produces elements and assemblies for multi-
dimensional devices. Their nomenclature allows a wider variety of layouts for measuring
diameters (inner and outer) and lengths [5]. The use of multi-dimensional devices built-up
of normalized elements and assemblies provides lots of advantages:
- Eliminates the need for many specialized attachments. This gives many
organizational advantages with respect to storehouses, maintenance and
necessity to discard equipment when seizing a given production. Normalized
elements and assemblies are not tied up to certain products.
- Conditions are set out for centralized production of elements for measuring
equipment.
- Inspection efficiency is largely improved.
- Expenses for universal measurement instruments are cut down.
3.
Page 9
SELECTION OF A SCHEMATIC DIAGRAM
The device to be developed in the present work aims at inspecting all three
parameters of a smooth bushing simultaneously. As mentioned earlier, multi-dimensional
inspection devices can be considered as consisting of several single-dimensional ones. For
our case, these are constructions for measuring inner diameters, outer diameters and
heights (lengths, respectively) [5].
We selected a commonly occurring solution for the inspection of the outer diameter
– the double-contact bracket. The schematic diagram for this bracket is shown on Fig. 1.
There are several reasons for this particular selection. First of all is the simplicity of the
construction. Another reason is the self-adjustment of the bracket. This is achieved
through flat spring suspension and eliminates possible errors from radial run-out against
the base plane. An advantage of this diagram is also the fact that the Abbey principle is
being observed in the measurement.
The schematic diagram for inspecting the inner diameter of the bushing was
developed on the basis of the diagram shown on Fig. 2. Several changes were made for
this particular application of the diagram. The strip 4 in Fig. 2 was exchanged for a bar
supported on a spring hinge. Another change that was shared with the Fig. 3 schematic
diagram is using two fixed shoes to improve positioning.
We have chosen the solution for the length measurement. Its advantages are
construction simplicity and observing Abbe’s principle [6]. The design diagram of the
device shown on Fig.5 is a synthesis of all three diagrams considered so far. Various
views show how inspection of each parameter is performed. The sections for inspection of
the other dimensions are shown as a block (rectangle) in each view.
The principle of action is the following:
The carriage 2 is drawn out by means of the handle 1. The component 3 is
positioned at inner diameter inspection position. Positioning is achieved by means of fixed
shoes 15 and measuring tip 14 mounted on the bar. The carriage containing the outer
diameter and length inspection sections is then returned at measurement position. When
carriage is set in position the measuring tips mounted on intermediate elements 4 and 9
contacts the component. The deviations from set in adjustment dimensions are then
transmitted via elements 4 and 9 to transducers 6 and 11. These are moved by means of
spring parallelograms 5 and 10. Measurement pressure is ensured by springs 7 and 13. The
spring parallelogram 12 is provided for the outer diameter inspection double-contact
bracket and it provides self-adjustment of the bracket and avoids any errors from radial
run-out against the base plane.
The hole diameter inspection section is actuated immediately following component
loading as it also provides positioning. When the component is loaded it rests against fixed
shoes 15. The measuring tip contacts bushing inner surface and sends the signal to the
transducer 17 via the bar 14 mounted on the spring hinge 16. The measurement pressure is
also provided here by the spring 18.
Page 10
Fig. 5 The basic parts of the schematic diagrams are:

1 Carriage; 2 Handle; 3 Component; 4 Intermediate element; 5 Spring parallelogram;
6 Transducer; 7 Spring; 8 Fixed shoe; 9 Intermediate element; 10 Spring
parallelogram; 11 Transducer; 12 Spring parallelogram; 13 Spring; 14 Bar; 15
Fixed shoes; 17 Spring hinge; 18 Transducer; 19 Spring.
4.
Page 11
CONSTRUCTION CALCULATIONS
Construction calculations for the design developed include kinematical and a

strength calculation for flat and cylindrical helical springs and spring parallelograms used
in the construction.
These shall be considered as follows:
4.1 Positioning element flat spring
4.2 Spring parallelograms
4.2.1 Spring parallelograms supporting transmission elements
4.2.2 Spring parallelogram supporting measuring bracket
4.3 Spring hinge
4.4 Cylindrical helical springs
4.4.1 Springs providing measurement pressure
4.4.2 Clamp spring
4.1 FLAT SPRINGS

The flat spring subject to the present calculation is provided to ensure holding of the
component when positioned on the mandrel. This spring shall have to compensate for the
action of the spring providing measurement pressure and the spring parallelogram of the
outer diameter-inspecting bracket. The formulas needed for the calculations can be found
in the literature [1].
The basic characteristics of the spring are:
- material – 65G steel
- modulus of linear elongation – E=2.10¹¹Pa
- allowed bending stress – [σ bn] = 65.10 Pa
- full load – F=7N
- length – l=24mm
We assume the necessary deflection value to be f=1.6mm. We calculated strip
thickness h from the equation [6]:
h = 2l2[σ bn] / 3Ef
h=0.7mm (4.1)
We use this result to calculate strip width using the formula:
b=6Fl / h2[σ bn] (4.2)
b=3.6mm
4.2 SPRING PARALLELOGRAMS

Spring parallelograms represent two flat springs connected in parallel, which
support an element providing some small linear displacement. When making my
calculations for these springs we used the technique from Para 4.1. Spring parallelograms
Page 12
are used in two cases in this particular design. We have chosen the same material for both
– steel 65G. It has the following characteristics [7]:
It should be kept in mind during calculation that when connected in parallel the load
is distributed proportionately between the connected springs. As is in this particular case,
when using two identical springs the acting force is being equally distributed over them.
4.2.1 Spring parallelograms supporting intermediate elements

There are two spring parallelograms in this particular design and these support
elements having measuring tips mounted on them, which transmit the measurement signal
to the inductive transducers in the length and outer diameter inspection sections. These are
designed to carry identical loads as intermediate elements have very similar masses [8].
The initial data for the calculations are:
- full load – F=1.8N
- length –l=22mm
We choose spring width of b=5mm. Calculating the strip thickness using the
equation:
h=√6Fl/b[σ bn] (4.3)
h=0.3mm
We use this result to calculate deflection using the formula:
f=Fl³/3EJ (4.4)
where J=bh³/12 is the cross section inertia.
f=2.8mm.
4.2.2 Spring parallelogram supporting the measuring bracket
The purpose of this spring parallelogram is to ensure self-adjustment of the outer

diameter inspection double-contact bracket. The data for this calculation are:
- maximum load – F=1.6N
- length –l=25mm
We choose spring width of b=8mm.
We use the relationship (4.3) to calculate spring thickness using the data chosen.
The result is: h=0.25mm.
We calculated the deflection using equation (4.4) [7]:
f= 4mm
4.3 SPRING HINGE

The spring hinge in the present design is used to provide turning of the bar, which
transmits measurement signals to the transducer at the bushing inner diameter inspection
section. This hinge comprises two flat springs connected in parallel and positioned under
Page 13
an angle against each other. The angle of rotation is small. This minimizes the error from
the variable centre of rotation.
We assume the bar transmitting the measurement pressure is a strut-framed beam.
The reactions at the supports represent the loads on the flat springs. The force acting on
the beam is the same from the spring providing the measurement pressure, i.e. F=5N.
Loads can be presented as their components. Each spring is subjected to the action of one
bending and one tensioning (pressure) force [8].
For this particular case the forces are:
A = 30N
B = 25N
The angle at which hinge strips are positioned is α = 20°. The components will be
presented by:
A1= A cosα=28.19N B1=B cosα = 23.49N
A2= A sinα = 10.26N B2=B sinα = 8.55N
A1 and B1 are bending forces in above equations and A2 (B2) are tension (pressure
respectively) forces.
The material for the springs is steel 65G having the following characteristics [9]:
Strip width is b = 6mm. The length is calculated from the expression:

l = l / cosα = 10.6mm
Thickness is calculated using the formula (4.3):
bA = 0.7mm
bB = 0.7mm
Deflection is calculated from the expression for springs under combined loading:
f max = f max1/(1±√P2/Po), (4.5)
where f max1 is the bending under the action of the bending component according to
formula (4.4)
P2 is the other component;
Po is the critical load calculated from the expression:
Po = π²EJ/4l² (4.6)
The type of the force P2 determines the sign in the brackets. When pressure is
applied the sign is “+” and when tension is applied the sign is “-“.
The values are:
fmax A = fmax B = 0.3mm
4.4
Page 14
CYLINDRICAL HELICAL SPRINGS
4.4.1 SPRINGS PROVIDING MEASUREMENT PRESSURE
We have chosen a cylindrical helical spring to provide measurement pressure

because of the linearity of its characteristics. The spring is tension loaded. We have shared
the calculations for similar springs from the reference literature [10].
The material chosen for the springs is steel having the following characteristics:
- modulus of angular deformation – G=8.10¹ºPa
- allowed torsion stress – [τ trs] = 6.10 Pa
The following initial parameters for the spring, can be altered later:
- pre-load F o = 2N
- maximum load F max = 5N.
The pre-load Fo ensures stable spring operation. It is selected within the range
Fo = (0.3÷0.8) Fmax. For this particular case I have chosen a value of 0.4.
In view of minimizing its size I have chosen an average spring diameter of D =
3mm. For construction considerations I have chosen wire diameter of d = 0.45mm. I used
these two values to find the spring index c using the formula:
c = D/d (4.4)
c = 0.667.
With the values thus calculated I could check the spring axial load – torsion stress. It
is calculated from the formula:
τ trs = 8FD / πd3 (4.5)
Considering the effect of the helical scan having a coefficient k 1, the check
becomes
τ trs = k1 (8FD / πd3) ≤ [τ trs] (4.6)
The coefficient k1 depends on the value of the spring index c. This coefficient
increases as c decreases and when c >10 it may be considered that k1 ≈ 1. For the rest of
the cases it is determined by the expression [11]:
k1 = (4c – 1)/(4c - 4) + 0.615 / c (4.7)
For this particular case:
K1 = 1.2246.
The result from the check is:
τtrs = 5.13.108 Pa < [τtrs] = 6. 108 Pa
The conclusion is that the parameters chosen meet our requirements.
The next step is the calculation of the number of windings and the lengths at various
loads. For this purpose it is necessary to know spring deflection at maximum load f. I
assume that for our case f = 2mm will be sufficient. The formula for the calculation of the
number of windings is:
Page 15
n = Gd / 8Fc³ (4.8)
n = 6.075 windings
For the number of windings the closest higher number is taken i.e.
n = 7.
We determine the spring constant K:
K – Gd / 8c³n (4.9)
Following the substitution with known values:
K = 3037.5 N/m
The total number of windings is calculated from the relation:
ntl = n + (1÷2) (4.10)
ntl = 8 windings
Further calculations involve spring lengths at various loads. The following formulas
are used:
- length of the spring occupied with windings:
L = ntl d (4.11)
L = 3.6mm
- length of unloaded spring, i.e. distance between securing points:
Lo = L +(1÷2) D (4.12)
Lo = 6.6mm
- spring length at maximum operational load:
Lm = Lo +8c³ntl(F max – Fo) Gd (4.13)
Lm = 8.2mm
- length of the wire used for spring windings:
l = πDntl/cos α + l 1 (4.14)
To find the slope of the helical line α I use the expression:
α = arctg (t / πD) (4.15)
As the pitch t of springs loaded on tension we assume the thickness of the wire as in
most cases windings are touching each other. In this case t = 0.45mm and the slope angle
is:
α = 2°44′.
We assume an additional length needed to form the securing ends of l1 = 17mm. If
we substitute the values in (3.8), then
l= 92.5 mm
4.4.2 Clamp spring

