Problems for designers in tolerance stackup analysis

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the challenges designers face in tolerance stackup analysis, particularly in relation to existing software tools. It includes considerations of statistical methods, data collection, and the integration of GD&T (Geometric Dimensioning and Tolerancing) with Monte Carlo simulations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants highlight that existing software struggles to fully incorporate ASME 14.5 rules when using GD&T and Monte Carlo simulations.
  • One participant notes that the effectiveness of these tools often depends on the user's expertise rather than solely on GD&T specifications.
  • A participant from a high-volume manufacturing background emphasizes the importance of yield prediction and mentions that while RSS (Root Sum Square) can provide initial estimates, more reliable results require substantial data, such as that obtained from Monte Carlo simulations.
  • Concerns are raised regarding the difficulty of obtaining component data distributions, with one participant suggesting that a tool to assist in the statistics of sampling would be beneficial.
  • Another participant discusses the use of MathCad routines and Excel for fitting data, particularly in filter design, and mentions the need for insight into probability density functions to effectively utilize Monte Carlo methods.
  • Challenges are identified, including supplier reluctance to disclose distribution data and the potential for modeling errors to bias results, necessitating corrections.
  • Collecting a comprehensive database of component probability density functions is noted as a significant expense in applying these techniques.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the challenges of tolerance stackup analysis, with no consensus reached on the best approaches or solutions. Multiple competing perspectives on the use of statistical methods and data collection issues remain evident.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights limitations related to the availability of component data and the dependence on user expertise, as well as unresolved issues regarding the accuracy of modeling techniques.

abhisuri
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hi all,

I am writing a program for tolerance stackup analysis, and I wanted to know kind of problems designers face with respect to existing softwares currently.

For example, I found out that using GD&T and monte carlo simulations, many ASME 14.5 rules cannot be incorporated. Also the major problems with these packages are that the results depend on the expertise of the user, not just the GD&T specifications.

So what are other problems that need to be addressed.

Thanks a lot!
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Hello,

I work for a high volume manufacturer, so yield prediction is important. Most guesses can be made RSS, but final work must be based on something more substantial, like Monti-Carlo.
The single largest difficulty we face is having component data. Distributions are hard to come by, and we've spent a lot of time sampling and characterizing.
A tool to aid with the statistics of sampling would make things easier.

Best Regards,

Mike
 
Hey Mike,

Thanks a lot for replying!

I guess the best way for yield prediction is Monte Carlo. I will surely incorporate that in my program.

Can you please elaborate the difficulty you are specifying regarding component data? I mean can you give me an example of the problem you are stating, regarding sampling?

As far as distributions are concerned, I guess what we do now is try out various combinations to see which one fits the best. Another alternative is there could be a code which looks at all the data and decide the distribution from its own. Mostly there is a standard machine learning algorithm for it. I'll find out more about this.

Thanks again!

Regards,

Abhi
 
Yes,

Time and again, I've written MathCad routines or Excel files to find fits. When designing filters, this is especially handy. I also have a Nelder-Meade optimizer which calls upon a Spice package to solve complex relationships.

However, the most fundamental, day-to-day tools are based upon statistical modeling of the components. Given insight into the probability density function for any given parameter, the Monti-Carlo method can give a fair approximation of yield data.

In reality, it has two shortcomings:(1) suppliers are resistant to admitting distributions, and (2) errors in the modeling typically give biased results such that a correction often needs to be made.

Collecting a database of component PDFs is the most expensive aspect of using these techniques.

- Mike
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
6K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K