Reverse engineering을 통한 공차 최적화 연구

김승한(Seunghan Kim) 한국자동차공학회 2014 한국자동차공학회 학술대회 및 전시회 Vol.2014 No.11

The result of design tolerances is derived through the optimization process by the mutual verification of tolerance analysis and the tolerance distribution. Factor is defined by the tolerance zone is applied to the theoretical values. In this case, the vehicle does not satisfy a performance increase in the tolerance zone or leads to the exterior quality degradation. Also inappropriate factors may cause the rise in cost due to reduced yield by selection of the tolerance zone. The selection of tolerance factors and the optimization design of tolerance zone are an important factor as the Tolerance absorbing design structure when designing the optimal tolerance. The purpose of this study is to apply Reverse engineering techniques to design optimal tolerance, the X100 tolerance design and to compare calculated tolerance zone of 3sigma level and the theoretical tolerance zone by using a standard deviation and the process capability in verifying the tolerance implementing mass production vehicle by SYMC.

The Role of Tolerance to Promote the Improving the Quality of Training the Specialists in the Information Society

Oleksandr, Makarenko,Inna, Levenok,Valentyna, Shakhrai,Liudmyla, Koval,Tetiana, Tyulpa,Andrii, Shevchuk,Olena, Bida International Journal of Computer ScienceNetwork S 2022 International journal of computer science and netw Vol.22 No.12

The essence of the definition of "tolerance" is analyzed. Motivational, knowledge and behavioral criteria for tolerance of future teachers are highlighted. Indicators of the motivational criterion are the formation of value orientations, motivational orientation, and the development of empathy. Originality and productivity of thoughts and judgments, tact of dialogue, pedagogical ethics and tact are confirmed as indicators of the knowledge criterion. The behavioral criterion includes social activity as a life position, emotional and volitional endurance, and self-control of one's own position. The formation of tolerance is influenced by a number of factors: the social environment, the information society, existing stereotypes and ideas in society, the system of education and relationships between people, and the system of values. The main factors that contribute to the education of tolerance in future teachers are highlighted. Analyzing the structure of tolerance, it is necessary to distinguish the following functions of tolerance: - motivational (determines the composition and strength of motivation for social activity and behavior, promotes the development of life experience, because it allows the individual to accept other points of view and vision of the solution; - informational (understanding the situation, the personality of another person); - regulatory (tolerance has a close connection with the strong - willed qualities of a person: endurance, selfcontrol, self-regulation, which were formed in the process of Education); - adaptive (allows the individual to develop in the process of joint activity a positive, emotional, stable attitude to the activity itself, which the individual carries out, to the object and subject of joint relations). The implementation of pedagogical functions in the information society: educational, organizational, predictive, informational, communicative, controlling, etc. provides grounds to consider pedagogical tolerance as an integrative personal quality of a representative of any profession in the field of "person-person". The positions that should become conditions for the formation of tolerance of the future teacher in the information society are listed.