The clamp spring is loaded on pressure. Similar to the one, which provides
measurement pressure, it is calculated according to a technique developed in the reference
Page 16
literature [1]. The differences from the calculations for springs loaded on tension are in the
formulas for various lengths. We have chosen the material for the spring to be steel having
the following characteristics [12]:
- modulus of angular deformation – G=8.10¹ºPa
- allowed torsion stress – [τtrs] = 6.108 Pa
- The output data necessary for the calculations are:
- maximum load Fmax = 8 N;
- initial load F0 = 4 N;
- deflection under maximum load fmax = 1mm.
For construction considerations we choose the diameter of the wire to be d = 0.7mm
and an average diameter of the spring D = 4mm. When I substitute these values in
equation (4.4) I find the spring index to be:
c = 5.714.
When we substitute this into the equation (4.7) the coefficient defining the curvature
of the windings can be found:
k1 = 5.714.
We use the values to check spring torsion according to formula (4.6) and I find:
τtrs =3.10 Pa < [τtrs] = 6. 108 Pa
The result of the check shows that the spring is properly dimensioned and will carry
the expected load. The next step is to determine the number of spring operational
windings. In equation (4.8) we substitute the values assumed and round the result to the
closest higher number:
n = 5 windings.
The total number of windings for a spring subjected to pressure is calculated using
the relationship:
ntl = n + (1.5÷2) (4.16)
ntl= 7 windings
The calculations that follow are related to spring lengths at various loads.
- minimum gap between windings at maximum load:
∆ = (0.1÷0.2) f/n (4.17)
∆= 0.017mm
- spring pitch:
t = f/n +d+∆ (4.18)
t =0.86mm
- spring length when pressed until windings touch:
L=(ntl-0.5) d (4.19)
L=4.55mm
Page 17
- length of unloaded spring

L0=L+n (t-d) (4.20)
L0=5.35 mm
- angle of slope of helical line:
α=arctg (t/πD) (4.21)
α=3°55′
- length of the wire used to wind the spring:
l = πDntl/cos α (4.22)
l=63mm
For springs working under pressure the following condition is observed:
L0/D<3 (4.23)
When this condition is kept the spring will be resistant to buckling. For our
particular case:
L0/D=1.3375<3,
i.e. this condition is met.
5. MEASUREMENT ERROR ANALYSIS

Automatic inspection systems, along with universal measuring devices share a
common metrological base determined by the measurement process. Hence, the theory of
accuracy for universal measurement means could be transferred into the automatic
inspection systems observing the features of inspection processes.
Unlike the inspection involving universal measurement means, which has a
continuous nature, the automatic inspection is in most cases of discrete nature. The
discrete feature is defined by the fact that the systems used to perform this inspection most
often only react to certain values for the inspected parameter. For example, this could be a
limiting size of a component in the conditions of passive inspection.
A conclusion can be drawn from all said above that automatic inspection devices
must have discrete features regardless of the technique used for conversion of the
measurement signal in the primary inspection section. The output signal of the primary
transducer in the developed design is an analogue signal. Therefore, a transition should be
considered from the analogue into a discrete signal for read out.
The metrological analysis for the accuracy of the automated inspection of
dimensions could be made based on the accuracy analysis of the measurement process
using universal measuring means. These, on the other hand are characterized by a device
reading error, which represents the difference between device readings and the actual
value of the inspected parameter. Adopting a similar feature for the automatic inspection
systems would be contrary to their discrete character and functional application.
Therefore, their accuracy should be determined based on the difference between the actual
value read for the inspected parameter at which the system is actuated, and the value for
Page 18
this parameter for the sample used for the adjustment of the device. Actually, this
difference represents an accumulated error of the system, which includes the errors of all
its modules: receiving, transmitting, processing, comparing and executing.
Three basic groups of errors are considered to comprise the cumulative error:
- kinematical and technological errors of transmitting circuits;
- errors due to the construction of the device and measurement process;
- errors caused by the operation conditions and adjustment
5.1 KINEMATICAL AND TECHNOLOGICAL ERRORS
5.1.1 Kinematical errors

These errors are mainly due to the selected design diagrams for the measurement
units or systems regardless of the method of transforming of the measurement signal.
Kinematical errors are characterized by the lack of linear relation between the input and
output parameters of measurement equipment and also, by the variable transmission rate.
Although non-linearity does not affect accuracy, it is considered best when transforming
characteristics have a linear nature and thus be able to work in a linear section. For the
inductive transducer made by TESA (Switzerland) this is a linear characteristic for a major
section of its range and the relative non-linearity [∆nonlin.] remains constant for a wide
range [12].
5.1.2 Technological errors

These errors are due to inaccurate manufacturing of certain components and
assemblies from the transmission circuit of units or devices or are due to the errors in their
mutual position. These errors could have systematic or random nature. Their occurrence
often depends on the functions of the measurement equipment and the measuring
techniques. Therefore, it is very hard to pre-determine the rate and nature of their effect.
In our particular design technological errors could be expected to arise from:
- inaccurate manufacturing of flat springs;
- inaccurate positioning of flat springs in relation to each other in the spring
parallelogram and spring hinge;
- inaccurate manufacturing of the transmission bar, etc.
The accuracy of the measurement could be influenced by each of the units
comprising the measurement equipment. The error of the measurement unit, although
prevailing for a number of cases, could not give a full and accurate idea of the accuracy of
measurement. This accuracy is determined by the cumulative error for the measurement
∆∑, which includes the following components [13]:
1. The error of the measurement unit (instrument error).
2. The error of the measurement diagram.
3. The error of positioning during measurement.
Page 19
4. Temperature error.
5. The error caused by the forces applied during the measurement.
6. Adjustment error
7. Subjective error
8. Operational error.
Errors 2 and 3 comprise the measurement technique error or the systematic error.
When adding separate components it should be kept in mind that each of them could
have two parts – systematic and accidental, i.e.
∆I= ±∆mI ± ∆limi (5.1)
Then,
∆∑=±∑∆mI ± √(∆lim12+∆lim22+…+∆limn2) (5.2)
The sum of the accidental components of the error is called limit error of the
measurement method ∆lim∑ and accepts the sign of the systematic error of the
measurement method ∆m∑.
The methods used further down to describe errors were adopted from the literature
[12]. Several basic types are only being used.
5.2 ERRORS OF THE MEASUREMENT UNIT (INSTRUMENT

ERROR)
The instrument error determining the accuracy of the measurement device is
characterized by the largest reading error within the measurement range.
Depending on the section of the measurement range being used, the instrument error
could be equal or less than the maximum reading error. When the full measurement range
is being used, the instrument error is going to be equal to the maximum error. When 2-3
divisions from the measurement device scale are being used the instrument error is going
to be equal to the accidental component of its measurement error when the measurement
tip is arrested. When operating without arresting or making amplitude measurements
(measurement of radial run-out and end play, measurements for shape deviations, etc.) the
instrument error is going to be equal to the sum of the accidental component and the
backstroke error.
In practice, when designing inspection and measurement devices to measure
dimensional parameters of components, standard measurement units are usually used from
serial production. The accuracy for such units is characterized by the allowable reading
error [∆R] or its accidental component – the reading variation V or the average error - σ.
Preferably, the average error σ is used. When reading variation is applied it is necessary to
point out the number of measurements for which it is determined.
In technical measurements, the allowable error [∆R], and hence the instrument error
are regarded as accidental values:
∆I =∆limI =[∆R] (5.3)
where ∆I is the instrument error, ∆limI is its accidental component.
Page 20
When selecting standard measurement equipment the following relation determines

the value for the allowable error [13]:
[∆R] = 0.7[∆meas] (5.4)
For our particular case the allowable measurement error [∆meas] is set to be 10µm. If
we substitute in equation (5.4):
[∆R] = 7µm.
5.3 ERRORS IN THE MEASUREMENT DIAGRAM

The error in the measurement diagram arises as result of the diagram imperfection as
a result of which the maximum and minimum values of the inspected dimension are being
incomplete. The basic sources for the error of the diagram are dimensional deviations,
shape deviations, location deviations and component roughness.
5.3.1 Effect of surface roughness over errors of the measurement diagram

When contact measurement is performed it is possible for the measuring tip to fall
into the depressions. The reading of the measurement unit will change depending on the
positioning of the tip over a depression or projection:
∆dgr = f = -0.125 Sm/r (5.5)
where r is the radius of the measuring tip and Sm is the roughness pitch.
For our particular case such an error could appear only when measuring the inner
diameter and length. When inspecting outer diameter the tips have flat surfaces, i.e. r =∞.
As the radius is included in the denominator, ∆dgr = 0.
For all other cases we get:
∆dgr = - 3.125µm.
5.4 ERRORS DUE TO POSITIONING IN MEASUREMENT

The error in positioning occurs as a result of the inaccurate mutual positioning of the
component to be measured and the measurement unit, which leads to misalignment of the
measurement line of the measuring device and the reading line for the inspected
parameter. This misalignment caused by a mistake in the fixing (securing) section causes
the positioning error:
∆pos = xr – x (5.6)
where x is the actual value of the parameter being measured and xr is the reading for
the value of this parameter or the input signal to the measurement unit.
Some basic reasons for the positioning error during measurement are:
1. Failure to observe the principle of unity of bases
2. Errors in the positioning section, measurement contact section and transducer
supporting section.
Page 21
5.4.1 Effect of the violation of the principle of unity of bases
According to this principle the measurement and locating bases of the inspected
component must be identical for a given measurement.
A measurement base is the surface of the inspected component, which forms the
dimension being inspected.
A locating base is the surface of the inspected component over which it is located in
the positioning section of the measuring device.
When the principle of unity of bases has been observed no positioning errors occur
(5.1), i.e. when measurement of the dimension L is performed (Fig. 5.1a) and this
dimension is formed by two measurement bases – the top and bottom face ends of the
component, the bottom measurement is identical to the locating base. The diameter
dimension D is formed by the cylindrical surface, which is also identical to both the
measurement and locating base.
Failure to observe the principle of unity of bases results in the occurrence of a
positioning error, which is a result of the mutual position of the measurement and locating
bases for the component being inspected. The positioning error is determined by the
formula:
∆pos = Lmeas - L (5.7),
where L is the actual dimension and Lmeas is the measured dimension.
The locating and measurement bases are identical in our particular design, i.e. no
positioning error is occurring.
5.4.2 Errors of positioning during measurement of internal cylindrical surfaces

occurring as a result of the displacement of measurement baseline in
respect to the inspected diameter
When measuring the diameter of external cylindrical surfaces the measuring device
is practically being self-positioned with respect to the diameter of the inspected
component thanks to the use of flat measuring shoes. No such self-positioning is observed
in double-contact measurements of inner diameters. When measurements on internal
cylindrical surfaces are performed a complicated process of compatibility between
measuring shoes (the measuring baseline) and the diameter in the inspected section is
realized.
The measurement error occurs as a result of the displacement of the measurement
baseline with respect to the inspected diameter. Displacement could occur either in the
plane, which is perpendicular to the axis of the opening, or in the axial plane of the
opening. In the first case, a displacement of a chord instead of a diameter is occurring and
in the second case, an ellipse diameter is displaced instead of a circle diameter.
This error has been kept to a minimum in our particular design thanks to the use of a
three-contact measurement layout thus improving accuracy in positioning.
5.5 TEMPERATURE ERROR

