See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/275670968

ISO Specifications of Complex Surfaces: Application on Aerodynamic Profiles

Article in Procedia CIRP · December 2015

DOI: 10.1016/j.procir.2015.04.037

CITATIONS READS

5 4,595

3 authors:

Mathieu Petitcuenot Laurent Pierre

Ecole normale supérieure de Cachan Ecole normale supérieure de Cachan
2 PUBLICATIONS 7 CITATIONS 25 PUBLICATIONS 173 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Bernard Anselmetti
Ecole normale supérieure de Cachan
63 PUBLICATIONS 770 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Bernard Anselmetti on 17 March 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect
Procedia CIRP 27 (2015) 16 – 22

13th CIRP conference on Computer Aided Tolerancing

ISO specifications of complex surfaces:

Application on aerodynamic profiles
Mathieu PETITCUENOTa,b*, Laurent PIERREa,c, Bernard ANSELMETTIa,c
a
LURPA, ENS Cachan, 61, Avenue du président Wilson, 94 235 Cachan, France
b
Snecma, Site de Villaroche, Rond Point René Ravaud-Réau, 77 550 Moissy-Cramayel, France
c
Université Paris-Sud, IUT de Cachan, 9, Avenue de la division Leclerc, 94 230 Cachan, France
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +33-1-47-40-27-65; E-mail address: [email protected]

Abstract

For many years, the use of complex surfaces is becoming widespread with the development of manufacturing process. CAD model describes
nominal shape of the part. Specifications are then defined by annotations directly in the 3D model. This work is illustrated by an application on
a turbine blade of an aircraft engine.
To impose the widest possible tolerances on the whole surface, it is necessary to have a multi-scale approach. The main datum reference frame
is built on the setting up surfaces of the part.
In the first level, all surfaces are located with regard to the main datum reference frame with a wide tolerance in order to avoid interference with
other parts of the mechanism. In a second level, specifications on restricted areas complete local requirements with lower tolerances. In the
third level, orientation specification on small mobile zone with small tolerance detects micro defects as tool traces for example.
This presentation shows several positions, orientation and form specifications on 3D surfaces and on 2D curves. The new modifier "For
orientation constraint only" of the ISO 5459: 2011 standard lets us define only the orientation with regard to a reference surface. The
overlapping of many orientation specifications on restricted areas limits parts defects inside a large global tolerance zone. Specifications with
common zone of two surfaces face to face control the thickness of the part which can be useful for strength or mass reasons.
These specifications can be detailed with a variable tolerance zone that defines the tolerance of all points of surfaces. The ISO standard only
treats the 2D case; this paper presents a solution to specify 3D surfaces with variable tolerance by a hypothesis of proportional variation
following the curvilinear distance on curves created on 3D surfaces.
This set of specifications constitutes a tool-box for designers based on only one type of specification which allows them to verify all
requirements with a partition of only one cloud of points.
The 3D complex surfaces are the interface between the part and the outside environment and often require similar functions. This study in a
context of aeronautic industry can easily be extended to other mechanical domains.
© 2015
© 2015 The
The Authors.
Authors. Published
Published by Elsevier B.V
by Elsevier B.V.This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of 13th CIRP conference on Computer Aided Tolerancing.
Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of 13th CIRP conference on Computer Aided Tolerancing
Keywords: : Functional tolerancing; Complex surface; Aerodynamic profile; Variable tolerance; ISO standard of tolerancing.

2212-8271 © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of 13th CIRP conference on Computer Aided Tolerancing
doi:10.1016/j.procir.2015.04.037
 Mathieu Petitcuenot et al. / Procedia CIRP 27 (2015) 16 – 22 17

1. Introduction

1.1. Context and studies field

In a classical mechanism, parts need functional geometrical

requirements between setting-up surfaces. However, parts on
the skin of the mechanism require esthetical or aero-
dynamical functions. Theses surfaces are often complex and
have to be defined in a 3D model. The classical method is to
impose a specification of profile of the surface with regard to
the main datum reference frame, but this approach is not
sufficient. A functional multi-scale approach must be used to
control various defects.

