Good Practice Guide - CMM Verification NPL PDF
Good Practice Guide - CMM Verification NPL PDF
Good Practice Guide - CMM Verification NPL PDF
42
CMM Verification
David Flack
Measurement Good Practice Guide No. 42
CMM Verification
David Flack
ABSTRACT
This guide covers performance assessment of CMM accuracy, use of everyday artefacts for
regular CMM checking, methods of monitoring machine performance between formal
verification intervals and traceability. It is an update of a guide first published in 2001.
© Crown Copyright 2011
Reproduced with the permission of the Controller of HMSO
and Queen's Printer for Scotland
July 2001
Updated July 2011
ISSN 1368-6550
Acknowledgements
The author would like to thank Alan Hatcher (formerly Mitutoyo Ltd) for supplying much of
the information given in this guide and Keith Bevan (formerly Mitutoyo Ltd), Mike
Crossman and John Cubis (UKAS) for providing useful technical input. Thanks also to
Dr G N Peggs (formerly NPL) and Dr R Angus (NPL) and all lead users who reviewed the
various drafts and last but not least the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) for funding
production of this guide as part of the 1999-2002 Length Programme (Project MPU 8/61.3).
The BIS 2008-2011 Engineering Measurement Programme funded the current revision.
Contents
Introduction.............................................................................................................................. 1
What this guide is about and what it is not....................................................................... 2
Introduction to ISO 10360 and this guide ........................................................................ 2
Co-ordinate measuring machines ....................................................................... 2
Structure of ISO 10360 ...................................................................................... 3
Note on optical CMMs ..................................................................................................... 3
Non-Cartesian CMMs ...................................................................................................... 4
Sources of CMM Error ........................................................................................................... 5
An introduction to CMM error sources ............................................................................ 6
ISO 10360 and CMM errors............................................................................................. 7
ISO 10360-2: 2009 CMMs used for measuring linear dimensions ...................................... 9
Objectives of ISO 10360-2............................................................................................. 10
An overview of ISO 10360............................................................................................. 10
What’s new in ISO 10360 .............................................................................................. 11
CMM test uncertainty..................................................................................................... 11
Limitations of ISO 10360............................................................................................... 12
Basic terminology................................................................................................................... 13
Material standard of size ................................................................................................ 14
Length measurement error of a CMM............................................................................ 15
Maximum permissible error of indication of a CMM for size measurement................. 16
Ram axis stylus tip offset ............................................................................................... 17
Symbols used in ISO 10360 ........................................................................................... 18
The acceptance test ................................................................................................................ 21
Preliminary actions......................................................................................................... 22
Environmental conditions............................................................................................... 22
Operating Conditions ..................................................................................................... 23
Workpiece loading effects.............................................................................................. 23
Checking the probing system prior to the ISO 10360-2 test .......................................... 23
Choice of measuring equipment..................................................................................... 24
Alternative artefacts........................................................................................................ 25
Laser interferometry with contact probing measured in a bi-directional manner26
Ball bars or ball plates measured in a bi-directional manner ........................... 26
Length measurement error with ram axis stylus tip offset of zero, E0 ........................... 27
Calculation of results...................................................................................................... 29
Length measurement error with ram axis stylus tip offset of 150 mm, E150 .................. 33
Repeatability range of the length measurement error..................................................... 33
Interpretation of the results............................................................................................. 33
Acceptance test................................................................................................. 33
Data rejection and repeated measurements ...................................................... 34
Reverification test ............................................................................................ 34
Acceptance test of the CMM probing system...................................................................... 35
Acceptance test of the CMM probing system ................................................................ 36
Probing error PFTU, MPE ................................................................................................... 36
Acceptance test procedure.............................................................................................. 37
Calculation of results...................................................................................................... 38
Interpretation of results................................................................................................... 39
Uncertainties........................................................................................................................... 41
Uncertainty of measurement........................................................................................... 42
Co-ordinate measuring machine test uncertainty ........................................................... 42
Periodic reverification ........................................................................................................... 45
Length measurement error.............................................................................................. 46
Single stylus probing error ............................................................................................. 46
Interim check of the CMM.................................................................................................... 47
Use of a purpose made test piece ................................................................................... 48
Use of a ball-ended bar................................................................................................... 50
A bar that can be kinematically located between a fixed reference sphere and the sphere
of the CMM probe stylus................................................................................................ 52
A circular reference object (for example a ring gauge).................................................. 54
Interim checks using a ball plate .................................................................................... 55
Interim checks using a hole plate ................................................................................... 56
Interim checks and the comparison to specifications ..................................................... 57
Interim probe check........................................................................................................ 57
Improving measurement confidence .................................................................................... 59
Similarity conditions ...................................................................................................... 60
An example using a calibrated workpiece...................................................................... 61
CMMs using multiple stylus probing systems..................................................................... 63
Fixed multi-probe and multi-stylus probing systems ..................................................... 64
Articulating probing systems.......................................................................................... 64
Assessment and reverification tests for CMMs with the axis of a rotary table as
the fourth axis......................................................................................................................... 67
Requirements for rotary tables ....................................................................................... 68
Error of indication ............................................................................................ 68
Environmental conditions ................................................................................ 68
Stylus system.................................................................................................... 68
Operating conditions ........................................................................................ 69
Acceptance and reverification tests ................................................................................ 69
Principles.......................................................................................................... 69
Measuring equipment....................................................................................... 69
Set up and procedure ........................................................................................ 69
Results .............................................................................................................. 72
Compliance with specifications ....................................................................... 72
Verification of large CMMs .................................................................................................. 73
Artefacts for verification of large CMMs....................................................................... 74
Use of laser interferometers............................................................................................ 74
Summary................................................................................................................................. 77
Glossary of terms ................................................................................................................... 79
Glossary of terms............................................................................................................ 80
Health and safety.................................................................................................................... 83
Mechanical hazards ........................................................................................................ 84
Hazards associated with laser illumination .................................................................... 84
Chemical hazards............................................................................................................ 84
Appendices.............................................................................................................................. 85
List of Figures
CMM Verification
Preface
The author hopes that after reading this Good Practice Guide you will be able to better
understand the specifications relating to co-ordinate measuring machines. The content is
written at a simpler technical level than many of the standard textbooks so that a wider
audience can understand it. I am not trying to replace a whole raft of good textbooks,
operator’s manuals, specifications and standards, rather present an overview of good
practice and techniques.