Temperature variations and deviations from the normal range (20˚C) could lead to
Page 22
the occurrence of errors. The percentage of temperature error in the cumulative error for
the measurement technique is considerable and increases with the increase of the
inspected dimension.
The temperature error occurs as a result of temperature deformations in the section
of the dimensional circuit within the measuring diagram when:
a. the temperature of the whole system (inspected component, measurement
equipment and environment) is changed from the normal when components
having different linear expansion coefficients are available either in the
inspection device or the component being inspected;
b. there is a difference in the temperature of the inspected component and the
measuring device (for example, due to component heat-up during processing);
c. variations in environmental temperature are observed including operator body
heat emission and temperature fluctuations;
d. local heat-up of parts of the components being inspected when held by the
operator.
Determining the cumulative effect of temperature deformations on the error of the
measurement technique is very complicated, as this requires information about the
physical properties of the material of the parts comprising the measuring device and of the
component as well as temperature fields in these components. This information is very
limited in real conditions so it is necessary to consider one maximum (marginal) value for
the expected temperature error. In this case the concept of “temperature conditions” is
used. This refers to a provisional difference in temperature between the inspected
component and the measuring device expressed in ˚C, which under ideal conditions would
cause the same temperature error, as is the entire complex of really existing causes. These
“ideal conditions” refer to the fact that the device and the component have constant
temperature content and the linear expansion coefficient of the material they were made of
is equal to 11.6 .10¯ l/grad.
The temperature conditions should not be understood as the allowable deviation
from a 20˚C temperature environment or its fluctuation in the measurement process.
Based on the definition given earlier, the temperature error resulting from
temperature deformations under certain temperature conditions could be determined by
the formula:
∆lt= l. Qt . 11.6. 10-6, (5.8)
where ∆lt is the temperature error;
l is the dimension being measured;
Qt is the temperature conditions.
Page 23
5.6 ERRORS DUE TO FORCES ACTING DURING

MEASUREMENT
The errors occurring from forces acting during the measurement (impact errors)
occur as a result of the elastic deformations in the sections of the dimensional circuit
within the measurement diagram.
The basic source for impact errors is the measurement pressure.
Measurement pressure and its variations have a critical influence on the accuracy of
the measurement technique. Errors caused by measurement pressure depend on the size,
shape and material of the inspected component and the stability of all sections within the
dimensional circuit of the measurement diagram.
5.6.1 Characteristics of measurement pressure
When constant measurement pressure is available in the measuring unit this could
lead to certain deformation on some of the parts within the measuring unit and these
deformations would still be constant throughout the measurement process. However,
measurement pressure changes with the position of the measuring bar (Fig.2.5).
The diagram shown on the Figure largely describes the real measurement pressure
available at the measuring heads. The following definitions were adopted:
∆P1 - measurement pressure change with penetration of measuring bar down its
complete stroke;
∆P2 - measurement pressure change with sensor withdrawal back its complete
stroke;
∆P3 - local change in measurement pressure;
∆P’max – maximum hysteresis change in measurement pressure;
∆Pmax - maximum value of measurement pressure.
The area of measurement pressure in the diagram characterizes the work necessary
to overcome the friction forces in the measurement unit mechanisms when the
measurement bar is moved to its end position.
The hysteresis change in measurement pressure ∆P’ max is largely due to friction
forces between measuring unit moving parts (measuring head) and is practically non-
existing in measuring devices where frictioning pairs have been substituted by elastically
deforming elements.
The local change ∆P3 is due to the uneven kinematical and force interaction between
the moving parts of the measuring device.
Errors caused by ∆P1, ∆P2 and ∆Pmax have a systematic character and could be
excluded from the result of the measurement. The same refers to errors, caused by ∆P’ max
when making amplitude measurements. However, when we keep in mind that ∆P max
could show even when a single division of change in movement has occurred, these errors
should be regarded as accidental for non-amplitude measurements.
Page 24
It is hard to pre-determine the values for ∆P3 at the time of measurement so the
errors occurring as a result of this change in pressure should also be regarded as accidental
values.
We used Table 10 [13] to get the data for contact measuring transducers made by
TESA and Taylor Holson and these are:
P max = 4.2÷20 cN
∆P1 = 0.2÷5 cN
∆P3 max = 0
∆P’ max = 0.005÷2.2 cN
Errors due to measurement pressure could be separated into three groups:

1. Errors due to the elastic deformation in the area of contact between the
measuring shoe and the component inspected
2. Errors due to elastic deformations of the component (without the ones in the
contact area)
3. Errors due to elastic deformations of the securing unit (carrier) of the measuring
device and the parts comprising the unit itself and also, to elastic deformations in
some of the other units comprising the measurement device.
5.6.2 CONTACT DEFORMATIONS
An elastic deformation – shrinkage occurs at the point of contact between the

measuring shoe and the surface of the component. The value of this deformation depends
on the material of the shoe and the component and on their shape.
When both the shoe and the component are made of steel, contact deformations are
determined by the formula:
∆c = 0.43³√P²/r (5.9),
where P is the measurement pressure at N, r is the measurement shoe radius in mm
and ∆c is the contact deformation (impact error) in µm.
Two types of measuring shoe are available for our particular design – spherical
(having a radius of 1mm) to measure inner diameter and length, and knife-like shoes to
measure outer diameter. We have been considering a flat contact surface for the latter, i.e.
the radius equals infinity. This according to the formula means that the impact error is
equal to zero. For the other shoes we have:
∆c = 1.26µm
5.7 ERRORS DUE TO ADJUSTMENT OPERATIONS

The adjustment operation error of the measurement device for a given dimension
depends on the quality of the adjustment unit, the selected adjustment technique and
operator’s qualifications.
5.7.1 ADJUSTMENT OPERATION ERRORS DEPENDING ON THE
Page 25
QUALITY OF THE ADJUSTMENT UNIT

The occurrence of such errors is related to the following reasons:
a. Friction available in the adjustment unit moving sections, which reduces its
marginal sensitivity, i.e. the lowest change in adjustment level that can be
achieved with sufficient accuracy via a single movement of the unit’s guide link.
b. Misalignment during securing of adjusting element in the proper position – this
is determined experimentally by testing a sample or reference part.
c. Occurrence of elastic deformations on unit parts as a result of the strong forces
necessary to move the adjustment element.
d. A reading error on the gauge of the adjustment unit. In this case this is an
accidental component of the reading error:
∆adj = ∆limmeas (5.10)
From equation (5.3) we get:
∆adj = 7 µm.
5.7.2 ADJUSTMENT OPERATION ERRORS DEPENDING ON THE

SELECTED ADJUSTMENT TECHNIQUE
The occurrence of such adjustment errors is related to the following reasons:
a. Errors of manufacturing and certification of reference components used for the
adjustment
b. Violation of the principle of similarity between the adjustment reference
(reference component) and the object of measurement.
According to this principle, all parameters of the object of measurement and the
adjustment reference, both geometrical (size, shape, location, roughness) and mechanical
(material, hardness, weight, etc.) should be identical. Measurement and adjustment
techniques should also be identical.
This principle is often violated and this results in adjustment operation error.
For example, when there is a difference in the linear expansion coefficients of the
material of the reference and the object of the measurement, the adjustment error will then
be determined by the difference in their temperature deformations, i.e. the same way as the
temperature error:
∆adj = ∆t
When there is a difference in hardness, shape, weight and stability it will be
determined by the difference in impact deformations:
∆adj = ∆imp, etc.
Therefore, special attention should be paid to the adjustment operation issues so
adjustment error is kept within a reasonable range.
5.7.3 ADJUSTMENT OPERATION ERRORS RELATED TO OPERATOR’S

STATE AND QUALIFICATIONS
These errors are accidental by nature and are part of the subjective error. During
Page 26
adjustment they are included in the reading error of the gauge of the adjustment unit used
(5.7.1).
5.8 SUBJECTIVE ERROR

In the case of our particular design the subjective error in reading is minimized as
the output signal is discrete and is shown on the screen.
5.9 OPERATION ERROR

The measurement accuracy decreases in the process of operation of the measurement
device as a result of the combined action of several physical processes, like: wear,
contamination and corrosion on operation surfaces, changes in parts elastic properties as a
result of material fatigue, aging of mechanical components and elements of the electrical
circuit [13]. All these processes influence various measurement component errors. It is
hard to make an advance calculation of their influence because of the strong dependence
of output data and particular measurement conditions and whenever this is possible,
calculation is only too approximate. Such is the case with the calculation of measuring
shoe wear and the rate of adjustment distortion as a result of unreliable securing of the unit
on the device, accidental shocks, vibrations, etc.
5.9.1 MEASUREMENT SHOE WEAR

The value of such wear f could be determined using the equation [11]:
∆oper = f = upLK (5.11),
where u is the relative shoe wear in µm/Pa.m,
p is the contact pressure in Pa,
L is the friction path of the shoe during measurement in m,
K is the total coefficient
K = K1.K2.K3,
Where K1 is the coefficient determining the rate of contamination in the area,
K2 is the coefficient determining the roughness of the inspected surface
K2 = 0.5Rz
K3 is the coefficient determining the hardness of the inspected surface
K3 = 0.02 HRC
The contact pressure on friction surfaces is determined using the formula 12]:
P=Q /F (5.12)
Where Q is the normal force and F is the contact area. This area is determined using
the relation:
F = 3.14 (2δk .r - δk²) (5.13),
Page 27
Where δk is contact deformations defined by the formula (5.9), and r is the shoe
radius.
5.9.2 RATE OF DISTORTION OF THE ADJUSTMENT OF THE

MEASURING DEVICE
The rate of misalignment depends on the complexity of the measuring device, the
accuracy of manufacture and adjustment [13]. It characterizes misalignment τ misal
allocated to a single measurement. If the number of measured components n during the
time between two successive adjustment operations is defined, i.e. the operational error,
∆oper = n. τmissal (5.14)
6. DEVICE ADJUSTMENT TECHNIQUE

