Balasubramanian Muralikrishnan

ASME B89.4.19 Performance Evaluation Tests and Geometric Misalignments in Laser Trackers.

Small and unintended offsets, tilts, and eccentricity of the mechanical and optical components in laser trackers introduce systematic errors in the measured spherical coordinates (angles and range readings) and possibly in the calculated lengths of reference artifacts. It is desirable that the tests described in the ASME B89.4.19 Standard [1] be sensitive to these geometric misalignments so that any resulting systematic errors are identified during performance evaluation. In this paper, we present some analysis, using error models and numerical simulation, of the sensitivity of the length measurement system tests and two-face system tests in the B89.4.19 Standard to misalignments in laser trackers. We highlight key attributes of the testing strategy adopted in the Standard and propose new length measurement system tests that demonstrate improved sensitivity to some misalignments. Experimental results with a tracker that is not properly error corrected for the effects of the misalignments validate claims regarding the proposed new length tests.

RECIST versus volume measurement in medical CT using ellipsoids of known size.

Two hundred eighty three uniaxial ellipsoids with sizes from 4 mm to 11 mm were measured with a coordinate measuring matching (CMM) and also scanned using a medical computed tomography (CT) machine. Their volumes were determined by counting voxels over a threshold, as well as using equivalent volumes from the length given by the RECIST 1.1 criterion (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors). The volumetric measurements yield an order of magnitude reduction in residuals compared to the CMM measurements than the residuals of the RECIST measurements also compared to the CMM measurements.

Measuring Scale Errors in a Laser Tracker's Horizontal Angle Encoder Through Simple Length Measurement and Two-Face System Tests.

We describe a method to estimate the scale errors in the horizontal angle encoder of a laser tracker in this paper. The method does not require expensive instrumentation such as a rotary stage or even a calibrated artifact. An uncalibrated but stable length is realized between two targets mounted on stands that are at tracker height. The tracker measures the distance between these two targets from different azimuthal positions (say, in intervals of 20° over 360°). Each target is measured in both front face and back face. Low order harmonic scale errors can be estimated from this data and may then be used to correct the encoder’s error map to improve the tracker’s angle measurement accuracy. We have demonstrated this for the second order harmonic in this paper. It is important to compensate for even order harmonics as their influence cannot be removed by averaging front face and back face measurements whereas odd orders can be removed by averaging. We tested six trackers from three different manufacturers. Two of those trackers are newer models introduced at the time of writing of this paper. For older trackers from two manufacturers, the length errors in a 7.75 m horizontal length placed 7 m away from a tracker were of the order of ± 65 μm before correcting the error map. They reduced to less than ± 25 μm after correcting the error map for second order scale errors. Newer trackers from the same manufacturers did not show this error. An older tracker from a third manufacturer also did not show this error.

Geometric Effects When Measuring Small Holes With Micro Contact Probes

A coordinate measuring machine with a suitably small probe can be used to measure micro-features such as the diameter and form of small holes (often about 100 μm in diameter). When measuring small holes, the clearance between the probe tip and the part is sometimes nearly as small as other characteristic lengths (such as probe deflection or form errors) associated with the measurement. Under these circumstances, the basic geometry of the measurement is much different than it is for the measurement of a macroscopic object. Various geometric errors are greatly magnified, and consequently sources of error that are totally irrelevant when measuring macroscopic artifacts can become important. In this article we discuss errors associated with misalignment or non-orthogonality of the probe axes, probe-tip radius compensation, and mechanical filtering.

Dimensional metrology of bipolar fuel cell plates using laser spot triangulation probes

As in any engineering component, manufacturing a bipolar fuel cell plate for a polymer electrolyte membrane (PEM) hydrogen fuel cell power stack to within its stated design tolerances is critical in achieving the intended function. In a bipolar fuel cell plate, the dimensional features of interest include channel width, channel height, channel parallelism, side wall taper, straightness of the bottom or side walls, plate parallelism, etc. Such measurements can be performed on coordinate measuring machines (CMMs) with micro-probes that can access the narrow channels. While CMM measurements provide high accuracy (less than 1 µm), they are often very slow (taking several hours to measure a single plate) and unsuitable for the manufacturing environment. In this context, we describe a system for rapid dimensional measurement of bipolar fuel cell plates using two laser spot triangulation probes that can achieve comparable accuracies to those of a touch probe CMM, while offering manufacturers the possibility for 100% part inspection. We discuss the design of the system, present our approach to calibrating system parameters, present validation data, compare bipolar fuel cell plate measurement results with those obtained using a Mitutoyo UMAP (see footnote 1) fiber probe CMM, and finally describe the uncertainty in channel height and width measurements.