1.2. Industrial needs

In a context of production of aircraft engines, Snecma

wants to improve the definition of the aerodynamic profile of
their blades. Fig. 2. Position and orientation specifications of a complex surface
In a first step, after designating different zones of the blade
(Pressure side, Suction side, Leading edge, Trailing edge ...), 1.4. Literature review
experts did a functional analysis to determine the geometrical
properties of these zones. A typical aerodynamic need is the Functional tolerancing becomes widely used in the
orientation of a profile which guides the air flow. industry and multiple researchers have written about this
It is difficult to determine the influence of a particular subject.
default on system performance. Mejbri & Al. [3] present a method which builds the best
In a second step it is necessary to choose ISO tolerancing datum reference frame for each functional requirement. After
specifications to control the form and the location of each have defined all relevant datum, an algorithm allows us to
zone and the continuity between two neighboring zones. choose quickly the adapted datum reference frame for each
In a conventional mechanism, datum reference frames are geometrical specification. Tolerancing of part requires two
built on planes or cylinders used for positioning adjacent parts. level of analyze. The first one is the set of specifications
On a blade the next part is an air flow without datum. which only answer to the functional needs of the part, and the
second one is the consideration of the assembly by specifying
1.3. State of the art part boundaries. This second approach insures the geometric
continuity of surfaces between parts.
Specifications of complex surfaces are built only with two In a similar view, Anselmetti B. [4] [5] developed a
symbols of profile of a line and profile of a surface (Fig. 1.) software application, named “CLIC method”, which can
defined in the ISO 1101 standard. specify a part by an automated way by analyzing contacting
Without datum reference frame, the specification controls features. This method gives a complete datum reference frame
the form of the surface [1]. corresponding to the functional requirements.
In her thesis Zhang M. [6] uses the concepts of the Skin
Model (GeoSpelling [7] [8]) by a discrete shape modeling
approach. She performed an analysis on a sheet of metal part
Fig. 1. Form specifications of a profile of a line and of a surface manufactured in a one-stage sheet metal forming process.
Some years before Chiabert & Al. [9] show the benefits of
With a datum reference frame, specification is a location the GD&T approach on tolerancing part. The GD&T
specification (Fig. 2.). approach gives a better representation of the reality of the
There is no specific symbol for orientation, but the last assembly and it allows us to have a better mastery of some
version of the ISO 5459: 2011 standard [2] gives a new defects. Chiabert apply these concepts to a gearbox to
modifier “><”, which removes the position constraint. This demonstrate that GD&T approach permits to put the extra
means that the tolerance zone can be translated with regard to tolerances on the specification that have the greatest impact
the nominal surface defined in the datum reference frame (Fig. on the manufacturing cost.
2.). In a context of reduction of manufacturing cost Curran &
Al. [10] give a cost model of tolerances of an aircraft engine
nacelle. Curran focuses on joints between the large parts
which constituted the nacelle.
18 Mathieu Petitcuenot et al. / Procedia CIRP 27 (2015) 16 – 22

His cost models give an idea of the influence of the This tolerancing is sufficient for simple parts, but it is often
conception, manufacturing and the assembly on the global necessary to add other specifications for functional surfaces
cost. With Bombardier data, he analyzes the estimated and other junctions with other parts.
reduction cost if tolerance value rises. The idea is to reduce A specification of profile form of the blade airfoil portion
the manufacturing cost by enhanced tolerance values. Even if can be added to define these functional surfaces on a
a second study gives the estimation functional requirement restricted zone.
losses because of the enhancement of tolerance values, Fig. 4. illustrates the concept of general tolerancing with
nothing shows how joints are specified and it could be a the comment "All surfaces" (S1). On the other hand, the form
significant parameter about manufacturing cost. specification uses the “All around symbol” (a circle) and a
The following work focuses on the definition of a collection plane C, which means that the specification (S2) is
functional datum reference frame and the expressions of aero- applied to all surfaces cut by a plane parallel to C located by
dynamic requirements by specifying a complex surface and the leader. In CAD environment, the portion of selected
how to write this kind of specifications. This paper does not surface will be highlighted.
deal with the calculation of tolerance value.

2. Global form specification of a complex surface

2.1. Main datum reference frame

The main stage of the part tolerancing is the definition of

the datum reference frame, A and B, corresponding to the
setting-up surfaces taking into account degrees of freedom
removed by each surface.
On Coordinate Measuring Machine, this datum reference
frame is associated to real surfaces to create a coordinate
system corresponding to CAD mark (Fig. 3.) Fig. 4. General form tolerancing

3. Connection specifications

3.1. Outcrop between parts

When a complex surface is defined on two parts, the

outcrop between parts is an important issue (Fig. 5.) [3].