The adjustment of the developed multi-dimensional inspection device is performed
using reference bushings [13]. The order of adjustment is the following:
1. The carriage supporting the length and outer diameter inspection sections is
drawn out.
2. The reference bushing made to meet the minimum requirement of the tolerances
for all three dimensions is positioned on the mandrel.
3. The carriage is returned back until it rests securely.
4. The control indication unit is turned on and dimension reading are reset.
5. The stability of the adjustment is checked through multiple draw outs and
insertions of the carriage and respective removal and installation of the reference
bushing.
Page 28
REFERENCES
1. M.J. García Tárrago, L. Kari, J. Vinolas, N. Gil-Negrete, Frequency and amplitude
dependence of the axial and radial stiffness of carbon-black filled rubber bushings.
Polymer Testing, Volume 26, Issue 5, August 2007, Pages 629-638.
2. Jennifer Kadlowec, David Gerrard, Howard Pearlman, Coupled axial–torsional
behavior of cylindrical elastomer bushings. Polymer Testing, Volume 28, Issue 2,
April 2009, Pages 139-144.
3. Wen-Ming Zhang, Guang Meng, Numerical simulation of sliding wear between the
rotor bushing and ground plane in micromotors. Sensors and Actuators A: Physical,
Volume 126, Issue 1, 26 January 2006, Pages 15-24.
4. M. Cerit, E. Nart, K. Genel, Investigation into effect of rubber bushing on stress
distribution and fatigue behaviour of anti-roll bar. Engineering Failure Analysis,
Volume 17, Issue 5, July 2010, Pages 1019-1027.
5. K. K. Choi, W. Duan, Design sensitivity analysis and shape optimization of structural
components with hyperelastic material. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and
Engineering, Volume 187, Issues 1-2, 23 June 2000, Pages 219-243.
6. E. Di Pietro, T. Amemiya, M. Hanada, T. Iga, T. Inoue, Y. Okumura, K. Watanabe,
Design and overview of fabrication tests for the 1 MV bushing for ITER NB system.
Fusion Engineering and Design, Volumes 66-68, September 2003, Pages 603-608.
7. Heinrich Groh, Inspection, maintenance and repair of explosion protected equipment.
Explosion Protection, 2002, Pages 472-484.
8. W.E. Bill Forsthoffer, Reciprocating compressor inspection guidelines. Forsthoffer's
Rotating Equipment Handbooks, 2005, Pages 319-361.
9. H.E. Gundtoft, C.C. Agerup, T. Nielsen, A new ultrasonic inspection system for non-
destructive examination of precision tubes Part 1. A description of the system. NDT
International, Volume 10, Issue 4, August 1977, Pages 171-176.
10. René Peter Schneider, Lucimara R. da Silva, Helder Brandão, Liutas Martinaitis
Ferreira, Iron-oxidising microbial biofilms as possible causes of increased friction
coefficient in intermediate and lower guide vane bearing bushings at a hydroelectric
powerplant in Brazil. International Biodeterioration & Biodegradation, Volume 58,
Issue 1, July 2006, Pages 48-58.
11. A. McCrea, D. Chamberlain, R. Navon, Automated inspection and restoration of steel
bridges—a critical review of methods and enabling technologies. Automation in
Construction, Volume 11, Issue 4, June 2002, Pages 351-373.
12. W.E. Bill Forsthoffer, Reciprocating compressor inspection guidelines. Forsthoffer's
Rotating Equipment Handbooks, 2005, Pages 319-361.
13. Jordan T. Maximov, Angel P. Anchev, Modelling of residual stress field in spherical
mandrelling process. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture,
Volume 43, Issue 12, September 2003, Pages 1241-1251.
Page 29
B. A TENSION/PRESSURE LOAD TESTING

DEVICE
PERFORMANCE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE

MECHANICAL RIG FOR TENSION/PRESSURE LOAD
TESTS
The tension/pressure loads testing device is a universal and easy to operate unit. The
basic load is applied through a screw-and-nut assembly, which is a standard design, easy
and low-cost to manufacture, does not require any special maintenance and is reliable [1].
The test rig is designed and intended to provide tension/pressure loads of 12000 N, which
is perfectly sufficient to test all types of plastic materials of a specified tensile strength
within 9-130 mPa. The test sample is cylindrical with standard dimensions:
Operating length l0 = 50 mm
Diameter = 10 mm
Results indication is by means of a dynamometric fork and indicator dial, the applied force
being transformed into linear deformation. Table 1 shows linear deformation values for
tension/pressure fork made of 65 G material and calibrated for 15000 N loads.
Table 1
Force Deformation Force Deformation

100 N 0,21 5 000 1,25
500 N 0,41 8 000 1,89
1 000 N 0,75 10 000 2,09
2 000 N 0,92 12 000 2,21
15 000 2,42
1. DEVICE OPERATION PRINCIPLE

The tension and pressure load testing device has been developed for testing plastic
materials and is designed for 12000 N basic tension/pressure force value. The device is a
universal type as it can successfully perform either tension or pressure tests only by
replacing certain parts and adjusting screw length [2]. For tension tests the sample is
positioned in the jaws (item 6) and secured by means of the M8 x 1LH screws (item 4).
When the driving nut (item 9) is rotated by means of the arms, the nuts item 10 and
item 7 where the moving jaw is positioned move downwards. Thus, the dynamometric
fork is actuated (item 14) one jaw of which is secured to the nut item 10 and the other – to
the fixed nut (item 16). The downward movement results in pressure being applied to the
fork jaw, which is pre-calibrated to indicate forces of up to 15000 N. The jaw thus
undergoes deformation and the indicator dial fastened to the fork fixed jaw indicates the
Page 30
value of this deformation.

The same device can also perform pressure tests after certain device adjustments are
made and some parts replaced. The position and stroke length of the screw could be
adjusted via the nuts (items 9 and 21) before the test sample is positioned in place. The
readings of the results are obtained in the same way – using the tension/pressure
dynamometric fork [3].
The test sample is positioned in the jaws and secured there the same way as for the
tension test using the M8 x 1 screw (item 4). The nut (item 24) moves forward when the
arm is rotated thus starting to tension the clamping jaw. The nut (item 10) where one of
the jaws of the dynamometric fork is secured also moves forward in turn thus causing the
indicator dial to indicate the linear displacement and hence, the force being applied.
The machine has been developed based on the screw-and-nut joint principle and is
easy and convenient to operate providing sufficient accuracy of readings. This makes it
suitable for a wide range of experimental and demonstration applications (in schools,
small laboratories, etc.) The screw-and-nut joint need frequent lubrication to provide
easier movement and minimum wear [4]. As friction losses in this joint are insignificant
we have good reasons to believe the device would provide good accuracy of readings.
2. SAFETY REGULATIONS & ENVIRONMENTAL

CONSIDERATIONS
The tension/pressure testing rig is easy to operate and does not require any
specifically acquired knowledge or qualifications as the mechanism is simply driven by
means of rotating the arm and the nut of the device. The screw and tested sample should
not reached or touched during operation as this might cause injuries.
Before the test is carried out one should first check if the test sample is reliably
secured in place into the jaws and the M8 screws are securely tightened [4]. It would be
useful is the screw is lightly lubricated and the nut run several times along the entire screw
before work is begun. The area around the measuring unit should be kept free of
contamination.
When manufacturing components to higher technical requirements and subjected to
thermal treatment it is necessary to perform some mechanical tests to be able to control
metal quality and thermal treatment characteristics [4]. Standard samples to be tested in
laboratory are made from the specific batch of materials or a specified batch of thermally
treated components under equal production conditions. The quantity of tested samples
would depend on the nature of the technological process. The materials used in machine
building industries are mainly tested for tensile, pressure and torsion characteristics and
the mechanical properties of the tested material are determined on the basis of the forces
applied and the resulting deformation.
Tension tests are usually performed on special machines comprising the following
basic mechanisms: loading mechanism, tension force transmitting mechanism and tension
force reading mechanism. Machines of breakdown force of 2, 4, 5, 30 and 50t are typically
used [4].
Compression tests are usually applied for materials of higher brittleness (cast iron,
aluminium alloys, etc.). These are carried out in special machines and also in tension
Page 31
testing machines where reversing mechanisms are adopted for this purpose to transform
tension force into compression force [5].
Samples of either round or square section are usually used for both types of tests
described above and for the compression test the height/diameter ratio of the sample
should be within 2,5 ÷ 3,0. Cylindrical surfaces of the samples should be concentric and
the bearing surfaces are coated with special grease to reduce friction.
Figures 1a, b, c and d show a round and a flat sample before and after loading when
subjected to fracture as well as the sample deformation curve and Table 2 shows basic
dimensions of tested samples [6].
Table 2
Round sample Flat sample

Dia. Length Width Thickness Length
do Long lo Short lo bo ao Long lo Short lo
25 250 125 30 25 310 155
20 200 100 30 20 280 140
15 150 75 30 15 240 120
10 100 50 30 10 190 95
8 80 40 30 8 170 85
5 50 25 30 5 140 70
Page 32
d0
d0
load P
a c
lo
Pmax
b
b0
Ps
a0
b lo
0.00 elongation δ
d1
c
lk
breakdocon
point
Figure 1
3.
Page 33
TENSION TESTING RIG

Tension and compression tests of plastic materials do not involve significant loads
due to their lower strength characteristics, as is the case with steel tests [7]. The tensile
strength of various plastics varies within σB=(10÷130)MPa. If we chose a ∅10mm
sample with a surface area of:
Fo = πr2 = 78,54.10-6 m2.
The loading force is determined by the formula:
σB = Pmax / Fo
Pmax = σB.Fo = 130.106.78,54.10-6=10210,2N
We assume a maximum loading force of Pmax=12000N. Such load could be applied

by means of a screw-nut drive so we chose a screw type loading mechanism comprising a
turning screw and a reciprocating nut. To ensure higher load-carrying capacity we select a
trapezoid thread screw.
Selecting thread and nut material:

We choose 45 steel for the screw having a tensile strength of σB=750MPa and
bronze CuSn4Zn7Pb5 for the nut with σB=200MPa.
The internal screw diameter d1 is:
5,2. P 5,2.12000
d1 = = = 0,0157mm
π. σ allw. pr. π.800.10 5
We selected a thread Tp20 x 4 with the following dimensions:

- major diameter d = 20 mm
- angle diameter d2 = 18 mm
- minor diameter d1 = 16 mm
- pitch t = 4 mm.
Keeping in mind the self-retention requirement for the thread
α ≤ ρ,
where α is the thread angle
tgα = t / πd2
t = thread pitch;
r = 5° ÷ 7°.
t 4
α = arctg = arctg = 4°2'46"
π. d2 π.18
Page 34
α = 4°2’46”< 5° ÷ 7°.
This shows the self-retention requirement for the thread is met.

The strength test for the screw Tp 20x4 is determined by the formula:
[1] σ equ. = σ 2tens. + 4. τ 2tors. ≤ σ allw. tens.
4. P 4.12000
where [2] σ tens. = = = 596,83.105 Pa - is the operational
π. d12 π.0,016 2
tensile stress.
Mtors. F. l
[3] τ tors. = = - is operational torsion stress
0,2. d13 0,2. d13
σallw.tens = 800.105 Pa.
F = the force applied at lever end in N;
l = lever arm in m.
4.12000
σ tens. = = 596,83.10 5 Pa
π.0,016 2
F. l 50.0,2
τ tors. = = = 122,07.10 5 Pa
0,2. d13 0,2.0,016 3
σ equ. = σ 2tens. + 4. τ 2tors. = (596,83.105 )2 + 4. (122,07.105 )2 =
= 644,83.10 5 Pa ≤ σ allw. tens. = 800.10 5 Pa
The screw buckling test is performed on the basis of the equation [8]:
l = 4.β.l / d1,
where β is a coefficient indicating the method of fastening
b = 2;
l is calculation length of the screw.
we assumed:
- screw lead path height lH = 100mm;
- contact jaw height L = 100mm;
- nut height H = t.z, where t is thread pitch and z is number of windings.
4. F
z=
(
π. d − d12 . ψ. [p]
2
)
Page 35
Where d is major thread diameter;

d1 is minor thread diameter;
ψ is coefficient indicating the uneven load on the windings
( ψ = 0,55 ÷ 0,76 );
[p] – allowable contact pressure (for the steel screw/bronze nut version
[p] = 70 ÷ 130.105Pa);
4.12000
z = = 10,88 < 10
( )
π. 0,02 − 0,016 2 .0,75.130.10 5
2
As the requirement for the number of windings < 10 is not met (the nut is not going
to bear any load), we choose a 26x5 screw thread of the following dimensions [8]:
- major diameter d = 26 mm
- angle diameter d2 = 23.5 mm
- minor diameter d1 = 20.5 mm
- pitch t = 5 mm.
- α = 3°52’28” < 5°÷7°.
Using equations [1], [2] and [3] we calculated:
τtens=363.56 . 105 Pa;

