[go: up one dir, main page]

WO2011110568A1 - Procédé de validation d'un résultat de mesure d'un appareil de mesure de coordonnées - Google Patents

Procédé de validation d'un résultat de mesure d'un appareil de mesure de coordonnées Download PDF

Info

Publication number
WO2011110568A1
WO2011110568A1 PCT/EP2011/053482 EP2011053482W WO2011110568A1 WO 2011110568 A1 WO2011110568 A1 WO 2011110568A1 EP 2011053482 W EP2011053482 W EP 2011053482W WO 2011110568 A1 WO2011110568 A1 WO 2011110568A1
Authority
WO
WIPO (PCT)
Prior art keywords
validation
measuring
limit
points
determined
Prior art date
Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
Ceased
Application number
PCT/EP2011/053482
Other languages
German (de)
English (en)
Inventor
Ulrich Staaden
Current Assignee (The listed assignees may be inaccurate. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation or warranty as to the accuracy of the list.)
Carl Zeiss Industrielle Messtechnik GmbH
Original Assignee
Carl Zeiss Industrielle Messtechnik GmbH
Priority date (The priority date is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the date listed.)
Filing date
Publication date
Application filed by Carl Zeiss Industrielle Messtechnik GmbH filed Critical Carl Zeiss Industrielle Messtechnik GmbH
Publication of WO2011110568A1 publication Critical patent/WO2011110568A1/fr
Anticipated expiration legal-status Critical
Ceased legal-status Critical Current

Links

Classifications

    • G—PHYSICS
    • G01—MEASURING; TESTING
    • G01B—MEASURING LENGTH, THICKNESS OR SIMILAR LINEAR DIMENSIONS; MEASURING ANGLES; MEASURING AREAS; MEASURING IRREGULARITIES OF SURFACES OR CONTOURS
    • G01B21/00—Measuring arrangements or details thereof, where the measuring technique is not covered by the other groups of this subclass, unspecified or not relevant
    • G01B21/02—Measuring arrangements or details thereof, where the measuring technique is not covered by the other groups of this subclass, unspecified or not relevant for measuring length, width, or thickness
    • G01B21/04—Measuring arrangements or details thereof, where the measuring technique is not covered by the other groups of this subclass, unspecified or not relevant for measuring length, width, or thickness by measuring coordinates of points
    • G01B21/045—Correction of measurements