Fig. 3. CAD mark on a turbine blade

This system gives the deviation between real points and the Fig. 5. Outcrop between 2 parts
nominal model.
The tolerancing can be defined by CLIC method [4] [5]. Figure 6 illustrates the specifications (S1) and (S2) of parts
Specification of profile form of surface A in common zone considering the continuity requirement on a restricted zone
(S1) assures the quality of the contact of the primary surface. near the boundaries of surfaces.
The inclinaison of the secondary surface B (S2) assures the
location of the blade.

2.2. General tolerancing

All surfaces of the part can be specified by a profile of all

surfaces of the part with a wide global tolerance, in relation
with the main datum reference frame.
This specification assures a maximal material condition of
the part that avoids interference with adjacent parts and limits
the weight of the part. A minimal condition to guaranties a
minimum thickness of parts.
 Mathieu Petitcuenot et al. / Procedia CIRP 27 (2015) 16 – 22 19

4. Aerodynamic profile specifications

4.1. Profile of a line

Depending on the environment of the mechanism, the

complex surface may require more stringent constraints than
the general tolerancing.
This problem is illustrated on a blade which requires a
quality profile in a plane which corresponds to the flow of the
air stream. Plane C (Fig. 4.) is now used as an intersection
plane for specification of profile of a curve (Fig. 9.).
This specification ensures the form and orientation of each
section, independently of the other sections. In practice, the
thickness of the blade is severe enough, by cons, the leading
and trailing edges can be longer or shorter.
Similarly, the trailing edge cannot have breaks to properly
Fig. 6. Tolerancing of the outcrop guide the air flow. The form of the trailing edge and the
leading edge must be perfect to minimize losses.
Maximal outcrop variation is equal to the sum of
tolerances (S1 and S2) and of the maximal clearance defined
by minimal material dimensions of the link between parts (S3
and S4).

3.2. Connection fillet

The form specification is not relevant for fillet, because,

the tolerance zone accepts very small or very large radius (Fig.
7.).
Fig. 9. Global tolerancing of sections

4.2. Splitting of a profile

Aero-dynamic requirements concern several portions of a

complex surface with smallest tolerances. So with the aim of
only specifying these functional requirements; the profile is
split.
Fig. 7. Continuous tolerance zone The splitting of the profile implies that form specifications
(S1) of the trailing or the leading edge (Fig. 10.) are free to
The classical notion of radius is preferable, with a move away from the center of the profile. Theses surfaces
tolerance zone defined between minimal and maximal must respect specification all around the profile with largest
acceptable radius. tolerance (S2).

Fig. 8. Radius tolerance

Fig. 10. Control of the edge positions; splitting profile of a blade

To control the orientation of trailing and leading edge,

orientation specification can be added (S3).
20 Mathieu Petitcuenot et al. / Procedia CIRP 27 (2015) 16 – 22

4.3. Datum reference on complex surface orientation of the reference element and limits the defect on
the specified element.
To control the breaking down of the trailing edge, the first
idea is to create a datum reference on central portion of the
blade to locate the extremity of the trailing edge.
Figure 11 presents datum A (S1) on surface defined as
nominal surface tangent to the real surface that minimizes the
maximal distance. In this case, the surface is quite circular.
The orientation with respect to a circle does not make sense.
Both specifications (S1) and (S2) are independent. The
relative location and orientation of these two portions are not
assured.
Datum B is defined on a bilateral surface. It is a nominal Fig. 12. Common zone specifications
surface that minimizes the maximal distance with the real
surface. In this case, the thickness decreases along the surface. The common zone (s3) locks the orientation; however it
So, the datum moves to reduce the distance with part. locks the relative position between the two elements too. It
Specification (S3) depends on the thickness of the part. could be useful to control the thickness of the blade, as
These two surfaces A and B are not acceptable to create specifications (s2) and (s3).
datum. The datum cannot be constructed if the normals of the
surface are quite concurrent. 4.4. Local defects
Datum C is created by three datum targets. The nominal
line can slide on points C1 and C2. Target C3 must be Frequently, functions of complex surfaces are esthetical or
perpendicular to this sliding direction. Specification (S4) can aero-dynamical. Micro defects are forbidden.
be specified relative to the C datum. Specifications with mobile tolerance zone limit theses local
defects by analyzing all small portions of the surface with
strict tolerances (Fig. 13.).