τtors = 58.03 . 105 Pa
σ equ. = (363,56.105 )2 + 4. (58,03.105 )2 =
= 38164
, .10 5 Pa < σ allw. tens. = 400.10 5 ÷ 800.10 5 Pa
4.12000
z = = 6,56 < 10
( )
π. 0,026 2 − 0,0205 2 .0,70.130.10 5
Assuming z = 8 windings.
The nut height is calculated by the equation:
H = t.z = 5.8 = 40mm
4. β. l 4.2.0,25
λ = = = 97,56
d1 0,0205
As 60 ≤ λ ≤ 100 the screw should be checked for buckling by means of the

reliability coefficient:
Page 36
π. d12. (3210 − 116

, . λ ).10 5 π.0,0205 2 . (3210 − 116
, .97,56).10 5
n = = =
4. F 4.12000
= 5,716 > nallw. = 4,0
The design dimensions for the screw and nut are determined by the formula:
- screw head size D = (1,5 ÷ 1,7).d = 40mm
- screw head thickness B = (1,3÷1,6).d = 35mm
- screw clamp neck size d = (0,6 ÷ 0,7).d = 18mm
- nut outer diameter D:
4. F 4.12000
D = + d2 = + 26 2.10 − 6 = 0,029 m
π. σ allw. tens. π.800.10 5
Assuming D = 35mm and the designed outer diameter of the bearing shoulder
45mm., the compression stress on the bearing shoulder will be [9]
) [ ]
4. F
σ comp. = ≤ σ allw. comp. = 600.10 5 Pa
π. (
D12 −D 2
σ comp. =
(
4.12000
π. 45 − 35 .10
2 2
) −6 [ ]
= 190,98.10 5 < σ allw. comp. = 600.10 5 Pa
The height of the bearing shoulder h is determined by the relationship [10]:
1 1
h ≈ . H = .50 = 12,5mm
4 4
F
τ cut = < τ allw. cut = 150 ÷ 300.10 5 Pa
π. D. h
F
τ cut = −6 = 87,3.10 5 < τ allw. cut
π.35.12,5.10
Lever calculations:
Lever length is determined by the formula:
l1 = M / P,
where P is the force applied on the lever by one operator.

P= 50 ÷150N.
I assume P = 100N;
Page 37
M is the momentum induced by the force P. M = M1 + M2;

M1 - momentum originating from the friction in the thread;
M2 – momentum originating from the friction between screw face surface and the
clamping section.
. −3
M1 = F. tg( α + ρ).
d2 23,510
= 12000. tg( 3,8744 + 7). = 27,086Nm
2 2
M2 = 0
27,086
l1 = = 0,135m as we have two handles.
100.2
The lever diameter d1 is determined by the formula [11]:
P. l1 100.0,270
d1 = 3 = 3 = 0,0139 = 14mm
0,1. σ allw. bend 0,11000
. .10 5
Assuming d1 = 15 mm.
When testing the sample on tension the nut moves forward in one direction and
when the compression test is performed its movement is reversed in the opposite direction
[12]. This is rather inconvenient when designing dual test equipment for tension and
compression tests. Therefore, it is better to have the nut fixed and the screw reciprocating.
With this alternative we assumed a screw working length of:
L = 2.lH + L,
where lH = lead length

L = clamping jaw length
H is nut height.
L = 2.100 + 60 + 40 = 300mm.
4. β. l 4.2.0,30
Then λ = = = 136,58
d1 0,0205
As λ>100,
π 3 . E. d14 π 3 .215
, .1011.0,02054
n = = = 4,25 > 4
64. lk2. F 64.0,62.12000
Page 38
4. CLAMPING THREADS CALCULATIONS FOR

FASTENING PLATES
The minor thread diameter d1 is calculated by the formula [13]:
4. F 4.12000
d1 = = = 0,016m
π. σ allw. tens. π.550.10 5
Assuming 4 screws with 56mm inner diameter and a design diameter of bearing
flange of ∅80mm. As a result of this the thread of clamping screws is M6x1.
Page 39
Page 40
Page 41
Page 42
Page 43
REFERENCES
1. Yusof Daud, Margaret Lucas, Zhihong Huang, Modelling the effects of superimposed
ultrasonic vibrations on tension and compression tests of aluminium. Journal of
Materials Processing Technology, Volume 186, Issues 1-3, 7 May 2007, Pages 179-
190.
2. Sungchul Yang, Tianxi Tang, Dan G. Zollinger, Ashok Gurjar, Splitting tension tests
to determine concrete fracture parameters by peak-load method. Advanced Cement
Based Materials, Volume 5, Issue 1, January 1997, Pages 18-28.
3. Carlos García-Garino, Felipe Gabaldón, José M. Goicolea, Finite element simulation
of the simple tension test in metals. Finite Elements in Analysis and Design, Volume
42, Issue 13, September 2006, Pages 1187-1197.
4. J. G. M. van Mier, M. R. A. van Vliet, Uniaxial tension test for the determination of
fracture parameters of concrete: state of the art. Engineering Fracture Mechanics,
Volume 69, Issue 2, January 2002, Pages 235-247.
5. Xiangqian Li, Stephen R. Hallett, Michael R. Wisnom, Navid Zobeiry, Reza Vaziri,
Anoush Poursartip, Experimental study of damage propagation in Over-height
Compact Tension tests. Composites Part A: Applied Science and Manufacturing,
Volume 40, Issue 12, December 2009, Pages 1891-1899.
6. Mohammad Kazem Asgharnia, William A. Brantley, Comparison of bending and
tension tests for orthodontic wires. American Journal of Orthodontics, Volume 89,
Issue 3, March 1986, Pages 228-236.
7. N. M. Zarroug, R. Padmanabhan, B. J. MacDonald, P. Young, M. S. J. Hashmi, Mild
steel (En8) rod tests under combined tension–torsion loading. Journal of Materials
Processing Technology, Volumes 143-144, 20 December 2003, Pages 807-813.
8. Bryan E. Barragán, Ravindra Gettu, Miguel A. Martín, Raúl L. Zerbino, Uniaxial
tension test for steel fibre reinforced concrete––a parametric study. Cement and
Concrete Composites, Volume 25, Issue 7, October 2003, Pages 767-777.
9. Michael R. Wisnom, The effect of fibre rotation in ±45° tension tests on measured
shear properties. Composites, Volume 26, Issue 1, 1995, Pages 25-32.
10. K. P. Rao, Emani V. R. Mohan, A vision-integrated tension test for use in sheet-metal
formability studies. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, Volume 118, Issues
1-3, 3 December 2001, Pages 238-245.
11. W. Chen, F. Lu, M. Cheng, Tension and compression tests of two polymers under
quasi-static and dynamic loading. Polymer Testing, Volume 21, Issue 2, 2002, Pages
113-121.
12. R. Mahmudi, R. Mohammadi, P. Sepehrband, Determination of tearing energy from
uniaxial tension tests of aluminum alloy sheet. Journal of Materials Processing
Technology, Volume 147, Issue 2, 10 April 2004, Pages 185-190.
13. A. Lindorf, L. Lemnitzer, M. Curbach, Experimental investigations on bond
behaviour of reinforced concrete under transverse tension and repeated loading.
Engineering Structures, Volume 31, Issue 7, July 2009, Pages 1469-1476.
C.
Page 44
A TORSION TESTING DEVICE
1. INTRODUCTION
Every piece of machinery and, under certain situations, components made of another
material are subjected under certain conditions to various loads, which they have to bear
not only without breaking up but also without showing signs of deformation beyond a
specified allowable limit. The design engineer should be aware of the torsion
characteristics of both metal and non-metal materials typically involved in his work and
these should have their numeric expression. These numeric values are usually obtained
through trials by testing the materials using special torsion testing rigs [1]. Various tests
could be run depending on the manner the machine components are being loaded during
operation.
Operational load could either be static when the acting force reaches its maximum
value slowly and evenly, or dynamic – when the acting force immediately reaches its
maximum value (shocks, for example), or variable – when the loading force periodically
and multiply varies its value (and sign, eventually) [1]. With this respect, the types of tests
that metal materials used in machine building industries are usually subjected to be static,
dynamic and variable load tests [1].
2. STATIC TESTS
The ability of the material to resist against a uniform, slow and evenly changing in
value load causing torsion stress is being tested here. The slowly increasing loading force
is linked to a slow movement and insignificant acceleration of the test equipment moving
parts where inertia forces could be disregarded. In static tests it is possible to determine
with sufficient degree of accuracy both the loading force value and the degree of
deformation to the tested sample at any moment throughout the test. Torsion tests are
usually carried out only rarely and mainly on cylindrical components [2].
Equipment available so far for material torsion testing are of horizontal type, rather
bulky with open transmissions, which makes operation harder to handle, maintain and
dangerous with respect to safety regulations [3]. During the torsion test it is impossible to
accurately determine the loading force and respective deformation value to the tested
sample at any time throughout the test due to inertia moments induced in all rotating parts.
From a weight point of view such testing equipment is not transportable [3].
We have tried to design a new type of material torsion testing equipment
considering the need to avoid all above mentioned disadvantages. Various materials of
cylindrical shape could be subjected to torsion tests with it. Here we would like to give a
general idea about the machine:
Page 45
1. The material torsion testing system (machine) is designed to test samples (references)
of cylindrical shape having a maximum diameter of φ 23mm for metals. The maximum
diameter for non-metal test samples could be larger and is inversely proportionate to
R
0°
12
d
a
120°
3÷4
D=d+10
Lj Lj
L=2Lj +150
Fig. 1
the torsion (yield) breakup stress for the respective material, i.e. a larger diameter of
the test sample for smaller breaking stress. The shape of the test sample is shown in
Figure 1. The test sample has a test tube shape. The sample sizes are shown in Fig. 1.
L j – jaw length of the universal chuck;
a - jaw contact surface width.
The number of a-wide grooves depends on the number of jaws in the chuck. These
are intended to avoid test sample slipping in the chuck as the torsion stress becomes too
high. The middle portion of the sample having a diameter d is made to a smaller size, as
sample rupture should occur in between the two chucks. The transition between the large
and the smaller diameter is by means of a slope (truncated cone) and a chamfer radium of
R = 10 ÷15 mm. This is again intended for the same objective – to have the rupture occur
between the two supports (chucks). The diameter d should be smooth with no signs of
rough machining as rough machining results in the occurrence of strain concentration
along the surface of the material [4].
2. The performance parameters of the torsion testing system are:
- maximum diameter of tested metals dmax = 23 mm;
- when using an electrical motor and reducer having a gear ratio of up to i = 8 ÷

10 and power under 1 kW, the test sample has usample= 8 ÷ 10 min-1;
- when using a flywheel with handle (manual drive without an electrical motor)
the flywheel torque is
- Mtr.max = 46 N.m;
- flywheel diameter Dmax = 300 mm;
- indication of torsion momentum is by means of an electrical dynamometer in

µA;
- means are provided to indicate the angle ϕ under which the test sample
undergoes rupture (on both scales);
Page 46
- worm reducer having the following parameters:

Output shaft power Nw = 5.4 kW;
Output shaft speed nw = 80 min-1
Overall dimensions:
Width – 360 mm
Height – 460 mm
Thickness – 220 mm;
- uses elastic coupling with rubber rings and clicks.
3. Depending on customers’ requirements the testing system could be used with or

without an electrical motor. The cost of the machine would be higher for the first case.
The advantage of using the flywheel to induce torsion to the test sample is that the
students have a better chance of observing the progress of the test for a longer time.
The sample rotates slowly in partial rounds and the size of the section along which
rupture is occurring could be measured at any time if desired. The testing system
provides visual idea of the process, which leads to material yield (for plastic
materials).
4. The torsion testing system involves a self-locking mechanism, i.e. when sample test is
interrupted the mechanism is not returned in its starting position as the worm reducer
prevents this. This is another moment giving chance to observe the process and make
necessary measurements.
5. As mentioned earlier, indication is provided by means of an electrical dynamometer,

which provides readings in µA and this necessitates a comparison table or graph to be
provided.
The following methods are applied to determine torsion force:
a. By determining the power consumed throughout the process of torsion;
b. By calculations using formulas obtained experimentally;
c. By direct measurement using dynamometric equipment.