볼테르의 관용 사상과 `보편적 관용`의 문제

송태현 ( Song Tae Hyeon ) 아시아문화학술원 2016 인문사회 21 Vol.7 No.5

최근에 국내 학계에서 볼테르의 관용에 대한 몇몇 연구들이 수행되었다. 어떤 이들은 볼테르의 관용 사상을 무신론까지 수용하는 “보편적 관용 사상”으로 해석해왔다. 반면에 다른 진영에서는 볼테르의 관용이 “무신론자를 관용하지 않는 `협의`의 보편적 관용”이라고 주장한다. 만일 볼테르의 `관용`이 무신론과 같은 특정 사상을 예외로 둔다면, 볼테르의 `관용`이 진정한 관용이라 말할 수 있는가라는 의문이 제기된다. 볼테르는 과연 무신론을 관용의 대상에서 제외시켰는가? 이 문제는 `관용이란 무엇을 의미하는가?` 라는 관용의 정의(定義)와도 관련이 된다. 볼테르는 사상적인 오류와 범죄를 구분한다. 그에 따르면, 그 사상이 실제로 사회에 해를 끼치는 행동으로 이어질 때 범죄가 된다. 이론적으로 비판하는 것과 실제적으로 박해를 가하는 것은 분리해서 생각해야 한다. 이론적으로 동의하지 않더라도 자신과 이견을 가진 사람을 박해하지 않는 것이 관용이다. 볼테르가 무신론을 동의하지 않고 강한 어조로 비판한 것은 사실이다. 하지만 그는 무신론자에 대한 박해를 주장하지 않았고 모든 종교에 대한 관용을 주장했기에, 그의 입장은 무신론자에 대한 관용을 포괄하는 보편적 관용에 해당한다고 생각한다. 또한 사상 문제는 권력이 아닌 이성의 활동을 통해 해결해야 한다고 보았다는 점에서 그의 `관용 정신`은 `사상의 자유`를 위한 토대가 된다. Several recent studies on the tolerance of Voltaire were carried out in the domestic academy. Some researchers have interpreted Voltaire`s tolerance as a “universal tolerance” which accepts even an atheism. In the other camp, they argued that Voltaire excluded atheists from his tolerance. If Voltaire`s tolerance make an exception for some thoughts like atheism, his tolerance is not a true tolerance. Did Voltaire really exclude atheism from his range of tolerance? Voltaire distinguishes the crime from ideological errors. According to Voltaire, only when an ideology actually leads to behaviors harmful to the community, it constitutes a crime. If one does not persecute those who do not agree theoretically with him, he practices the tolerance. It is true that he doesn`t agree with the atheism, and he criticized it in a firm tone. However, he did not insist on the persecution of atheists. So his tolerance is an universal tolerance which embraces the tolerance for the atheism as well as all kinds of religions. His `spirit of tolerance` is the foundation for `Freedom of thought` in respect that the problem of thought should be resolved through the activities of the `reason`, not through the `authority`.

파리 톨레랑스

이학수(Lee Hak-Su) 부산경남사학회 2008 역사와 경계 Vol.68 No.-

Anumber of scholars believe that the Reformation of French right-wing party (Reformation), which underwent from 1995 to 2007, and the Counter-Manifestation of the Reformation mirror Revolution of May 1968. However, more appropriate point of view would be to say the Reformation claimed a separation from Social Party government and accomplished its own arguments and plans. This claim tried not only to destroy the values and logics of Social Party, but also to amend the value of Tolerance which left wing parties tried to preserve. In order to show that their reform policy cannot coexist with citizen government self-governing or socialist ideology, the right-wing government seem to have tried to handle Tolerance. Although the right-wing government has not touched on sensitive religion issue of Islam yet, it is obvious that they were going to put a restriction on illegal immigrant issue, social right, and social providence. Like this, the anti-Tolerance policy of the right-wing government faced severe resistance, but the right-wing government still won the election, and a survey of public opinion did not seem too bad. Therefore, we know the fact that Parisians tried to preserve the value of Tolerance did not cause them to doubt about the governing power of the right-wing government. Taking the current (2007-2008) political circumstances into consideration, Paris has low possibility of recovering the past status of Tolerance. This is due to the late 20th century's structural contradiction, which occurred globally. Even though the phenomenon of international migration of workers, failure of socialism, and rise of neo-democracy arose, there was no clear resistance or measure to these phenomenon. Therefore, it is too early for one to decide that Parisians will continue to maintain the value of Tolerance along with the immigrant problems and multi-cultural characteristics. The reason why the Parisians showed confused attitude towards Tolerance was because of the rebirth of nationalism, egocentrism, racialism and others that once thought to be expelled from the French. This phenomenon occurred all over Europe with a peculiar combination of conservatism and neo-liberalism after the real socialism collapsed. However, Paris will not give up Tolerance easily. Because, Paris has succeeded its fame and vitality as an international city through maintaining generosity and open-mindedness. Also because, Parisians already understand that the moment they give up Tolerance, Paris would lose vitality and creativity that Paris has always possessed. We can find the possibility of Tolerance when the Parisians elected a social party mayor in 2001 and 2008 municipal elections, even though they elected the right-wing government and president. The reason why the rich Paris elected a social party mayor is because they believed that he, as the head of a municipal organization, could preserve the value of the Tolerance by maintaining environmental and residential policies, which are two new visions of international city. Besides, if the mayor was a sexual minority (he is homosexual), haven't Parisians given him the biggest Tolerance, and asked for the same from him?