Definitions

  • the present invention relates to a method for validating a multiple measurement points having measurement result of a coordinate measuring machine.
  • Such a method is known for example from the document DE 199 00 737 AI.
  • Coordinate measuring machines are used today in many areas of industrial technology to measure workpieces. Fields of application arise, for example, in the field of quality control or in the field of reverse engineering, which involves detecting the dimensions of a known workpiece as precisely as possible, in order then to draw conclusions about the manufacturing process and to reconstruct the workpiece as identical as possible. Coordinate measuring machines have a sensor which is movable as a rule. Alternatively, coordinate measuring machines are available in which the sensor is fixed and the workpiece is moved past the sensor. These are then usually used to check a certain type of workpieces in large quantities.
  • the senor is pivotally mounted on a rotary / swivel element about all three spatial axes, wherein the rotary / swivel element itself can be moved in turn in a measuring range, so that by means of the sensor, the workpiece at all points can be detected in any spatial direction.
  • the senor may be an optical sensor, but in the present case, in particular tactile sensors are considered, which touch the workpiece by means of a mounted in a probe stylus and from the position of the rotary / pivot member and the deflection of the stylus in the probe to the probing position.
  • the surface may be a plane of the workpiece surface that is to be checked to see if it is actually planar, or it may be, for example, a cylindrical surface created by a bore and then checked for actual the required diameter is present.
  • the stylus of a probe enters the depression during a scanning process or "jumps" over the elevations. Also during these processes, measuring points are detected, which then have to be filtered out of the measurement result to be evaluated, since they do not characterize the actual surface to be scanned and thus falsify the measurement result.
  • overshoots and undershoots are critical, which occur during a scanning process at the beginning and at the end of a survey or a depression.
  • a selected geometric element for example a circle
  • a predetermined pass condition for example as a minimum circle, as an enveloping circle or as a circle in the amount of all measuring points. Measuring points that differ by a certain amount from the equivalent element thus approximated should be sorted out as invalid measuring points.
  • the approximation with an absolute minimum straight line can not lead to the desired result, for example, in the case of several grooves crossing the path of a scanning process.
  • the use of an absolute minimum line leads to obtain a straight line with the actual orientation by the approximation, the approximation by means of an absolute minimum line ignores largely deviations from the ideal or actual geometry. If there are more measuring points on the scanned workpiece surface than measuring points in the groove, then the approximated straight line runs on the surface to be scanned. If, however, the other way round is exactly the same, ie more measuring points were recorded in a groove than on the surface to be scanned, the approximated straight line runs in the groove.
  • US 5,724,745 suggests, in addition to the coordinates of the measuring points, to use variables such as the deflection of the probe or the speed of movement of the probe at the time of detection of the corresponding measuring point in order to subject the measurement results to additional filtering.
  • the publication WO 2008/074989 proposes to skip existing grooves in a surface to be scanned by means of appropriate control specifications. This means that the stylus lifts before the start of a groove from the surface to be scanned and restarts on the surface when the groove and the stylus were passed to each other over. At the same time it is proposed to switch a signal that causes detected during the lifting of the stylus measuring points are marked from the outset as invalid. However, this procedure assumes that the position of the grooves in the surface to be scanned is known in advance.
  • an object of the present invention an improved method for validating a plurality Specify measuring points having measuring results of a coordinate measuring machine, which provides a validated measurement result in particular in existing in the geometry to be measured depressions and / or surveys without the position of these depressions or surveys must be known in advance.
  • the validation limit is therefore not necessarily a certain threshold, which is applied to a still to be determined geometry, but just the opposite, the geometry is required and the position of the validation limit to this setpoint geometry is determined or approximated.
  • the flexible setting of the validation limits relative to a known desired geometry also makes it possible to reliably filter measurements deviations or elevations without knowledge of the position of the depressions or elevations. As described in detail below, can the validation limits to be determined are set appropriately during the course of the procedure.
  • a coordinate measuring device with a sensor for measuring a workpiece and an evaluation device is proposed, which is characterized in that the evaluation device validates a measurement result of the sensor by means of a method according to the first aspect of the invention.
  • a computer program comprising program code means adapted to perform all the steps of a method according to the first aspect of the invention when the computer program is executed on a computer.
  • the coordinate measuring machine according to the second aspect of the invention and the computer program according to the third aspect of the invention therefore have the same advantages as the method according to the first aspect of the invention.
  • the validation limit is determined by determining an extreme point outside or inside the target geometry whose distance in normal directions is farthest from the desired geometry, and this distance is reduced by a predetermined distance to a validation boundary distance so that the validation boundary distance validation boundary extends in parallel to the desired geometry.
  • Whether the extreme point lies within or outside the desired geometry depends on whether elevations or depressions in or on the workpiece be expected. For depressions, an extreme value point lying within the setpoint geometry is determined, and in the case of elevations, an extreme point point lying outside the setpoint geometry is determined. Of course, it can also be provided that first a validation boundary within the desired geometry, ie for depressions, is determined and then a validation limit outside the desired geometry for surveys is determined.
  • a validation limit is defined which extends through the measuring point furthest from the desired geometry parallel to the desired geometry. This distance of the validation boundary from the desired geometry is then reduced by a predetermined distance.
