Free engineering tool

Tolerance stack-up calculator

Enter a chain of dimensions and get worst-case, RSS and Monte Carlo results side by side — with a predicted scrap rate, Cpk, and a breakdown of which tolerance is actually costing you. Everything runs in your browser. Nothing is uploaded.

Worst case RSS Monte Carlo · 24 000 builds ISO 286 fits mm & inch No signup

Those default values are a worked example — see the assembly they come from.

How to use it

A stack-up is a loop. You walk from one side of the gap you care about, through every feature that controls it, and back again. Each feature either opens the gap or closes it.

Sectioned assembly drawing: a bearing, spacer ring and shaft shoulder stacked inside a blind housing bore, with the 40.00 mm bore depth and each component width dimensioned, and the resulting axial gap shown in an enlarged detail view.
The example loaded in the calculator above, drawn out. The bore depth opens the gap; the shoulder, spacer and bearing close it. What is left is the axial clearance at the mouth — the dimension the analysis is actually about.

If the nominal gap comes out negative, your direction signs are inconsistent — walk the loop again.

Worst case or RSS?

This is the argument that shows up in every design review, and both sides are usually half right.

Worst case

Assumes every part arrives at its worst limit simultaneously. It is arithmetic, not statistics: add the tolerances. Nothing you build can ever fall outside the range it predicts, which is why it is the right method for safety-critical clearances, interference conditions, and anything where a single failure is unacceptable.

The cost is that it is pessimistic to the point of being misleading. With eight features in a chain, the probability of all eight simultaneously landing at the same extreme is vanishingly small — and designing for it means paying for tolerances you will never need.

RSS

Root-sum-square takes the square root of the summed squared tolerances. Because errors partially cancel, the predicted spread is much narrower — typically 40–60 % of worst case on a chain of four or more features. That difference is real money in machining cost.

RSS is only valid if its assumptions hold. Independent processes, roughly centred, roughly normal, and enough features for the cancellation to actually happen. Break any of those and RSS will quietly under-predict your scrap rate.

Where RSS goes wrong

The contributor breakdown in the results panel exists for that last case. If the top row is above roughly 50 %, tightening it is the only change that will move the result — and everything else you tighten is wasted money.

What the numbers mean

OutputReading it
Nominal gapThe gap with every feature exactly at its stated size. A design intent value, not something you will measure.
Worst caseThe absolute bounds. Nothing can fall outside this, however unlikely the combination.
RSSThe statistical spread at the chosen sigma band. Assumes independent, centred processes.
Predicted scrapParts per million falling outside your spec limits. Roughly 2 700 ppm corresponds to a ±3σ process exactly filling the band.
CpkProcess capability including any off-centre shift. 1.33 is a common minimum, 1.67 for critical features. Below 1.0 you are shipping defects.
ContributorsShare of total statistical variance. Because variance goes as the square, the largest tolerance dominates far more than it looks.

Assumptions and limits

Worth knowing before you put a number from here into a drawing package:

Also here

Coming soon

Pro — save projects and export reports

The calculator stays free and complete — metric and inch units, ISO 286 fits, and shareable links are all part of it. Pro adds the things you need when a stack-up has to leave your screen:

One email when it ships. Nothing else, and no list sharing.