Introduction / Context:
Precision carries a cost. Tighter tolerances often require slower machining, specialized tooling, more capable equipment, additional in-process controls, and stricter inspection. Therefore, increasing precision usually increases, not decreases, manufacturing cost. The statement claiming the opposite is generally false.
Given Data / Assumptions:
- Production processes have natural capability (process spread) that may or may not meet tighter limits.
- Inspection time and scrap risk rise as tolerances tighten.
- Functional requirements dictate the minimum necessary precision.
Concept / Approach:
Cost drivers include machine time, tool wear, setup complexity, environmental controls, and inspection methods. As tolerance narrows, yield can drop and rework increases. Best practice is to apply only as much precision as the function and fit require, avoiding unnecessary expense.
Step-by-Step Solution:
Determine functional and fit needs to set the minimum necessary tolerance.Compare tolerance with process capability; if inadequate, plan process upgrades or accept higher cost.Quantify inspection requirements (e.g., CMM time, gauge R&R) and include them in cost.Iterate design/process to balance performance and affordability.
Verification / Alternative check:
Use process capability indices (Cp, Cpk) to evaluate whether tighter tolerances are economically achievable.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Correct for additive manufacturing only / True only for soft materials: The cost trend applies broadly across processes and materials.Cost is always unaffected by precision: Contradicts industry experience and cost models.
Common Pitfalls:
Specifying extremely tight tolerances without functional justification.Ignoring inspection cost, which can rival machining cost at tight limits.
Final Answer:
Incorrect
Discussion & Comments