  • the measure of the predetermined distance then influences how many measurement points are determined to be invalid, ie how rigorously the validation is performed. It has been proven to set the predetermined distance relative to a true immersion depth (t 0 ).
  • the true immersion depth corresponds to the distance by which a stylus can dip into the desired geometry to the maximum extent. As a rule, the true immersion depth corresponds to the greatest depth of a groove present in the desired geometry. The same is true for surveys.
  • the predetermined distance can thus be set, for example, to half the true immersion depth.
  • a final validation limit is determined by an average of the distances of all measuring points is formed whose distance in the normal direction to the desired geometry is greater than the validation limit distance, and that the mean by a predetermined distance to a final validation boundary distance is reduced such that the final validation limit in the validation boundary distance extends parallel to the target geometry.
  • an improved validation can be provided, since this is suitable for marking even more measuring points as invalid.
  • all measuring points are determined whose distance in the normal direction to the desired geometry is greater than the validation limit distance. In other words, all measurement points that are farther from the target geometry than the validation limit are identified. From the distances of these measurement points, the mean value is formed, which is correspondingly closer to the desired geometry than the extreme value point, which was initially used to determine the validation boundary distance. If this mean value by the predetermined distance, for example, t is 0/2 is reduced, so that the final validation boundaries distance is closer to the desired geometry as the validation limits removal or the original or first validation distance limits. Accordingly, more measurement points are flagged as invalid and the validation leads to a better result.
  • the validation limit is determined by the measured values are approximated with a replacement element, the geometric shape of which corresponds to the desired geometry, and the replacement element forms the validation boundary, where before determining the validation limit, it is determined that a normal direction of the replacement element corresponds to a normal direction of the target geometry.
  • the validation limit is determined by means of one of the known approximation methods.
  • This procedure differs from methods known from the prior art, according to which a reference element, ie the element relative to which the validation limit is determined, for example, by means of a specific distance, is determined by approximation.
  • This element referred to herein as desired geometry, is known and defined from the outset according to the present method. If, for example, a surface is present which is penetrated by grooves, a set of measuring points is obtained in which a plurality of measuring points lie on the surface to be measured and a plurality of measuring points lie within the grooves.
  • a minimum straight line ie a straight line which has a minimum distance from the measuring points
  • a straight line which runs somewhere between the bottom of the grooves and the surface to be measured. This line can then be used as a validation limit.
  • the normal direction By defining the normal direction as a further boundary condition, it is avoided that the replacement element has a different orientation than the surface to be measured.
  • the replacement element may thus be, for example, a minimum element or an absolute minimum element.
  • the respective property of the measuring points is a position relative to the validation limit, and that a measurement point is determined to be invalid when the validation boundary between the measuring point and the desired geometry is.
  • the validation limit in this case then forms a limit up to which measurement points are considered valid. Measurement points that deviate from the target geometry further than the validation limit are considered to be invalid. In yet a further development, it can be provided that intersections of a measurement curve connecting the measurement points with the validation boundary are determined, and that measurement points in regions defined relative to the intersection points are determined to be invalid measurement points.
  • a curve which roughly describes the movement of a scanning element which touches the surface to be measured, for example a probe ball.
  • the intersections of this curve with the validation limit can be determined. Since a probe ball always moves into a depression, for example a groove, and moves out of it again or moves up to and from an elevation, the points of intersection roughly mark the beginning and the end of an elevation or depression. Since, due to oscillatory movements, the measuring points just before and shortly after these elevations and depressions can not regularly be used for validation, it can be defined, for example, that all measuring points located 5 mm before or after an intersection are determined to be invalid. The direction of the specific distance is usually parallel to the desired geometry.
  • the defined ranges are thus determined only on the basis of the previously determined validation limit and the measurement curve.
  • the target geometry has no direct influence on the position of the defined areas. Rather, an actual geometry represented by the measurement curve of the workpiece to be measured has a direct influence on the position of the defined areas.
  • the defined areas are determined depending on an actual geometry of the workpiece to be measured. Thus, the defined areas are determined, wherein a location of obstacles, especially elevations or depressions, may be previously unknown. In particular, no obstacles, in particular elevations or depressions, are defined in the desired geometry.
  • the desired geometry can only be formed from a basic geometric shape, such as a circle, an ellipse or a cylinder, in particular a cylinder with a circular base. Accordingly, it can be provided that the defined regions are defined with a distance value before and / or behind a respective intersection.
  • the validation boundary is determined by defining a cone limit angle, and the respective property of the measurement points is the direction of a probing force of a tactile sensor detecting the measurement points, and that the measuring points where the detection of the direction of the probing force is outside the cone limit angle are determined as invalid measuring points.
  • the direction of the probing force during a scanning operation is determined by vector addition of the normal direction probing force and the sliding frictional force acting on the surface between the workpiece and the probe element.
  • a cone limit angle of about 11 ° ie the angle between the conical surface and the normal is about 11 °, is suitable for providing a sufficiently good validation result.
  • the cone angle can also be made smaller in order to exclude more measuring points or be chosen larger in order to exclude fewer measuring points.
