Skip to main content
Log in

“What-if” scenarios towards virtual assembly-state mounting for non-rigid parts inspection using permissible loads

  • ORIGINAL ARTICLE
  • Published:
The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Recent developments in the fixtureless inspection of non-rigid parts based on computer-aided inspection (CAI) methods significantly contribute to diminishing the time and cost of geometrical dimensioning and inspection. Generally, CAI methods aim to compare scan meshes, which are acquired using scanners as point clouds from non-rigid manufactured parts in a free-state, with associated nominal computer-aided design (CAD) models. However, non-rigid parts are deformed in a free-state due to their compliance behavior. Industrial inspection approaches apply costly and complex physical inspection fixtures to retrieve the functional shape of non-rigid parts in assembly-state. Therefore, fixtureless inspection methods are developed to eliminate the need for these complex fixtures and to replace them with simple inspection supports. Fixtureless inspection methods intend to virtually (numerically) compensate for flexible deformation of non-rigid parts in a free-state. Inspired by industrial inspection techniques wherein weights (e.g., sandbags) are applied as restraining loads on non-rigid parts, we present a new fixtureless inspection method in this article. Our proposed virtual mounting assembly-state inspection (VMASI) method aims at predicting the functional shape (in assembly-state) of a deviated non-rigid part (including defects such as plastic deformation). This method is capable of virtually mounting the scan mesh of a deviated non-rigid part (acquired in a free-state) into the designed assembly-state. This is fulfilled by applying permissible restraining forces (loads) that are introduced as pressures on surfaces of a deviated part. The functional shape is then predicted via a linear FE-based transformation where the value and position of required restraining pressures are assessed by our developed restraining pressures optimization (RPO) approach. In fact, RPO minimizes the orientation difference and distance between assembly mounting holes on the predicted shape of a non-rigid part with respect to nominal ones on the CAD model. Eventually, the inspection is accomplished by examining the mounting holes offset on the predicted shape of the scan model concerning the nominal CAD model. This ensures that the mounting holes on the predicted shape of a scan model in assembly-state remain in the dedicated tolerance range. This method is evaluated on two non-rigid parts to predict the required restraining pressures limited to the permissible forces during the inspection process and to predict the eventual functional shape of the scan model. We applied numerical validations for each part, for which different types of synthetic (numerically simulated) defects are included into scan meshes, to determine whether the functional shape of a geometrically deviated part can be virtually retrieved under assembly constrains.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Abenhaim GN, Desrochers A, Tahan AS, Bigeon J (2015) A virtual fixture using a FE-based transformation model embedded into a constrained optimization for the dimensional inspection of nonrigid parts. Comput Aided Des 62:248–258

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Abenhaim GN, Desrochers A, Tahan A (Nov 2012) Nonrigid parts’ specification and inspection methods: notions, challenges, and recent advancements. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 63:741–752

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bi Z, Wang L (2010) Advances in 3D data acquisition and processing for industrial applications. Robot Comput Integr Manuf 26:403–413

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Ascione R, Polini W (2010) Measurement of nonrigid freeform surfaces by coordinate measuring machine. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 51:1055–1067

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Weckenmann A, Weickmann J (2006) Optical inspection of formed sheet metal parts applying fringe projection systems and virtual fixation. Metrol Meas Syst 13:321–330

    Google Scholar 

  6. Gentilini I, Shimada K (2011) Predicting and evaluating the post-assembly shape of thin-walled components via 3D laser digitization and FEA simulation of the assembly process. Comput Aided Des 43:316–328

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Weckenmann A, Weickmann J, Petrovic N (2007) Shortening of inspection processes by virtual reverse deformation. In: 4th international conference and exhibition on design and production of machines and dies/molds, Cesme, Turkey

  8. Jaramillo A, Prieto F, Boulanger P (2013) Fixtureless inspection of deformable parts using partial captures. Int J Precis Eng Manuf 14:77–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Abenhaim GN, Tahan AS, Desrochers A, Maranzana R, (2011). A novel approach for the inspection of flexible parts without the use of special fixtures. Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering, 133(1), p.011009. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4003335

  10. Aidibe A, Tahan AS, Abenhaim, GN (2012). Distinguishing profile deviations from a part’s deformation using the maximum normed residual test. WSEAS Transactions on Applied and Theoretical Mechanics, 7(1), 18-28

    Google Scholar 

  11. Radvar-Esfahlan H, Tahan S-A (2012) Nonrigid geometric metrology using generalized numerical inspection fixtures. Precis Eng 36:1–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Sabri V, Tahan SA, Pham XT, Moreau D, Galibois S (2016) Fixtureless profile inspection of non-rigid parts using the numerical inspection fixture with improved definition of displacement boundary conditions. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 82:1343–1352

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Sattarpanah Karganroudi S, Cuillière J-C, Francois V, Tahan S-A (2016) Automatic fixtureless inspection of non-rigid parts based on filtering registration points. Int J Adv Manuf Technol:1–26

  14. Merkley, K. G. (1998). Tolerance analysis of compliant assemblies (Doctoral dissertation, Brigham Young University).

  15. Mounaud M, Thiebaut F, Bourdet P, Falgarone H, Chevassus N (2011) Assembly sequence influence on geometric deviations propagation of compliant parts. Int J Prod Res 49:1021–1043

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Chen H, Jin S, Li Z, Lai X (2014) A comprehensive study of three dimensional tolerance analysis methods. Comput Aided Des 53:1–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Ravishankar S, Dutt H, Gurumoorthy B (2010) Automated inspection of aircraft parts using a modified ICP algorithm. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 46:227–236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Weckenmann A, Gall P, Hoffmann J (2004). Inspection of holes in sheet metal using optical measuring systems. In Proceedings of VIth International Science Conference Coordinate Measuring Technique (April 21-24, 2004, Bielsko-Biala, Poland), pp. 339-346

  19. Bronstein AM, Bronstein MM, Kimmel R (2006) Generalized multidimensional scaling: a framework for isometry-invariant partial matching. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 103:1168–1172

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Kimmel R, Sethian JA (1998) Computing geodesic paths on manifolds. Proc Natl Acad Sci 95:8431–8435

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. Spence AD, Chan H-L, Mitchell JP, Capson DW (2005) Automotive sheet metal and grid digitizing solutions. Comput Aided Des Appl 2:135–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Botsch M, Pauly M (2007). Course 23: Geometric modeling based on polygonal meshes. In International Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques: ACM SIGGRAPH 2007 courses: San Diego, California (Vol. 2007)

  23. Frey PJ, George PL (2008). Mesh generation: application to finite elements. London: ISTE

  24. Cuillière JC, Francois V (2014) Integration of CAD, FEA and topology optimization through a unified topological model. Comput Aided Des Appl 11:1–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Geuzaine C, Remacle J-F (2009) Gmsh: a three-dimensional finite element mesh generator with built-in pre- and post-processing facilities. Int J Numer Methods Eng 79:1309–1331

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

In this paper, we use Gmsh™ [25] for visualizing distance distributions.

Funding

The authors would like to thank the National Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC), industrial partners, Consortium for Aerospace Research and Innovation in Québec (CRIAQ) and UQTR foundation for their support and financial contribution.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jean-Christophe Cuillière.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sattarpanah Karganroudi, S., Cuillière, JC., François, V. et al. “What-if” scenarios towards virtual assembly-state mounting for non-rigid parts inspection using permissible loads. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 97, 353–373 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-018-1947-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-018-1947-4

Keywords

Navigation