Concept

Allocation — where it appears

The division of an assembly's permitted output variation between the tolerances of its individual dimensions. It is decided by how sensitive the output is to each of them, so the cheap tolerances go where the mechanism does not care and the tight ones where it does.

Named by 5 essays across one field — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

The four lengths do not matter equally. Each length's average contribution to the output band, for a tolerance of ±0.01 on all four, averaged over the 48 crank positions the mechanism reaches. The coupler contributes 38% of the total and the rocker 11% — a factor of 3.4 between the ends of the ranking. A tolerance specified equally on all four therefore spends most of its cost buying accuracy the mechanism does not notice, which is what a sensitivity ranking is for.

The four lengths do not matter equally

Averaged over a whole turn, the coupler contributes 38% of a four-bar's output band and the rocker 11% — a factor of 3.4 between the ends of the ranking. A tolerance specified equally on all four therefore spends most of its money buying accuracy the mechanism cannot use, and the ranking that says so costs four linear solves.

practice · Tolerance
Two ways of adding four tolerances. The output band from ±0.01 on each of four lengths, combined two ways. The upper curve is worst case — every error at its extreme and conspiring — and the lower is root-sum-square, which treats the four as independent random errors. RSS is smaller everywhere, by between 1.42 and 1.95, and with four contributions the most it can ever be is √4 = 2. That factor is not a saving found in the geometry; it is bought with the assumption that the four errors are independent, and one fixture that locates two of the holes takes it straight back.

Worst case and the square root

Four tolerances can be added as a straight sum or as a root-sum-square, and the second is smaller by between 1.42 and 1.96 through this linkage's cycle. The ceiling is √4 = 2 and no geometry can beat it. That factor is not found in the mechanism — it is bought entirely with an assumption of independence, and one fixture that locates two holes takes it straight back.

practice · Tolerance
Where enumerating the corners stops being affordable. The two routes to a tolerance band, costed against the number of toleranced lengths. Enumerating every extreme combination is 2ⁿ mechanisms at every crank position; differentiating the constraints is n linear solves. A four-bar is 16 corners and a Watt six-bar is 128, which is still cheap — 142 solves for one position — and the curve is the point rather than either number: at twenty parameters, which is an ordinary spatial mechanism, the corner route is a million mechanisms and the derivative route is twenty. Both are drawn because the corner route is not merely slower, it is the one that assumes nothing, and its answer is what the cheap route has to be checked against.

Seven lengths and a hundred corners

Nothing in a tolerance analysis is about four. A Watt six-bar has seven lengths, its corner enumeration is 128 mechanisms rather than 16, and the two routes still agree to a hundredth of a per cent — but the costs have separated — 142 solves against seven. At twenty parameters, which is an ordinary spatial mechanism, it is a million against twenty.

practice · Tolerance
Which pin's play costs the most. Each pin's clearance taken one at a time, at 0.01 on links of 1 to 4, with the direction swept rather than assumed. The ranking runs A 32%, B 25%, O₂ 22%, O₄ 21% — a spread of 1.52 against the 3.43 the four lengths spread over. Clearances are more evenly weighted than length tolerances because each pin joins two links and so enters two of the four sensitivities, which is why the best bearing buys less than the best-held length does — and why it still goes somewhere the load path does not suggest.

Which pin to buy

The four lengths of a four-bar contribute 38, 26, 25 and 11 per cent of its output error — a spread of 3.4. Its four pins contribute 32, 25, 22 and 21 — a spread of 1.5. Clearances are more evenly shared than length tolerances, because every pin joins two links and so appears in two of the four sensitivities, and that changes what a better bearing is worth.

practice · Clearance
Tolerancing the holes rather than the lengths. The output band from ±0.01, computed on the four link lengths and then on the features those lengths are derived from. The ground length is the distance between two frame holes, and what happens to it depends entirely on how they were made: located separately, two independent errors combine to √2 times one and the lengths-only answer is optimistic by 11%; bored in one setup, the common part of the machine's error cancels out of the distance between them and the lengths-only answer is pessimistic by 34%. Neither is a correction to apply; it is a question for the machine shop, and this site can compute the sensitivity and not the answer.

Tolerancing the holes

A drawing does not tolerance link lengths. It tolerances holes, and the lengths are derived from them — so what a length's tolerance really means depends on whether its two holes were bored in one setup. Located separately, a lengths-only stack-up is optimistic by 11%; bored together, it is pessimistic by 34%. Neither is a correction to apply blind.

practice · Tolerance

Named alongside it

The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.

DerivativeJacobianSensitivityToleranceConstraintFour-barStrokeAverageIndependenceThresholdTransmission angleClearance

All concepts