The latter is usually applied in laboratory conditions using hydraulic, electrical or
mechanical dynamometers. These devices should meet certain requirements to match
indicated results with the actual values of forces:
- these devices should not cause additional deformations in the set up;
- they should be small in size and should be independent from the set up;
- the readings of the dynamometer should match the calibration device readings;
in laboratory conditions deviations should be less than 10%;
- calibration results should be maintained constant throughout the trial after
which the dynamometer should again be calibrated;
- they should exhibit high sensitivity and be safe to use;
- a recording unit is desirable.
Page 47
P (N)
f (µm)
Fig. 2 Fig. 3
Torsion load could be measured fairly easy and accurately using an electro-inductive
dynamometer. Its principle of operation is based on the deformation its elastic components
undergo when subjected to the torsion loads. This is transmitted to electrical inductive
transducers, which transform and transmit it to the recording unit where the results of the
measurements are being recorded.
The transducer comprises an armature and two fixed coils positioned symmetrically
from the armature. As the armature is moved under the action of the respective torsion
force it induces electromotive voltage, which is being measured and recorded. When
measuring torsion forces it is convenient to immediately record their values. This calls for
calibration of the dynamometric equipment using an elastic element of specified
charactersitics, Figure 2:
6. The elastic element 1 is loaded on a press (eccentric or hydraulic) by the force P to

various degrees. The indicator 2 reads the shifts and a curve of P = f(P) is drawn which
represents the “fork” type elastic element characteristic, Figure 3.
One arrow is positioned under each chuck, which indicates the angle of rotation. The
elastic element and the electrical dynamometric equipment are positioned in the upper
bearing assembly due to the conditions given above. An example table could be made
based on the data read from the device, Table 1 for a random number of locations.
Table 1
Νο ϕ1 ϕ2 ϕ =ϕ1− ϕ 2 φδ Π Λ Mtors= τtors=
P.L Mtors/(0.2d3)
° ° ° µµ Ν µ Νµ Ν/µ2

2
3
4
5
The angles of rotation of the top and bottom end of the sample (top and bottom
chucks) are measured as rotation is present in both supports – from the worm reducer in
the bottom end and in the top end – thanks to the fact, that the “fork” type elastic element
is actuated, which is part of the testing arrangement. The difference between these two
Page 48
angle values is needed to indicate the actual rotation.
7. This material torsion testing system is a rational solution. It is portable, as its body
comprises lightweight shaped and sheet metal components. A single operator of no
special qualifications quickly and easily operates it. The bracket where one bearing
assembly is positioned provides a rather large space for observing experiments and
sample tests. The reducer is compact and with small size. The electrical motor rotation
(when installed) is transmitted via elastic coupling to the worm reducer uniformly and
evenly without shocks.
8. The test system does not use any harmful substances, liquids or oils for its operation. It
is not harmful to environment. It is fairly safe to use. A protection cover is installed
around the testing area, which is made of transparent material – Plexiglas. The
machine would not operate if the protection cover were not mounted in the correct
place. If the system locks the supply cable should be disconnected from the mains
before you proceed with the repairs. During maintenance routines the supply cable
should also be disconnected from the mains. The system should be aligned every time
it has been installed or transported.
9. Power supply: The material testing system provides high precision and sufficient
accuracy of indicated results thus providing a real idea of the mechanical properties of
various types of materials – metal or non-metal when subjected to torsion.
Measurement results could be improved if sensor transducers were adopted instead of
the electrical dynamometer, which in turn would increase the cost of the equipment.
3. MATERIAL TORSION TEST SYSTEM (ASSEMBLY

DIAGRAM)
1. Bracket
2. Universal chuck
3. Roller bearings
4. Worm gear
5. Worm
6. Electro-inductive dynamometer
7. “Spring fork”-type dynamometer
8. Mechanical arm
9. Flywheel
10. Body
11. Torsion angle indicating arrow
12. Test sample (test bar)
13. Bearing assembly
Page 49
430 13
130
1 12
11
2
1350
800
10
580
350
6
4
5 8
3.1
Page 50
TORSION TESTING EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATION
Item Designation Name Qty. Material Notes
1 M24x1.5 Round nut 1
2 24 Safety washer 1
3 6205 Ball bearing 1
4 MTTS-004-000 Plate 1
5 10x8x35 Key 1
6 MTTS -000-006 Arm 1 C45W3
7 MTTS -000-007 Top shaft 1 C45W3
8 MTTS -008-000 Spring fork 1 50CrV4
9 MTTS -000-009 Sleeve 1 C45W3
10 6206 Ball bearing 1
11 M10x20 Screw 40
12 MTTS -000-012 Cap 1 GG-25
13 MTTS -013-000 Plate 1
32211J2 Conical
14 1
roller bearing
15 MTTS -000-015 Reducer cover 1 GG-25
16 MTTS -000-016 Worm 1 C45W3
17 MTTS -000-017 Shaft 1 C45W3
30207J2 Conical
18 1
roller bearing
19 MTTS -000-019 Cap 1 GG-25
Page 51
20 M10x30 Screw 8
21 MTTS -000-021 Sleeve 1 C45W3
22 MTTS -022-000 Worm gear 1
23 MTTS -000-023 Reducer base 1 GG-25
24 MTTS -000-024 Reducer gasket 1 Rubber
25 M10x25 Screw 4
26 14x10x45 Key 1
27 MTTS -000-027 Sleeve 1 C45W3
28 55x67x7 Shaft seal 1
29 MTTS -029-000 Frame 1
30 Test tube sample 1
31 MTTS -000-031 Plate 1 C45W3
32 Chuck, universal 2
33 Elastic coupling 1
34 6x5x60 Key 1
35 MTTS -000-035 Flywheel 1 GG-25
36 MTTS -000-036 Handle 1 C45W3
37 MTTS -000-037 Top scale 1 C45W3
38 MTTS -000-038 Indicating arrow 1 C45W3
39 MTTS -000-039 Bottom scale 1 C45W3
40 MTTS -000-040 Indicating arrow 1 C45W3
4.
Page 52
DESIGN & STRENGTH CALCULATIONS

1. The torsion test technique is required to provide testing of various materials (metal or
non-metal materials).
2. The torsion test shall be carried out using cylindrical test samples.
3. The construction of the system shall be a welded type using thin-wall pipes having a
square or rectangular section and made of common steel or steel sheet with σ=1; σ=
1.2mm.
Thus, the following would be ensured:
a) fast and easy assembly of the construction;
b) light-weight and low-cost construction;
c) easy and technological assembly of components into the construction and similar
eventual replacement and repairs
4. The construction shall be made vertical, i.e. the cylindrical sample shall be positioned
vertically. This would allow easy access and maintenance.
5. When preparing the assembly diagram some standard parts and components could be
used such as:
a. Universal chucks for lathes of the smallest available size as the torsion force
and eventual break-up of the metal cylindrical test sample would be rather
high. Chucks provide a rather high clamping force for the test sample.
b. Worm reducer – the gear ratio should be high and this could be ensured by this
type of reducer. The torsion force is high. This could be achieved by a reducer
having a high gear ratio (i = 40÷50) driven by means of an electrical motor
having a typical power of max 1kW-1.5kW, for example [5]. This reducer
might also be manufactured following respective design and strength
calculations if a suitable ready-made one is not readily available.
c. 1 – 1.5 kW DC electrical motor
Above materials selected for the construction and respective standard parts and
components are intended to provide a cheaper construction.
A construction built-up of standard profiles and thin-wall sheet metal by means of
welding is far more preferable than a die-cast construction made with thick plates. The
design tendencies are directed at using materials such as the ones adopted for our case
thus guaranteeing lowest product cost to the required quality.
6. Design and strength calculations
d. Under simple torsion the test sample would have to be rotated (twisted) not
more than a single round before break-up [6]. For this reason the mechanism
intended to provide this torsion should have a high torque of its output shaft. It
would also be necessary that it provide self-locking in a specified position
during the test of the sample. The test sample should be rotated slowly at only
a few degrees. A high gear ratio reducer of a small size and namely, a worm
reducer could provide this. The reducer could be driven by either an electrical
motor or manually, by means of a flywheel.
e. The next step is measuring the loading force (torque) on the sample under test.
Page 53
The following techniques are applies to determine this:

i. by determining the power consumed in the torsion process;
ii. by calculations using formulas obtained from experiments;
iii. by direct measurement using dynamometric equipment [7].
The latter is typically used in laboratory conditions and hydraulic, electrical or
mechanical dynamometers could be used.
In order for the indicated results to consistent with the actual forces involved the
equipment should meet several requirements [8]:
- they should not cause additional deformation to the construction;
- they should be small in size;
- the readings from the dynamometer should coincide (within a specified limit)
with the calibration unit readings; in laboratory conditions deviations should be
no greater than 10%;
- calibration check results should be maintained constant throughout the
experiment and the dynamometer should again be calibrated afterwards;
- they should exhibit high sensitivity and be safe to use;
- it is desirable that they have a recording device.
Force measurements could be performed relatively fast and accurate using an
electro-inductive dynamometer. The principle of operation of this equipment is based on
the deformation that it elastic elements undergo when subjected to the torsion force. This
is transmitted to electrical-inductive transducers, which in turn transform and transmit it to
the recording device where the results of the measurement are being recorded [9]. The
Fig. 1
transducer comprises an armature and two fixed coils positioned symmetrically from the
armature. As the armature is moved under the action of the respective torsion force it
induces electromotive voltage, which is being measured and recorded.
When measuring torsion forces it is convenient to immediately record their values. This
calls for calibration of the dynamometric equipment using an elastic element of specified
charactersitics [10].
Figure 1 shows a “fork”-type dynamometer used for calibration checks of the
electro-inductive dynamometer.
First, the curve p=p(f) is made, which represents the fork characteristics. The
dynamometer is loaded sequentially with specified forces and the deformations are red
from the indicating dial in µm. The results thus obtained are being plotted in a co-ordinate
system to a specified scale, the straight line thus obtained is the fork characteristic (Fig. 2).
Page 54
Then calibration check is carried out on the

dynamometric equipment. The dynamometer is
P (N)
positioned on the table of a universal milling
machine – Figure 3. The originating force is
measured and the torque M = P.l is hence
calculated.
Calibration is carried out under sequential
loading and unloading conditions. Sensor
transducers could also be used to read the torque
instead of electrical inductive dynamometer [11].
7. Calculations and design of the worm reducer

f (µm) In order to make this we shall need to figure
out what would be approximate the moment of
Fig. 2 torsion Mtors and the test sample diameter,
respectively needed to attain material yield and
eventual break up. We assume the test sample is
made of 45 steel (a heavier testing alternative)
[12]. From the table of allowable material stress
used in machine building practice we select for 45
steel: τs = 22.5. 107 N/m2 – yield strength.
Then from:
M tors M tors
τ tors = =
Wtors 0.2 xd 3
M tor
d =3
0 . 2 xτ s
where:
Fig. 3 N2
M bi = 9554 , [Nm]
M (N.m) n2
is the test sample torque.
We choose an electrical motor of Nmot = 6÷7
kW, u = 1450 rpm as the force needed to break up
the sample is too high.
i = 18 is the gear ratio of the worm reducer.
We assumed:
N2 = Nmot. η = 6.75. 0.80 = 5.4 kW
I (mA)
= 0.80 - worm drive efficiency coefficient
Fig. 4
n mot 1450
n2 = = ≈ 80[rpm]
i 18
5 .4
M b 2 = 9554 = 645[N / m 2 ]
80
M tors = M b2 = 645[N / m 2 ] Page 55
645
d =3 = 0.024[m]
0.2 x 22.5 x107
Mb2- worm wheel shaft torque