  • the cone boundary angle can thus be in a range between 0 ° and 45 °, in particular between 5 ° and 30 °.
  • the abovementioned possibilities for determining the validation limit can be applied not only alternatively but also cumulatively.
  • the individual developments can be carried out simultaneously or in succession. For example, it may be provided to first determine a validation limit by means of an extreme value point, so that one obtains a validation limit which extends in the validation boundary distance parallel to the desired geometry and a first number of measurement points can be excluded by means of this validation limit. Subsequently, it can then be provided, for example, to mark further measurement points as invalid by means of a cone limit angle and a determination of the direction of the probing forces in the measurement points. Accordingly, other combination options are given. Furthermore, the method is applicable to all geometries and any free-form surfaces.
  • the geometries can be arbitrary two-dimensional geometric elements or arbitrary three-dimensional geometric bodies.
  • the desired geometry or nominal free-form surface must be known, but a position of recesses (grooves) or elevations on the desired geometries or predetermined free-form surfaces need not be known.
  • FIG. 1 shows an embodiment of a coordinate measuring machine according to a second aspect of the invention
  • FIG. 2 is a detail view of a probe in an embodiment of the coordinate measuring machine in Fig. 1,
  • Fig. 5 is another illustration for explaining the method in Fig. 4, and
  • Fig. 6 shows yet another embodiment of the method according to the first aspect of the invention.
  • the coordinate measuring machine 10 has a measuring surface 12 on which a workpiece 14 is arranged.
  • a portal 16 is movably mounted in a Y-direction.
  • a carriage 18 is movably mounted in an X direction.
  • a quill 20 is displaceably mounted in the carriage 18 in the Z direction.
  • a probe 22 which receives a stylus 24 with a Tastkugel 26 in itself.
  • the stylus 18 can be approached in any direction to the workpiece 14 and the workpiece 14 are touched with the probe ball 26.
  • scales 28, 29, 30 are provided, along which the portal 16, the carriage 18 and the sleeve 20 are moved.
  • the position of the portal 16, the carriage 18 and the quill 20 can be determined on the basis of the scales 28, 29, 30.
  • the probe 22 has a further sensor (not shown), which can be designed active or passive measuring. By means of this sensor, a deflection of the stylus 18 relative to the probe 22 and the sleeve 20 can be determined, so that a position of the probe ball 26 is known.
  • the coordinate measuring machine 10 further comprises a control device 32, which may be formed, for example, as a conventional computer.
  • the control device 32 then has an output device 34 and an input device 36, so that a user can read results of measurements at the output device 34 or, for example, start a sequence program for a measurement process.
  • the input device 36 for example, various modifications with regard to the speed of the measuring process, the surfaces to be touched, etc., can be made.
  • an evaluation device 38 is provided, which is provided to evaluate the measurement data acquired by the coordinate measuring device 10 by means of a method described below.
  • the evaluation device 38 is shown as part of the control device 32, but in principle the evaluation device 38 can also be provided separately.
  • the control device 32 is capable of automatically measuring the workpiece 14.
  • an operating device 40 may be provided to perform a measuring operation manually.
  • a certain measuring operation can be taught or, in the event of failure of the control device 32, the control of the coordinate measuring machine 10 can be taken over manually.
  • the control device 32 may, as shown, have a cable connection to the other elements of the coordinate measuring machine 10, but it may also be wirelessly connected. Of course, it can also be provided that the control device 32 is an integral part of the remaining elements, for example, in the measuring surface 14 or in the portal 16 is arranged. There, the output device 34 or the input device 36 may be arranged.
  • Fig. 2 shows a simplified schematic representation of the basic operation of the probe 22.
  • the probe 22 is designed as an active probe, with which a probing force with which the probe ball 26, the workpiece 14 touches, can be controlled.
  • the probe 22 has a fixed part 40 and a movable part 42, which are connected to each other via two leaf springs 44, 46.
  • the leaf springs 44, 46 form a spring parallelogram, which allows movement of the part 42 in the direction of the arrow 48.
  • the stylus 24 can be deflected by a distance 50 from its rest position.
  • the reference numeral 24 ' the stylus 24 is shown schematically in the deflected position.
  • the deflection of the stylus 24 relative to the fixed part 40 may be the result of a probing of the workpiece 14.
  • the deflection of the stylus 24 is taken into account in the determination of the spatial coordinates of the probe ball 26.
  • the deflection of the stylus 24 can be generated at an active probe 22 using a measuring force generator.
  • a leg 51, 52 is arranged in each case.
  • the legs 51, 52 are parallel to the leaf springs 44, 46 and parallel to each other.
  • a sensor 54 shown here with a scale 55
  • a measuring force generator or measuring force generator 57 is arranged between the legs 51, 52.
  • the sensor 54 may be a plunger, a Hall sensor, a piezoresistive sensor or another sensor, with the aid of which the spatial deflection of the stylus 18 relative to the fixed part 40 can be determined.
  • the measuring force generator 57 may be, for example, a plunger coil, by means of which the two legs 51, 52 can be pulled against each other or pushed apart.
  • the probe 22 is correspondingly also connected to the control device 64 so that it can read on the one hand sizes such as the deflection and the probing force and on the other hand can control the measuring force generator 57.
  • the probe 22 allows only a deflection of the stylus 18 in the direction of the arrow 10.
  • a probe 22 typically allows a corresponding deflection in two other orthogonal directions in space
  • An embodiment of such a probe 22 is described for example in the document DE 44 24 225 AI, the disclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference.
  • the invention is not limited to this special probe 22 and can also be realized with other measuring or switching probes and sensor heads of other measuring systems, in particular passive probes.
  • a probe head 22 or sensor head of the kind shown in greatly simplified form in FIG. 2 generally has a receptacle on which the stylus 18 or another sensor is interchangeably attached.
  • FIG. 3 shows a diagram 60 in which the distance s is plotted on the abscissa.
  • f deviations or positions are plotted in the normal direction.
  • measuring points 62, 64 are obtained which were recorded from left to right in the course of a measuring operation in the illustrated diagram 60. Accordingly, a set of points with the coordinates (s, f) results from the measurement points 62, 64.