Fig. 13. Local defects tolerancing

It is possible to specify different kinds of tolerance zone

shape. It is possible to define a circle or a rectangle:

‚
‚
8x8: Square with 8 mm sides
Φ8: Circle with 8 mm diameter
Fig. 11. Datum reference on complex surface
A mobile tolerance zone specification needs the modifier
To control the breaking down of trailing edge and the “><”, introduced in section 1.3, because the tolerance zone is
thickness of the blade, a better solution consists in the small and it is dangerous to let the orientation free during the
association of both surfaces in a common tolerance zone. As association between the real surface and the CAD model. The
specification (s2) (Fig. 12.), common tolerance zone keeps the optimization is made only with a translation along the normal
of the surface on this studied point.
 Mathieu Petitcuenot et al. / Procedia CIRP 27 (2015) 16 – 22 21

The following figure illustrates this issue (Fig. 14.).

Fig. 16. Standardized writing proposition

Fig. 14. Problem of mobile tolerance zone

In a first step the evolution between points stays linear, but
5. Variable tolerance it is easy to imagine another step where the evolutions
between the extremities of the boundaries are non linear with
5.1. State of the ISO Standard function in nota.
This 3D evolution of the ISO definition of variable
With the aim of reducing the number of specifications and tolerance coupled with a large cloud of points, obtained by an
improve the comprehension of the tolerancing it could be optical measurement tool for example, allows the designer to
relevant to use variable tolerances. check immediately the conformity of a part with a high
Variable tolerances are defined by the ISO 1101: 2013 [1] precision. With the notion of variable tolerance the continuity
standard (Fig. 15.), which only presents a 2D case. of the tolerance zone is preserved.

6. Conclusion

The multi-scale approach seems to be a relevant solution to

analyze the way of tolerancing a complex surface or line.
It is necessary to start the part tolerancing with the
functional datum reference frame built on the setting-up
surfaces which gives the general form and position, and look
more precisely for the orientation of the surfaces and
connections between them. The next step is to split surfaces to
answer particular needs and finally specify local defects.
Fig. 15. Extract of ISO 1101: 2013 standard A complementary tool which could include some of the
previous specifications is variable tolerance. It permits to
With a simple arrow, the variation of tolerance is linear reduce the number of specifications and make a continuous
from 0.1 to 0.2 between boundaries J and K. tolerance zone.
The double arrow symbol indicates that the tolerance is Except for variable tolerances, the ISO standards give
constant between the boundaries. enough tools to specify all kinds of complex surfaces
requirements. Therefore methods presented in this paper can
5.2. Proposition of standardized writing be applied to all kind of parts and respect the ISO standard.

To go further from the ISO standard the tolerance of the

surface would become entirely 3D by extending the Acknowledgements
possibility to make the tolerance vary on all boundaries of the
complex surface. It implies to define a tolerance value at all The authors want to thank Snecma for all information it
points which define the boundaries (Fig. 16.). has shared with them. This work has been funded by a CIFRE
contract with Snecma company and LURPA laboratory.
 22 Mathieu Petitcuenot et al. / Procedia CIRP 27 (2015) 16 – 22

References [7] Ballu A., Mathieu L. (1995), Univocal expression of functional and
geometrical tolerances for design, manufacturing and inspection, Computer
[1] ISO 1101. (2013). International organization for standardization, Aided Tolerancing, 4th CIRP Seminar, Japan, 31-46.
geometrical tolerancing - tolerancing of form, orientation, location and run- [8] Mathieu L., Ballu A. (2003), GEOSPELLING: a common language for
out-generalities, definitions, symbols, indications on drawings. Geometrical Product Specification and Verification to express method
[2] ISO 5459. (2011). Geometrical product specifications (GPS), Datums and uncertainty. Proceedings of the 8th CIRP Seminar on Computer Aided
datum systems for geometrical tolerancing Tolerancing, Charlotte, USA, April.
[3] Mejbri H., Anselmetti B., Mawussi K. (2005), Functional tolerancing of [9] Chiabert P., Lombardi F., Orlando M. (1998), Benefits of geometric
complex mechanisms: Identification and specification of key parts. dimensioning and tolerancing.
[4] Anselmetti B. (2008) CLIC method, « Tolérancement » volume 3: [10] Curran R., Kundun A., Raghunathan S., Eakin D., McFadden R. (2003),
Editions Hermes Sciences, Lavoisier. Influence of manufacturing tolerance on aircraft direct operating cost
[5] Anselmetti B. (2006), Generation of functional tolerancing based on (DOC).
positioning features.
[6] Zhang M. (2011), Discrete Shape Modeling for Geometrical Product
Specifications: Contributions and Applications to Skin Model Simulation,
thesis.

View publication stats