This means that to be able to break up the test sample it should have a diameter
smaller than 24mm. We assumed a diameter of the test sample d = 15÷20.
7a. Determining the number of worm strokes zw and the number of teeth zg of
the worm gear wheel.
a) Number of worm strokes zw

The allowable minimum number of teeth is between 26 and 28 teeth. If we
assume a single stroke worm we will get a number of teeth that is lower than the
minimum so we assume zw = z [12].
b) Number of gear teeth zg

zg = i . zw = 18. 2 = 36
7b. Module determination
The front module is determined by the equation:
1.7M b2 .ν .k
ms = 3
zk .y .q.ο allw .bend
M b2 = 645[Nm]
k = 1.5 as the load varies,
= 1 – indicates teeth wear,
zg = 36 – number of worm gear teeth,
y - tooth shape coefficient. It is defined by:
λ = 14°2′14″ - angle of spiral, from the table
zk 36
ze = = = 39.6
cos λ cos 14°2'14"
3 3
zworm= z and q = 8,
i.e. y = 0.6 from the table ze = 40
σallow.bnd.= 460. 105 N/m2 – bending stress for bronze.
According to the standard we assumed ms = 7 and q = 9.
1.7 x 645 x1.5

m=3
36 x 0.6 x 460 x10 5
m = 0.0059⎛ z[km] =⎞5.9[mm]
3
⎜ + 1⎟
180 x10 3 ⎜ q ⎟ .M .k .k ≤ σ
σc =
zk ⎜ A ⎟ b2 c g all .c .
⎜ ⎟
q ⎝ ⎠
where
ms (q + zc ) 7 x (9 + 36 )
A= = = 157.5[mm]
2 2
3 3
⎛z ⎞ ⎛ 36 ⎞
k hp = 1 + ⎜ k ⎟ .(1 − ℵ) = 1 + ⎜ ⎟ .(1 − 0.6 ) ≈ 1.05
⎝ϑ ⎠ ⎝ 71 ⎠
7c. Teeth contact strength check [13]
Page 56
For insignificant load variations I assumed χ = 0.6.
I select from the table for zw=2 and q = 9 a worm deformation coefficient θ = 71.
kid – dynamic coefficient; when Vsl <3m/s, kd = 1.
Vsl – sliding speed,
σall.c = 2100 . 105 N/m2
3
⎛ 36 ⎞
⎜ +1 ⎟
180 x10 3 ⎜ 9 ⎟ .645 x1x1.05 ≤ 2090 x10 5 [N / m 2 ]
σc =
36 ⎜ 157.5 x10 −3 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
9 ⎝ ⎠
The operational voltage σc= 2090 . 105 N/m2 < σall.c = 2100 . 105 N/m2 –
so the contact strength requirement is met.
Further calculations are made on the basis of the adopted module ms = 7mm.
7d. Determining the basic dimensions of the worm and worm gear wheel:
a. worm
Diameters of dividing, external and internal cylinders:
dd.w = ms.q = 7. 9 = 63mm
De.w = ms(q+2) = 7(9 + 2) = 77mm
Di.w = ms(q-2.4) = 7(9-2.4) = 46.2mm
The length of the cut section of the worm is
L = (11+0.6.zg) ms = (11+0.6 . 36). 7 = 92mm
b. worm gear wheel

Diameters of the base, external and internal circles:
db.g = ms.zg= 7.36 = 252mm
De.g = ms (zg+2) = 7. (36+2) = 266mm
Di.g = ms (zg - 2.4) = 7.(36 - 2.4) = 235.2mm
The largest external diameter would be obtained when zw = z;
B = 0.75. Dew = 0.75. 77 = 58mm
8. Approximate calculation of shafts
Page 57
8a Determining the diameter of worm shaft output end:

This is determined using the formula:
M tor 46
d1 = 3 =3 = 0.0226[m] = 23[mm]
0.2 τ all .tors 0.2 x 200 x10 5
Where Mtors. = Mshft = 46N is the shaft torque;
τall.tors = 200. 105 N/m2 is the reduced allowable torsion.
The diameter of the output end of the worm shaft shall not be much different than
the diameter of the motor shaft and should match the selected coupling hub opening.
The diameter of the electrical motor shaft is dmot = 38mm. We assumed the coupling
has a hub opening diameter not larger than 38mm [14]. We assumed the diameter of the
shaft output end is d1 = 35mm. We assumed a design value for the roller bearings neck
diameter of dA=dB = 40mm. Other dimensions to be determined after the suitable roller
bearings have been selected.
8b. Worm wheel shaft
M tors 645
d2 = 3 .=3 = 0.048[m] = 48[mm]
0.2 τ allow .tors 0.2 x 300 x10 5
where Mtors.w = 645 N.m is the moment of torsion of the wheel shaft;
τall.tors = 300 . 105 N/m2 – allowable torsion stress for 45 steel.
assuming dw = 50mm.
We assumed design values for the other shaft diameters. Bearings neck diameters dc
= dD = 55mm. The diameter of the shaft underneath the gear dw.g = 60mm. As the shaft
has been re-dimensioned we do not need to make any strength checks.
9. Forces of interaction between the worm and the worm wheel
a. Worm peripheral force P1 and worm wheel axial force Pa:
2M b1 2 x 46
P1 = Pa2 = = = 1460[N ]
d g1 0.063
Where Mshft.1 = 46 N.m
dd.1 = 63 mm – worm pitch diameter.
b. Worm axial force Pa and worm wheel peripheral force:
2M b 2 2 x 645
P2 = Pa1 = = = 5100[N ]
d g2 0.252
Page 58
Where Mshft.2 = 645 N.m

dd.2 = 252 mm – worm gear pitch diameter
c. Radial forces Pw.1 and Pw.2 of the worm and worm gear:
Pr1 = Pr2 = P2 .tgα = 5100.tg 20° = 1850[N ]
10. Support reactions, bending and equivalent momentums of the worm shaft
a. Reactions in the A and B supports of the worm shaft

Radial reactions in the XY plane:
From the force P1 acting symmetrically:
RAY = RBY = P1/2 = 1460/2 = 730 N.
Radial reactions in the XZ plane:
From the force Pw.1:
R’AZ = R’BZ = Pw.1/2 = 1850/2 = 925 N.
From the force Pa1:
∑MB = 0;
d g1
− R " Az .l + Pa1 =0
2
Pa 1d g1
= 640[N ]
5100.0.063
R " Az = =
2l 2 x 0.025
R " Bz = R " Az = 640[N ]
Where l≈dd 2 = 250mm is the distance between supports.
Reactions resultant from the forces Pw.1 and Pa.1:
RAZ = R’AZ – R’’AZ = 925 – 640 = 285 N
RBZ = R’BZ + R’’BZ = 925 + 640 = 1565 N
Resultant reactions from the forces P1, Pw.1 and Pa.1
R A = R Ay
2
+ R Az
2
= 790 2 + 285 2 = 795[N ]
R B = R By
2
+ R Bz
2
= 730 2 + 1565 2 = 1730[N ]
Axial reactions in the support B:
AB = Pa.1
Bending and torsion momentums diagrams Bending and torsion momentums

for the worm shaft [15] diagrams of the worm gear shaft [15]
Page 59
l l1
L/2 l1/2
dg2
RA RB RCz RC
RAz P1 RBz RDy
MB1
Pa1
A B RCy P2 D
C
Pa2
RAy RBy RDz RD
Pr1
in the plane õó in the plane õó
RAy RBy RCy P2 RDy
P1
Mz=-93 N.m
Mz=191 N.m
in the plane õz in the plane õz
Pr1 R'Bz R'Cy R'Dy
R'Az
Pr2
M'y=-70N.m
M'y=115N.m
dg2/2
Pa1 R"Bz
R"Az R"Cz R"Dz
Pa2
dg1/2
M"y=80 N.m
M"y M"y=92N.m
M"y
My of Pr1 and Pa1 My of Pr2 and Pa2
M"y=-162N.m
M"y=195N.m
Mres of P2 , Pr2 and Pa2

Mres of P1 , Pr1 and Pa1
M"res =216N.m
M"rez=250N.m
Mtors=46.8N.m
Mtors=615N.m
Page 60
b. Bending momentums in the endangered section of the worm shaft

Bending momentum in the XY plane:
From the force P1
MZ = -RAY . l/2 = - 730 . 0.250/2 = -93 N.m
Bending momentums in the XZ plane:

From the force Pw.1
M’Y = R’A . l/2 = 925 . 0.250/2 = 115 N.m
From the force Pa 1 on the left and right of the section:
M’’ Y = P’’ A . l/2 = -640 . 0.250/2 = - 80 N.m
M’’ Y = R B . l/2 = 640 . 0.250/2 = 80 N.m
Bending momentums resultant from the forces Pw 1 and Pa 1:
MIY = M’Y - M’’Y = 115 – 80 = 35 N.m
MIIY = M’Y + M’’Y = 115 + 80 = 195 N.m
Bending momentums resultant from the forces P1, P w 1 and Pa 1:
I
M res ( )
= M z2 + M y'
2
= (− 93 )2 + 35 2 = 99.5[Nm]
II
M res = M z2 + (M ) " 2
y = (− 93 )2 + 195 2 = 216[Nm]
c. Equivalent momentums in the endangered section

I
M equ = (M ) + (M ) = 99.5 + 46 = 99.5[Nm]
I
res
2 '
tors
2 2 2
II
M equ = (M ) + (M ) = 216 + 46 = 220[Nm]
II
res
2 " 2
y
2 2
11. Support reactions bending and equivalent momentums of the worm gear shaft [15]
a. Reactions in the supports C and D of the worm gear shaft

Radial reactions in the XY:
From the force P2
RCY = RDY = P2/2 = 5100/2 = 2550 N;
From the force Pw 2
RCY = R’DZ = Pw2/2 = 1850/2 = 925N;
From the force Pa 2
∑MD = 0; -R’’Cz . l + Pa 2 . dd 2/2 = 0
Pa 2 .d d 2 1460 x 0.252
II
R cz = = = 1230[N ]
2.l 2 x 0.150
Page 61
where l1 = 150 mm is the distance between supports.