  • These measuring points 62, 64 should now be subjected to a validation, ie valid measuring points 62 should be distinguished from invalid measuring points 64.
  • a desired geometry 66 which corresponds to the expected position of a surface of the workpiece 14. In the present case, this is a level to be checked to see if it is flat. Accordingly, the desired geometry 66 is a straight line.
  • the workpiece 14 to be scanned has a groove 68, which represents a depression in the surface to be scanned. Accordingly, a probe ball 26 during scanning can not follow the expected course of the desired geometry 66, but immerse in the groove 68.
  • an extreme value point 70 is first searched. In the present case this is the lowest point 70 in the ordinate direction. For surveys, it would be the highest point 70 'in the ordinate direction f.
  • a distance to the desired geometry in the normal direction 72 is determined in a normal direction 72.
  • the extreme value point 70 is located exactly at the bottom of the groove 68, so that its removal in the normal direction 72 corresponds to a true immersion depth 74 of a probe ball 26 into the workpiece 14.
  • the distance of the extreme value point 70 to the desired geometry 66 in the normal direction 72 may also be less than the true immersion depth 74.
  • This distance of the extreme point 70 from the desired geometry 66 is reduced by a predetermined distance 76. In the present example, it is determined that this predetermined distance 76 corresponds to half the true immersion depth 74.
  • a validation limit distance 77 ie the distance of a validation boundary 78 from the desired geometry 66. It is defined that the validation boundary 78 extends parallel to the desired geometry 66, ie in the present case the validation boundary 78 is also a straight line that extends in the validation boundary distance
  • All measured value points 64, for which the validation limit 78 extends between their location and the desired geometry 66, are marked as invalid measuring points 64. In other words, all those measuring points 64 that are farther than the validation limit 78 from the desired geometry 66 are invalid. Optionally, it can be determined that measurement points that are exactly on the validation boundary 78 are valid or invalid.
  • an average value of the invalid measured values 64 is formed in the ordinate direction.
  • This mean value 80 can then also be reduced by the predetermined distance 76 ', which may possibly deviate from the predetermined distance 76, in the direction of the desired geometry 66, so that a final validation limit distance 77' results. Accordingly, a final validation limit 82 can be found which extends in the validation boundary distance 77 'parallel to the desired geometry 66.
  • an average value of the measuring points 64 which are now marked as invalid, may again be formed and the above be repeated process described. In this way, a kind of iterative process can be formed. However, it is preferably provided to form an average of the invalid measuring points 64 only once and then to set the final validation limit 82.
  • the method described above can also be carried out for surveys.
  • the method described above can be carried out once again for depressions and once for elevations, so that a corresponding validation can also be carried out for workpieces 14 which have both elevations and depressions.
  • FIG. 4 shows a further embodiment for the determination of invalid measuring points 64.
  • the entry of the individual measuring points was not made in FIG. 4 for reasons of clarity.
  • defined areas 84, 85 are provided, wherein it is determined that measurement points 64 located in the areas 84, 85 are determined to be invalid.
  • the defined regions 84, 85 are intended to mark existing measurement points as invalid, in particular at the beginning and at the end of the groove 68, since these regions are predominantly characterized by overshoots or undershoots and have a corresponding course of measurement points 64 which is not to be used ,
  • FIG. 5 shows a measurement curve or a measurement result 87 for this purpose, which is obtained by connecting the measurement points 82, 84 in chronological order.
  • the validation limit 78 is to be determined, for example by means of one of the preceding methods, or by approximating a replacement element 88, for example, as a minimum straight line with a defined normal direction 72.
  • the further boundary condition of the predefined normal direction 72 avoids that the minimum straight line is approximated obliquely to the desired geometry 66. In this way, it is achieved in any case that the additional element 88 runs parallel to the desired geometry 66.
  • validation limit 78 may also have been determined in one of the other ways described above.
  • intersections 91, 92 between the validation boundary 78 and the measurement curve 87 are determined.
  • intersections 91, 92 give an indication of the approximate location of the groove 68 by describing their beginning and end in approximately.
  • the defined regions 84, 85 are defined, in the present example, for example, by defining a distance in the negative s direction starting from the intersection point 91 and starting from the intersection point 92, a distance in positive s direction is defined. All measuring points 64 whose s-coordinates lie within these defined regions 84, 85 are now marked as invalid.
  • the described method can also be cumulated with the methods described above, for example the determination of invalid measuring points 64 based on a validation limit 78 determined on the basis of an extreme value point at a predetermined distance. In this way, measuring points produced reliably in the groove 68 and at the edges of the groove due to overshoots or undershoots can be identified and excluded from a further evaluation, which leads to the finally validated measuring curve 89.
  • Fig. 6 shows another embodiment of the validation method which can be used alternatively or cumulatively to the embodiments presented above.
  • a cone limit angle 94 is set to the normal direction 72 of the desired geometry 66, it being true that only those measuring points 62 are considered valid, the detection of the direction of the contact force between the Tastkugel 26 and the workpiece 14 was within this Kegelgrenzwinkels 94.
  • a vector 96 of the probing force at the detection time point must also be recorded.
  • the probe shown in Fig. 2 is suitable.
  • the direction of the probing force is interrogated and compared with the cone boundary angle 94. Now only the measuring points 62 are determined to be valid, in which the direction 96 of the probing force is within the cone limit angle 94.
  • measuring points which are detected in a free-floating probe ball 26 have a significantly different vector 96 than those measuring points which are recorded in the event of contact between the workpiece 14 and the probe ball 26
  • a suitable one can also be used here Validation of the measuring points 62, 64 make. It is also understood for this embodiment that it can be used not only alternatively but also cumulatively with the embodiments described above.