Assessing ranging errors as a function of azimuth in laser trackers and tracers

Tilt and radial error motion of a laser tracker head as it spins about the two rotation axes result in small but measurable ranging and angle errors. The laser tracer, on the other hand, measures range with respect to the center of a high quality stationary sphere. It is therefore not expected to be influenced by the radial error motions of the carriage that carries the optics and the source, but the form error of the reference sphere and possibly the eccentricity in its placement with respect to the circular path traced by the carriage will be contributors to the ranging errors. In this paper, we describe experiments to assess the magnitude of these ranging errors as a function of the azimuth angle in different laser trackers and a laser tracer.

Performance evaluation of laser trackers

The American Society for Mechanical Engineers (ASME) recently released the ASME B89.4.19 Standard [1] on performance evaluation of spherical coordinate instruments such as laser trackers. At the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), we can perform the complete set of tests described in the Standard, and have done so for a variety of laser trackers. We outline the tests described in the Standard, discuss our capabilities at the large-scale coordinate metrology group, and present results from B89.4.19 tests conducted on a few trackers. We also outline an analysis approach that may be used to evaluate the sensitivity of any measurement, including the tests described in the B89.4.19 Standard, to different geometric misalignments in trackers. We discuss how this approach may be useful in determining optimal placement of reference lengths to be most sensitive to different geometric misalignments.

Area measurement of knife-edge and cylindrical apertures using ultra-low force contact fibre probe on a CMM

Several radiometric and photometric measurements depend on high accuracy area measurement of precision apertures. Some apertures have sharp edges and are generally measured optically. At the Precision Engineering Division of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), we have developed a contact fibre (fiber) probe for diameter and form measurement of micro-holes (holes of size 100??m or larger). This probe exerts extremely small forces, under 5??N, and can therefore be used on knife-edge apertures without causing edge damage. We have measured the diameter and roundness of three knife-edge and one cylindrical apertures with this probe. The uncertainty in diameter ranges from 0.06??m (k = 1) to 0.17??m (k = 1). The uncertainty contributions from the probing system and machine positioning are together only 35 nm (k = 1). The largest contributors to the diameter uncertainty are the overall form (sampling uncertainty) and surface finish (mechanical filtering due to finite probe size) of the aperture.

Fiber Deflection Probe Uncertainty Analysis for Micro Holes

Abstract: We have recently reported on a new probe, the Fiber Deflection Probe (FDP), for diameter and form measurement of large aspect ratio micro-holes (100 qm nominal diameter, 5 mm deep). In this paper, we briefly review the measurement principle of the FDP. Then, we discuss different error sources and present an uncertainty budget for diameter measurements. Some error sources are specific to our fiber probe such as imaging uncertainty, uncertainty in determining calibration factor, and misalignment of the two optical-axes. There are other sources of error that are common to traditional coordinate metrology such as master ball diameter error, tilt in holes axis, temperature effects etc. Our analysis indicates an expanded uncertainty of only 0.07 qm on diameter.

Evaluation of a laser scanner for large volume coordinate metrology: a comparison of results before and after factory calibration

Large volume laser scanners are increasingly being used for a variety of dimensional metrology applications. Methods to evaluate the performance of these scanners are still under development and there are currently no documentary standards available. This paper describes the results of extensive ranging and volumetric performance tests conducted on a large volume laser scanner. The results demonstrated small but clear systematic errors that are explained in the context of a geometric error model for the instrument. The instrument was subsequently returned to the manufacturer for factory calibration. The ranging and volumetric tests were performed again and the results are compared against those obtained prior to the factory calibration.