R’’Dz = R’’C = 1230 N
Reactions resultant from the forces P’w 2 and Pa:
RCz = R’Cz - R’’Cz = 925 – 1230 = - 305 N
RDz = R’Dz + R’’Dz = 925 + 1230 = 2155 N
The resultant reactions from the forces P2, Pw 2 and Pa:
R c = R cy2 + R cz2 = 2550 2 + (− 305 ) = 2560[N ]

2
R D = R Dy
2
+ R Dz
2
= 2550 2 + 2155 2 = 3340[N ]
The axial reaction in the support D:
AD = Pa 2 = 1460 N.
b. Bending momentums in the endangered section of the worm gear shaft [15]
Bending momentum in the XZ plane :
From the force P2
MZ = RCY . l1 /2 = 2550 . 0.150/2 = 191 N.m
Bending momentums in the XZ plane:
From the force Pw 2
M’Y = -RCZ . l 1 /2 = -925 . 0.150/2 = -70 N.m;
From the force Pa 2 left and right from the section:
M’’Y = R”CZ . l 1 /2 = 1230 . 0.150/2 = 92 N.m;
M’’Y = -R’’DZ . l 1 /2 = -1230 . 0.150/2 = -92 N.m;
The resultant bending momentums from the forces Pw 2 and Pa 2
MIY = M’Y + M’’Y = -70 + 90 = 20 N.m
MIIY = M’Y + M’’Y = - 70 - 92 = - 162 N.m
The resultant bending momentum from the forces P2, Pw 2 and Pa 2:
I
M res ( )
= M z2 + M yI
2
= 1912 + (− 20 ) = 192[Nm ]
2
= M z2 + (M )
II 2
= 1712 + (− 162 ) = 250[Nm]
II 2
M pes y
c. Equivalent momentums in the endangered section:
I
M equ = M tors
2
( )
+ M res
I 2
= 645 2 + 192 2 = 642[Nm]
+ (M )
2
II
M equ = M tors
2 II
res = 645 2 + 250 2 = 683[Nm]
Page 62
12. Bearings selection
a. for the worm shaft

The following forces act on the supports:
Radial RA = 795 N.; RB = 1130 N and axial Pa 1= 5100 N.
The shaft rotates at u = 1440 rpm. Bearing necks diameters are :
d A = dB = 44 mm.
Duration h = 6000 hours; temperature – under 100°C.
Bearing load under normal operation is even, without shocks.
The construction of bearing assemblies can be made using the following
arrangement: we select two conical roller bearings for the support B, which are capable of
bearing both radial and axial thrusts. A single row radial ball bearing is selected for the
support A.
- Selecting support B bearing

The axial component
SB = 1.3 RB . tgα = 1.3 . 1730 . tg 12° = 4475 N
For dual conical roller bearings the equivalent load is determined by the formula:
QB = (0.5 RB . kk + 0.385 A . cotg β) kd . kt =
= (0.5 . 1750 . 1 + 0.385 . 5100 . cotg 12°) 1.1 = 9365 N,
where kk = 1 – kinematical coefficient;
kd = 1 – dynamic coefficient;
kt = 1 – temperature coefficient.
The load-bearing capacity is determined by the formula:
C = QB (u.h)0.3 = 9365 . 113.8 = 1070000 N = 1070 kN,
where (u.h)0.3 = (1450 . 5000)0.3 = 110 + 190.7/330 = 113.8 is determined by
interpolation.
From the roller bearing catalogue we selected bearing No.7608 having Ctabl. =
1400kN > c = 1070 kN and the following dimensions:
d= 40 mm
D = 90 mm
T = 35 ÷35.5 mm
Selecting the support A bearing:

QA = RA. kk kd . kt = 795 N
Page 63
C = QA . (n.h)0.3 = 795 . 113.8 = 90500 N = 90.5 kN

We selected bearing No.208 with Ctabl. = 390 kN and dimensions:
d = 40 mm
D = 80 mm
B = 18 mm
b. Selecting worm gear shaft bearings

Acting forces are radial RC = 2560 N and RD = 3340 N and axial force Pa 2 = 1460 N.
The shaft rotates at u2 = 80 rpm.
Neck diameters are dC = dD = 55.
We selected conical roller bearings
SC = 1.3 RC . tg β = 1.3 . 2560 . tg 12o = 705 N
SD = 1.3 RD . tgβ = 1.3 . 3340 . tg 12o = 920 N
Aexp = Pa 2 + SC – SD = 1460 + 705 – 920 = 1245 N
- This force is born by support D.

QD = (RD . kk + m . Aexp) . kδ .kt = (3340 + 1.5 . 1245) = 5210 N,
Where m = 1.5 is the equalization factor for conical roller bearings.
C = QD (u.h)0.3 = 5210 . 48 = 250000 N.
From the bearings [14] we selected bearing No 7211 having
Ctabl = 990 kN > C = 250 kN and the following dimensions:
d = 55mm;
D = 100 mm;
T = 23÷22.5 mm
Page 64
Page 65
Page 66
Page 67
Page 68
Page 69
Page 70
Page 71
Page 72
Page 73
Page 74
Page 75
REFERENCES
1. K. Bruyère Garnier, R. Dumas, C. Rumelhart, M. E. Arlot, Mechanical

characterization in shear of human femoral cancellous bone: torsion and shear tests.
Medical Engineering & Physics, Volume 21, Issue 9, November 1999, Pages 641-
649.
2. José Divo Bressan, Ricardo Kirchhof Unfer, Construction and validation tests of a
torsion test machine. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, Volume 179,
Issues 1-3, 20 October 2006, Pages 23-29.
3. Shahin Khoddam, Variations of effective length of the hot torsion test specimen
with deformation. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, Volume 177, Issues
1-3, 3 July 2006, Pages 465-468.
4. Poul V. Lade, Jungman Nam, Won Pyo Hong, Interpretation of strains in torsion
shear tests. Computers and Geotechnics, Volume 36, Issues 1-2, January-March
2009, Pages 211-225.
5. Y. Nara, K. Kaneko, Study of subcritical crack growth in andesite using the Double
Torsion test. International Journal of Rock Mechanics and Mining Sciences,
Volume 42, Issue 4, June 2005, Pages 521-530.
6. J. P. Hou, C. Ruiz, A. Trojanowski, Torsion tests of thermosetting resins at impact

strain rate and under quasi-static loading. Materials Science and Engineering A,
Volume 283, Issues 1-2, 15 May 2000, Pages 181-188.
7. M. Zhou, M. P. Clode, A finite element analysis for the least temperature rise in a
hot torsion test specimen. Finite Elements in Analysis and Design, Volume 31, Issue
1, 1 November 1998, Pages 1-14.
8. Nao-Aki Noda, Yasushi Takase, Stress concentration formula useful for all notch
shape in a round bar (comparison between torsion, tension and bending).
International Journal of Fatigue, Volume 28, Issue 2, February 2006, Pages 151-
163.
9. K.E. Atcholi, C. Oytana, D. Varchon, D. Perreux, Superposed torsion-flexure of

composite materials: Experimental method and example of application. Composites,
Volume 23, Issue 5, September 1992, Pages 327-333.
10. Kh. G. Schmitt-Thomas, Zhen-Guo Yang, T. Hiermer, Development of torsion

loading facility used for evaluating shear performance of polymeric composite
implant rods. Polymer Testing, Volume 17, Issue 2, April 1998, Pages 117-130.
11. L. Ferry, D. Perreux, D. Varchon, N. Sicot, Fatigue behaviour of composite bars

subjected to bending and torsion. Composites Science and Technology, Volume 59,
Issue 4, March 1999, Pages 575-582.
Page 76
12. E.L. Tan, B. Uy, Experimental study on straight composite beams subjected to
combined flexure and torsion. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Volume
65, Issue 4, April 2009, Pages 784-793.
13. M.A. Mansur, P. Paramasivam, Steel fibre reinforced concrete beams in pure
torsion. International Journal of Cement Composites and Lightweight Concrete,
Volume 4, Issue 1, February 1982, Pages 39-45.
14. A. I. Fernández, B. López, J. M. Rodríguez-Ibabe, Relationship between the

austenite recrystallized fraction and the softening measured from the interrupted
torsion test technique. Scripta Materialia, Volume 40, Issue 5, 5 February 1999,
Pages 543-549.
15. H. Mayer, Ultrasonic torsion and tension–compression fatigue testing: Measuring

principles and investigations on 2024-T351 aluminium alloy. International Journal
of Fatigue, Volume 28, Issue 11, November 2006, Pages 1446-1455.
Page 77

Multidimensional Component Inspection Devices

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Multidimensional Component Inspection Devices

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Miltiadis A. Boboulos, Ph.D.

MULTIDIMENSIONAL COMPONENT INSPECTION DEVICES

A. INSPECTION DEVICE FOR BUSHING-TYPE COMPONENTS ___ 1

2. REVIEW OF MULTI-DIMENSIONAL INSPECTION DEVICES FOR

5. MEASUREMENT ERROR ANALYSIS _____________________________ 18

5.7 ERRORS DUE TO ADJUSTMENT OPERATIONS _____________________ 25

6. DEVICE ADJUSTMENT TECHNIQUE_____________________________ 28

B. A TENSION/PRESSURE LOAD TESTING DEVICE__________ 30

1. DEVICE OPERATION PRINCIPLE________________________________ 30

2. SAFETY REGULATIONS & ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS _ 31

3. TENSION TESTING RIG _________________________________________ 34

4. CLAMPING THREADS CALCULATIONS FOR FASTENING PLATES 39

C. A TORSION TESTING DEVICE___________________________ 45

2. STATIC TESTS _________________________________________________ 45

3. MATERIAL TORSION TEST SYSTEM (ASSEMBLY DIAGRAM) _____ 49

A. INSPECTION DEVICE FOR BUSHING-TYPE

Dimension measuring machines are a means of making universal measurements

Inspection devices can be single-dimensional (inspection of a single parameter) and

2. REVIEW OF MULTI-DIMENSIONAL INSPECTION

The present review is a survey of several kinematical diagrams of single-dimension

2.1 SCHEMATIC DIAGRAMS

Fig. 4a shows measurement of an outer diameter. The measurement fork l is moving

2.2 DESIGN SCHEMATICS

heights of a bushing-type component. The component is positioned on the mandrel 1,

SELECTION OF A SCHEMATIC DIAGRAM

Fig. 5 The basic parts of the schematic diagrams are:

Construction calculations for the design developed include kinematical and a

4.1 FLAT SPRINGS

4.2 SPRING PARALLELOGRAMS

4.2.1 Spring parallelograms supporting intermediate elements

4.2.2 Spring parallelogram supporting the measuring bracket

The purpose of this spring parallelogram is to ensure self-adjustment of the outer

4.3 SPRING HINGE

Strip width is b = 6mm. The length is calculated from the expression:

CYLINDRICAL HELICAL SPRINGS

4.4.1 SPRINGS PROVIDING MEASUREMENT PRESSURE

We have chosen a cylindrical helical spring to provide measurement pressure

4.4.2 Clamp spring

- length of unloaded spring

5. MEASUREMENT ERROR ANALYSIS

5.1 KINEMATICAL AND TECHNOLOGICAL ERRORS

5.1.1 Kinematical errors

5.1.2 Technological errors

5.2 ERRORS OF THE MEASUREMENT UNIT (INSTRUMENT

where ∆I is the instrument error, ∆limI is its accidental component.

When selecting standard measurement equipment the following relation determines

[∆R] = 0.7[∆meas] (5.4)

5.3 ERRORS IN THE MEASUREMENT DIAGRAM

5.3.1 Effect of surface roughness over errors of the measurement diagram

5.4 ERRORS DUE TO POSITIONING IN MEASUREMENT

5.4.1 Effect of the violation of the principle of unity of bases

5.4.2 Errors of positioning during measurement of internal cylindrical surfaces

5.5 TEMPERATURE ERROR

5.6 ERRORS DUE TO FORCES ACTING DURING

5.6.1 Characteristics of measurement pressure

∆P3 - local change in measurement pressure;

∆P’max – maximum hysteresis change in measurement pressure;

∆Pmax - maximum value of measurement pressure.

∆P’ max = 0.005÷2.2 cN

Errors due to measurement pressure could be separated into three groups:

5.6.2 CONTACT DEFORMATIONS

An elastic deformation – shrinkage occurs at the point of contact between the

5.7 ERRORS DUE TO ADJUSTMENT OPERATIONS

QUALITY OF THE ADJUSTMENT UNIT