Landscapes

  • Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
  • General Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
  • Length Measuring Devices With Unspecified Measuring Means (AREA)
  • A Measuring Device Byusing Mechanical Method (AREA)

Abstract

La présente invention concerne un procédé de validation d'un résultat de mesure (87), présentant plusieurs points de mesure (62, 64), d'un appareil de mesure de coordonnées (10). Selon l'invention, il est prévu de déterminer une limite de validation (78) par rapport à une géométrie théorique connue (66) d'une pièce (14) à mesurer et de déterminer des points de mesure non valables (64) et valables (62) sur la base d'une propriété en cause des points de mesure (62, 64) par rapport à la limite de validation (78). La présente invention concerne également un appareil de mesure de coordonnées et un programme d'ordinateur.
PCT/EP2011/053482 2010-03-11 2011-03-08 Procédé de validation d'un résultat de mesure d'un appareil de mesure de coordonnées Ceased WO2011110568A1 (fr)

Applications Claiming Priority (2)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
DE102010011841.9A DE102010011841B4 (de) 2010-03-11 2010-03-11 Verfahren zur Validierung eines Messergebnisses eines Koordinatenmessgeräts
DE102010011841.9 2010-03-11

Publications (1)

Publication Number Publication Date
WO2011110568A1 true WO2011110568A1 (fr) 2011-09-15