Emotional Distress Tolerance and Pain Tolerance: The Moderating Effect of Painful Events

서장원 한국임상심리학회 2018 Korean Journal of Clinical Psychology Vol.37 No.4

Emotional distress tolerance has been considered a lower-order dimension of distress tolerance as well as being closely related to pain tolerance. However, there is accumulating evidence that emotional distress tolerance and pain tolerance might not be associated with each other in individuals with psychological problems related to repetitive painful events. This study aimed to examine the role of painful events in the relationship between emotional distress tolerance and pain tolerance. Three hundred undergraduate students completed measures of emotional distress tolerance, pain tolerance, painful events, depression, and anxiety. Hierarchical regression analyses revealed that painful events moderated the relationship between emotional distress tolerance and pain tolerance even after controlling for the effects of depression and anxiety on pain tolerance. More specifically, it was found that painful events weakened the relationship between emotional distress tolerance and pain tolerance. These findings highlight the need for further exploration of the relationship between emotional distress tolerance and pain tolerance.

Multibody approach for tolerance analysis andoptimization of mechanical systems

Hyungho Chun,권상직,Taeoh Tak 대한기계학회 2008 JOURNAL OF MECHANICAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY Vol.22 No.2

A multibody approach is suitable for tolerance analysis of mechanical systems since multibody formulation can directly consider part-level tolerance variables. In this study, procedures for performing tolerance analysis and corresponding sensitivity analysis for spatial multibody systems are proposed. First, statistical formulation for performing multibody system tolerance analysis is developed to obtain system level tolerance for given part-level tolerances. One very useful aspect of the proposed formulation is that in the process of computing system tolerance, the sensitivity of system tolerance with respect to part-level tolerances can be additionally obtained. The kinematics of spatial multibody systems has been redefined in terms of both generalized coordinates and part-level tolerance variables. Tolerances in geometry of a body are specified in terms of the variations in relative locations of joint definition points and relative distance between them. Tolerances in the joint kinematics are defined through variations in vector closure equations and orthogonality equations that are two fundamental constraint equations for most kinematic joints. To demonstrate the validity and effectiveness of the proposed tolerance analysis procedure, tolerance analysis of a spatial 4-bar mechanism and tolerance optimization are performed.

장자사상에서 “관용”의 성격과 도덕교육에의 적용

김병희 ( Byung Hee Kim ) 한국교육철학회 2011 교육철학 Vol.43 No.-

Even though the idea of ``Tolerance`` born in Western society was a tolerance of religious form, it has become a basic virtue in democratic civic societies. The Western idea is different from the idea of tolerance born in Eastern society where historical forces were different. In this thesis, I examine the problem of ``Tolerance`` from an Eastern background. This thesis looks at the concepts of ``Korean traditional ethics, the value of globalization and the harmony and balance of virtue`` in Korea`s seventh national education curriculum. I try new interpretations of meaning and examine the basis and necessity for ``Tolerance`` as the universal value through examining social and cultural foundations of Oriental thought. The Oriental idea of ``Tolerance`` having different non religious origins has better potential for developing the universal tolerance demanded by a world groping for success in a globalized environment. Though there are many sources of thought about tolerance in Oriental society, this thesis will consider the idea as found in the thought of Chinese Taoist philosopher, Zhuang-Tzu(4th century B.C.E), because many of the notions of tolerance found in Zhuang-Tzu`s thought, though uniquely Oriental, have universal value. Three elements common in the thought of Zhuang-Tzu are ``self-awareness or self-reflection(見獨)``, ``essence of nature(道樞)``, and ``emptiness(虛)``. These elements represent the special harmonious quality of Zhuang-Tzu`s thought. ``Self-awareness,`` ``essence of nature`` and ``emptiness`` is a way of helping students gain understanding of the concept of ``Oriental Tolerance.`` A ``Tolerance Game``, based on the above three factors, is proposed as a method that introduces an emotional factor. Too often, moral education proceeds as a purely intellectual exercise. This is a limitation. Using a game to teach the idea of ``Oriental Tolerance`` introduces an emotional element necessary for memorable learning. In summary, the idea of Oriental tolerance can serve well as a universal value in a globalized economy. The teaching of Oriental tolerance must combine emotional and intellectual elements. When cognitive and emotional factors are integrated through a game, the result will be that students learn respect, generosity and develop consideration for others that is both cognitive and emotional in nature making it more memorable and practical.

