Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-11T09:34:49.223Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Assessing measurement uncertainty in CMM measurements:comparison of different approaches

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 March 2014

S. Ruffa ,
G.D. Panciani ,
F. Ricci  and
G. Vicario
Get access

Abstract

Manufactured parts are affected by size and form errors, which need to be assessedagainst geometrical and dimensional tolerances in order to meet the functionalrequirements they have been conceived for. The compliance assessment of workpieces withspecifications depends on measurements and is unavoidably affected by several uncertaintycontributions. According to the geometrical product specifications and verification (GPS),measurement uncertainty consists of method and implementation uncertainty. Literatureproposes different approaches for the evaluation of implementation uncertainty, however astandardized method has not been yet achieved. This paper makes an analysis of the variouselements to be considered when choosing a specific approach: in the implementationuncertainty of circular features. The most common manufacturing signatures affectingcircular profiles were considered, together with the number of points necessary for areliable estimation of implementation uncertainty.

Keywords

Uncertaintygeometrical product specification and verificationcoordinate measuring machineroundnessform error
Type
Research Article
Information
International Journal of Metrology and Quality Engineering , Volume 4 , Issue 3 , 2013 , pp. 163 - 168
Copyright
© EDP Sciences 2014

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Srinivasan, V., Standardizing the specification, verification, and exchange of product geometry: Research, status and trends, Comput. Aided Des. 40, 738–749 (2008) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ISO 12181-1, Geometrical product specifications (GPS) – Roundness – Part 1: Vocabulary and parameters of roundness (2011)
ISO 12181-2, Geometrical product specifications (GPS) – Roundness – Part 2: Specification operators (2011)
Desta, M.T., Feng, H.-Y., OuYang, D., Characterization of general systematic form errors for circular features, Int. J. Mach. Tools Manufact. 43, 1069–1078 (2003) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ISO 11562, Geometrical Product Specifications (GPS) – Surface texture: Profile method – Metrological characteristics of phase correct filters (1996)
Changcai Cui, S.F., Fugui, H., Research on the uncertainties from different form error evaluation methods by CMM sampling, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 43, 136–145 (2009) Google Scholar
Efron, B., Bootstrap Methods: Another Look at the Jackknife, Ann. Statist. 7, 1–26 (1979) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
JCGM 100, Evaluation of Measurement Data – Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement (GUM, 2008)
Farooqui, S.A., Doiron, T., Sahay, C., Uncertainty analysis of cylindricity measurements using bootstrap method, Measurement 42, 524–531 (2009) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ISO 17450-2, Geometrical product specifications (GPS) – General concepts – Part 2: Basic tenets, specifications, operators, uncertainties and ambiguities (2012)
Cho, N., Tu, J., Roundness modeling of machined parts for tolerance analysis, Precis. Eng. 25, 35–47 (2001) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henke, R.P. et al., Methods for evaluation of systematic geometric deviations in machined parts and their relationships to process variables, Precis. Eng. 23, 273–292 (1999) CrossRefGoogle Scholar