Family

ID=44041721

Family Applications (1)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
PCT/EP2011/053482 Ceased WO2011110568A1 (fr) 2010-03-11 2011-03-08 Procédé de validation d'un résultat de mesure d'un appareil de mesure de coordonnées

Country Status (2)

Country Link
DE (1) DE102010011841B4 (fr)
WO (1) WO2011110568A1 (fr)

Cited By (1)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
WO2012148520A2 (fr) 2011-02-11 2012-11-01 Quality Vision International, Inc. Évaluation de tolérance à points mesurés réduits

Families Citing this family (1)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US11821758B2 (en) * 2021-03-25 2023-11-21 Pratt & Whitney Canada Corp. Validation of a measurement machine

Citations (7)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
DE4424225A1 (de) 1994-07-09 1996-01-11 Zeiss Carl Fa Tastkopf für Koordinatenmeßgeräte
US5724745A (en) 1994-09-23 1998-03-10 Carl-Zeiss-Stiftung Method and manually guide coordinate measuring apparatus for measuring a workpiece
DE19735975A1 (de) 1997-08-19 1999-03-04 Leitz Brown & Sharpe Mestechni Verfahren zur rechnerischen Vibrationsunterdrückung bei Koordinatenmeßgeräten sowie Koordinatenmeßgerät zur Durchführung des Verfahrens
DE19900737A1 (de) 1999-01-12 2000-07-27 Zeiss Carl Fa Verfahren zur Korrektur der Meßergebnisse eines Koordinatenmeßgerätes und Koordinatenmeßgerät
DE102004032822A1 (de) * 2004-07-06 2006-03-23 Micro-Epsilon Messtechnik Gmbh & Co Kg Verfahren zur Verarbeitung von Messwerten
WO2008074989A1 (fr) 2006-12-19 2008-06-26 Renishaw Plc Procédé de mesure d'une pièce à l'aide d'une machine-outil
DE102007006192A1 (de) * 2007-02-07 2008-08-21 Advanced Mask Technology Center Gmbh & Co. Kg Verfahren und Vorrichtung zur Ermittlung einer Vielzahl von Messwerten

Family Cites Families (2)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
DE10242852A1 (de) * 2002-09-14 2004-03-25 Technische Universität Ilmenau Abteilung Forschungsförderung und Technologietransfer Verfahren zur Minimierung des Einflusses von Störsignalen bei der Formelementeberechnung aus Koordinatenpunkten
DE102005037837A1 (de) * 2005-08-08 2007-02-15 Daimlerchrysler Ag Verfahren und Vorrichtung zur Erstellung eines Messplans zur Vermessung eines 3D-Messobjekts

Patent Citations (7)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
DE4424225A1 (de) 1994-07-09 1996-01-11 Zeiss Carl Fa Tastkopf für Koordinatenmeßgeräte
US5724745A (en) 1994-09-23 1998-03-10 Carl-Zeiss-Stiftung Method and manually guide coordinate measuring apparatus for measuring a workpiece
DE19735975A1 (de) 1997-08-19 1999-03-04 Leitz Brown & Sharpe Mestechni Verfahren zur rechnerischen Vibrationsunterdrückung bei Koordinatenmeßgeräten sowie Koordinatenmeßgerät zur Durchführung des Verfahrens
DE19900737A1 (de) 1999-01-12 2000-07-27 Zeiss Carl Fa Verfahren zur Korrektur der Meßergebnisse eines Koordinatenmeßgerätes und Koordinatenmeßgerät
DE102004032822A1 (de) * 2004-07-06 2006-03-23 Micro-Epsilon Messtechnik Gmbh & Co Kg Verfahren zur Verarbeitung von Messwerten
WO2008074989A1 (fr) 2006-12-19 2008-06-26 Renishaw Plc Procédé de mesure d'une pièce à l'aide d'une machine-outil
DE102007006192A1 (de) * 2007-02-07 2008-08-21 Advanced Mask Technology Center Gmbh & Co. Kg Verfahren und Vorrichtung zur Ermittlung einer Vielzahl von Messwerten

Non-Patent Citations (1)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Title
FACHBUCHS WECKENMANN, GAWANDE: "Koordinatenmesstechnik", 80319, CARL HANSA VERLAG