자유주의적 관용의 역사적 전개와 그 한계

고봉진 한국법철학회 2016 법철학연구 Vol.19 No.2

The term ‘Tolerance’ refers to the acceptance of beliefs, actions or practices that one considers to be wrong but still tolerable. One can’t force if the other don’t want to. Today tolerance is regarded as a virtue. Tolerance is regarded as the means of peaceful coexistence. The most typical example of intolerance is the wars of Religion in the Middle Ages which were fought between Catholics and Protestants. In history relativism appears as a solution. There are no absolute truth. Truth is relative to some particular frame of reference. Tolerance is the highest result of relativism(pluralism). But in my view ‘liberal tolerance’ does not mean the positive(active) acceptance of different beliefs, actions or practices. It means the passive acceptance. It means non-interference with different beliefs, actions or practices. It means ‘leaving alone’ or neglect of duty. Instrumental reason and intensified individualism distort the meaning of tolerance. The meaning of Minority Difference has hardly been discussed in the public sphere. In my view ‘liberal tolerance’ is not sufficient guide for rights and values of minority. This paper deals with a recent critique of the ‘liberal model of tolerance’. In this paper I assert that the liberal model of tolerance fails to recognize rights and values of minority. I suggest replacing the liberal model of tolerance with the appropriate combination of Tolerance and Recognition. 불관용의 시대를 지나 역사는 관용의 시대를 이끌 사상을 원했다. 독단이나 독선을 피하고 신념이나 행동의 이질성을 인정한 자유주의는 인류 최대의 역사적인 유산이 되었다. 자유주의적 관용은 불관용의 역사에서 비롯된 결과물이었다. 필자는 우선 자유주의적 관용이 역사 속에서 어떻게 전개되었는지를 살펴보았다. 그런 후에 자유주의적 관용의 여러 장점에도 불구하고, 필자는 자유주의적 관용의 장점에서 단점으로 시선을 돌려 자유주의적 관용의 한계를 살폈다. 한때는 비판적이었던 것이 이제는 이데올로기적인 것이 되어 버렸다. 필자는 오늘날의 주류 사상인 자유주의 사상과 관용이 접목함으로써 관용이 이데올로기화되어 관용 본래의 의미를 상실하지는 않았는지 살펴보았다. 자유주의 하의 관용은 방해하지 않고 그냥 두는 무관심, 냉담함으로 변할 수 있다. 관용은 심하게 말하면 ‘나와 상관없음’, ‘그대로 내버려 둠’을 의미한다. 더 심하게 말하면 다른 삶에 대한 거부와 폄하를 잠깐 동안 연기하고 유예하는 것이다. 이는 현대 자유주의 사회가 ‘개인주의’와 ‘도구적 이성’이 만연한 사회라는 점에서 더 그러하다. ‘개인주의’와 ‘도구적 이성’이 지배하는 사회에서는 개인은 자신의 이해를 넘어 공동의 이해에는 관심이 없으며, ‘상대주의적 무관심’에 빠진다. 이런 사회에서 ‘관용’이라는 고상한 언어는 더 이상 고상한 어떤 것도 뜻하지 않는다. 또한 관용의 정치는 차이의 장소를 사적인 영역에 한정함으로써 차이가 가진 공적인 속성을 축소시킬 수 있다. 사적인 영역에 한정된 관용 담론은 차이를 사적 정체성의 문제로 후퇴시키며 시민들 간의 소외를 강화시킬 뿐, 공적인 차이의 문제를 제대로 다룰 수 없게 된다. 사적인 영역으로 축소된 관용 담론은 공적인 불평등, 배제, 갈등을 탈정치화하기도 한다. 오늘날 지배적인 이데올로기인 신자유주의 하에서 관용이 이야기되지만, 사실상 약자의 권리, 약자의 가치는 쉽게 도외시된다. 필자는 관용의 정치보다 승인의 정치를 우선해야 한다고 생각한다. 적극적으로 약자의 권리, 약자의 가치를 승인하는 모델이 필요하다. 이런 모델 하에서 관용은 제 기능을 수행하게 된다. 자유주의 하에는 관용이 우선되지만, 실제로는 (의도한 것은 아니겠지만) 약자의 권리, 약자의 가치는 강자의 권리, 강자의 가치에 뒤처지고, 관용은 그 본래 의의를 잃어버린다.