Cited By (4)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
WO2012148520A2 (fr) 2011-02-11 2012-11-01 Quality Vision International, Inc. Évaluation de tolérance à points mesurés réduits
EP2673589A4 (fr) * 2011-02-11 2013-12-18 Quality Vision Internat Inc Évaluation de tolérance à points mesurés réduits
EP2673589A2 (fr) * 2011-02-11 2013-12-18 Quality Vision International Inc. Évaluation de tolérance à points mesurés réduits
EP2824415A1 (fr) 2011-02-11 2015-01-14 Quality Vision International Inc. Évaluation de tolérance avec réduction de points mesurés

Also Published As

Publication number Publication date
DE102010011841A1 (de) 2011-09-15
DE102010011841B4 (de) 2015-06-18

Similar Documents

Publication Publication Date Title
EP3240994B1 (fr) Détection d'écarts géométriques d'une commande de trajectoire dans un appareil de mesure de coordonnées ou dans une machine-outil
EP3286524B1 (fr) Procédé et dispositif permettant de déterminer les propriétés dimensionnelles effectives d'un objet à mesurer
EP3274654B1 (fr) Procédé, dispositif et produit programme d'ordinateur de détermination de propriétés en matière de dimension d'un objet mesuré
DE102014112396B4 (de) Verfahren zur Einzelpunktantastung eines Werkstücks und Koordinatenmessgerät
EP3403051B1 (fr) Procédé et dispositif pour définir des données de consigne pour un mesurage d'une pièce à mesurer au moyen d'un appareil de mesure de coordonnées et/ou pour évaluer des résultats de mesure d'un mesurage d'une pièce mesurée au moyen d'un appareil de mesure de coordonnées
DE102007011603B4 (de) Verfahren und Vorrichtung zum Bestimmen von Geometriedaten eines konischen Messobjekts
WO2011098487A1 (fr) Procédé pour le réglage d'un processus de mesure au moyen de surfaces virtuelles
EP3901574B1 (fr) Procédé et dispositif de détermination des points de mesure d'une bande de mesure adaptée à la mesure d'un objet de mesure au moyen d'un dispositif de mesure de coordonnés ainsi que programme
WO2002023292A9 (fr) Procede pour generer un programme de mesure destine a un appareil de mesure de coordonnees
WO1999059038A1 (fr) Appareil de mesure de coordonnees et procede pour en assurer la commande
DE19805155B4 (de) Verfahren zum Erzeugen von Steuerdaten für Koordinatenmeßgeräte
DE102010011841B4 (de) Verfahren zur Validierung eines Messergebnisses eines Koordinatenmessgeräts
DE102010006382B4 (de) Verfahren und Anordnung zum Betreiben von Koordinatenmessgeräten
EP1850089B1 (fr) Dispositif et procédé destinés à la mesure spatiale de pièces à usiner sur une machine-outil
DE102007007574B3 (de) Verfahren zum Ermitteln von Messstellen
DE102013101931B4 (de) Verfahren und Vorrichtung zum Vermessen eines Werkstücks
EP1377884B1 (fr) Appareil de mesure de coordonnees
EP3901563A1 (fr) Procédé et dispositif de détermination d'une stratégie de mesure permettant de mesurer un objet de mesure et programme
DE102015205566A1 (de) Kalibrierung eines an einem beweglichen Teil eines Koordinatenmessgeräts angebrachten taktilen Tasters
EP1893941B1 (fr) Procede et dispositif pour determiner des parametres geometriques d'un objet de mesure conique
DE102010008751A1 (de) Verfahren zum Regeln eines Messvorgangs mittels virtueller Oberflächen
DE102017108033A1 (de) Verfahren zur Messung von Koordinaten oder Eigenschaften einer Werkstückoberfläche
WO2005050133A1 (fr) Procede de mesure automatique a l'aide d'appareils de mesure de coordonnees
DE102008037441A1 (de) Verfahren zum Messen der Geometrie eines Werkstücks
DE102013207116A1 (de) Koordinatenmessgerät und Verfahren zur Steuerung eines Koordinatenmessgeräts

Legal Events

Date Code Title Description
121 Ep: the epo has been informed by wipo that ep was designated in this application

Ref document number: 11707176

Country of ref document: EP

Kind code of ref document: A1

NENP Non-entry into the national phase

Ref country code: DE

122 Ep: pct application non-entry in european phase

Ref document number: 11707176

Country of ref document: EP

Kind code of ref document: A1