헤이트스피치와 관용

고봉진(Ko, Bong-Jin) 전남대학교 법학연구소 2019 법학논총 Vol.39 No.3

절대주의 시대에서 상대주의 시대로, 동질성에 기초한 사회에서 이질성에 기초한 사회로 변모하면서 관용이 실질적으로 행해질 가능성이 높아졌다. 하지만 안타깝게도 관용은 행해지지 않고, 비관용이 혐오와 증오의 모습으로 나타나고 있다. 주류 가치관은 이질성을 포용하는데 한계를 드러내고, 그 중 일부는 타자와 소수자에 대한 혐오와 증오의 정치를 벌인다. 시대의 변화는 다름에 대한 관용의 폭을 넓히긴 했지만, 역으로 타자와 소수자에 대한 혐오와 증오를 더 강화시키기도 했다. 가치의 상대성이 인정되는 분위기 속에서도, 자신의 가치에 기초해 다른 가치를 부정하는 일이 빈번하게 일어났다. 시대(context)가 변함에 따라 관용을 논하는 text가 달라진다. 절대주의 시대에는 (그 당시 법으로도 처벌되지 않는) 물리적 가해를 입히는 증오 범죄(hate crime)를 하지 말라는 촉구로서 관용을 들고 나왔다면, 상대주의 시대에는 (물리적 가해를 입히는 증오 범죄는 당연히 범죄로서 형벌을 받기에) 정신적 가해를 입히는 Hate Speech가 논의의 중심에 선다. 예전과 차이가 있는 건 비주류 쪽의 대응이다. 절대주의 시대에 주류는 절대 강자였고, 비주류는 주류의 관용을 어쩔 수 없이 기다릴 수밖에 없는 처지에 있었다. 이런 가운데 비주류의 투쟁이 있었지만 (대부분 불법으로 탄압받았다) 변화가 있기까지는 정말 오랜 시간과 많은 사람의 피와 땀이 필요했다. 법제화(法制化)는 느리게 이루어졌다. 상대주의 시대에는 비주류는 더 이상 주류의 관용에 의지하지 않고, 비주류 스스로 자신의 정체성에 기초한 ‘승인 투쟁’을 벌인다(오늘날은 정당한 집회와 결사로 보호받는다). ‘평등한 존중’이라는 관점에서 본다면, 관용보다는 ‘승인’의 차원에서 다른 삶의 방식을 인정하고 이를 권리로서 인정하는 것이 필요하다. 이럴 때 소수자 배척과 배제는 비관용을 넘어서, 권리 침해, 평등권 침해가 된다. 1차적 질서 하에서는 승인될 여지가 없지만, 2차적 질서 하에서는 승인될 여지가 생긴다. 승인될 여지가 없거나 부족할 때는 관용의 미덕은 빛을 발하지만, 승인될 여지가 있을 때에는 관용은 (좋은 것임에도) 소극적인 미덕에 그친다. ‘다름에 대한 관용’은 ‘다름에 대한 승인’과 밀접한 관련이 있다. 다름에 대한 승인이 되고 나면, 이후 관용의 기제는 더 힘을 발휘한다. 오늘날 ‘관용’은 승인’과의 관련성 속에서 살펴야 한다. There is a greater likelihood that tolerance will be practiced while transforming from absolutism to relativism, from a society of primary order to a society of secondary order, from a society based on homogeneity to a society based on heterogeneity. Unfortunately, tolerance is not done, and pessimism appears in the form of disgust and hate. Mainstream of values limit the inclusion of heterogeneity, and some of them engage in disgust and hate of minorities. Changes in the times have broadened the tolerance for differences, but they have also strengthened disgust and hate of minorities. Even in an atmosphere where the relativity of values is recognized, it frequently happened to deny other values based on their own values. As the context changes, the text of tolerance changes. In the era of absolutism there was tolerance as a call to not hate crime(which is not punishable by the law at that time). Hate Speech, which causes mental harm, is at the center of the discussion in the era of relativism. There was a struggle of minority (mostly illegal suppression) but it took a long time and many people’s blood and sweat to change. Legislation has been slow. In the era of relativism, subcultures no longer rely on tolerance, but subcultures themselves make ‘struggle for recognition’ based on their identity(today they are protected by legitimate rallies and associations). From the perspective of ‘equal respect’, it is necessary to acknowledge the other way of life and to recognize it as a right in terms of ‘recognition’ rather than tolerance. In the dimension of minority movement, ‘recognition’ is the priority, ‘tolerance’ is not the priority. People in the majority group acknowledge that minorities can enjoy the same rights as their ‘equal respect’ demands. The virtue of tolerance shines when there is no room to be recognized or when there is a lack of tolerance, but when there is room to be recognized, tolerance is a passive virtue although it is good. ‘Tolerance of difference’ is closely related to ‘recognition of difference’. After approval of difference, the tolerance mechanism becomes more powerful. Today ‘tolerance’ should be examined in relation to ‘recognition.’

Calculating Cp of Position Tolerance when MMC Applied at Datum and Position Tolerance

Jun-Ho Kim(김준호),Sung-Ho Chang(장성호) 한국산업경영시스템학회 2017 한국산업경영시스템학회지 Vol.40 No.3

Process capability is well known in quality control literatures. Process capability refers to the uniformity of the process. Obviously, the variability in the process is a measure of the uniformity of output. It is customary to take the 6-sigma spread in the distribution of the product quality characteristic as a measure of process capability. However there is no reference of process capability when maximum material condition is applied to datum and position tolerance in GD&T (Geometric Dimensioning and Tolerancing). If there is no material condition in datum and position tolerance, process capability can be calculated as usual. If there is a material condition in a feature control frame, bonus tolerance is permissible. Bonus tolerance is an additional tolerance for a geometric control. Whenever a geometric tolerance is applied to a feature of size, and it contains an maximum material condition (or least material condition) modifier in the tolerance portion of the feature frame, a bonus tolerance is permissible. When the maximum material condition modifier is used in the tolerance portion of the feature control frame, it means that the stated tolerance applies when the feature of size is at its maximum material condition. When actual mating size of the feature of size departs from maximum material condition (towards least material condition), an increase in the stated tolerance-equal to the amount of the departure-is permitted. This increase, or extra tolerance, is called the bonus tolerance. Another type of bonus tolerance is datum shift. Datum shift is similar to bonus tolerance. Like bonus tolerance, datum shift is an additional tolerance that is available under certain conditions. Therefore we try to propose how to calculate process capability index of position tolerance when maximum material condition is applied to datum and position tolerance.