“Metrology is not just a process of measurement that is applied to an end product. It should
also be one of the considerations taken into account at the design stage. According to the
Geometrical Product Specification (GPS) model, tolerancing and uncertainty issues should
be taken into account during all stages of design, manufacture and testing. The most
compelling reason is that it is often considerably more expensive to re-engineer a product at
a later stage when it is found that it is difficult to measure, compared to designing at the start
with the needs of metrology in mind.” Professor Richard Leach 2003.
GOOD MEASUREMENT PRACTICE
There are six guiding principles to good measurement practice that have been defined by
NPL. They are:
The Right Measurements: Measurements should only be made to satisfy agreed and well-
specified requirements.
The Right Tools: Measurements should be made using equipment and methods that have
been demonstrated to be fit for purpose.
The Right People: Measurement staff should be competent, properly qualified and well
informed.
Regular Review: There should be both internal and independent assessment of the technical
performance of all measurement facilities and procedures.
his measurement good practice guide provides an overview of the ISO 10360 series of
T specification standards. It is an update to a guide first published in 2001 and has been
updated to reflect changes in the standards over the last ten years.
It is intended that this guide should give enough information so that the metrologist can
interpret the requirements of the international standards relating to co-ordinate measuring
machines. This guide will allow operators to interpret the results from third parties who have
verified their machine. It will also provide information to allow more advanced users to carry
out the tests themselves. This good practice guide is not intended to be an authoritative guide
to the standards and the primary reference should always be the standards themselves.
For the user, demonstrating traceability to national standards and estimating the accuracy of
measurements made with three dimensional CMMs is of importance for maintaining
confidence and reliability in the measurements.
The ISO 10360 series of standards detail the acceptance, reverification tests and interim
checks required to determine whether the CMM performs to the manufacturer’s stated
maximum permissible error of length measurement. However, even with these tests it is not
possible to make a statement about the length measurement capability of the machine due to
the complicated way in which the uncertainties associated with the CMM combine.
Therefore, the length measurement uncertainty derived from a limited sample of
measurements cannot be considered to be representative of all the possible length
measurement tasks and certainly not of the measurement tasks the CMM is capable of
performing. In effect the tests do not guarantee traceability of measurement for all
measurement tasks performed. The user should be aware of this important fact and develop
task-related measuring strategies for each measurement undertaken that will provide the
appropriate level of confidence in the overall result. Virtual CMMs, for instance Pundit1 and
those in Calypso and Quindos can meet this requirement. Further information on virtual
CMMs can be found in NPL report CMSC 01/00 Simulated Instruments and Uncertainty
Estimation A B Forbes and P M Harris and ISO 15530-4 Geometrical product specifications
(GPS). Coordinate measuring machines (CMM). Technique for determining the uncertainty
of measurement. Evaluating task-specific measurement uncertainty using simulation.
1
Website www.metrosage.com
3 Chapter 1
International Standard ISO 10360 covers CMM verification. This standard currently has six
parts:
Part 2 and part 5 have been updated since the last revision of this guide. Part 6 has been
added to this series of standards since this guide was last published.
This guide will concentrate on the tests listed in part 2 of the standard and will cover some
aspects of parts 3 and 5.
It is suggested that the reader regularly checks the catalogue on the ISO web site for further
information and to see when new standards are published.
In addition ISO/TS 23165: 2006 Geometrical product specifications (GPS) – Guidelines for
the evaluation of coordinate measuring machine (CMM) test uncertainty provides guidance
on how to calculate the uncertainty of measurement associated with the test.
• in the case of two dimensional sensors (no ram movement), an index 2D may be used
for indication, e.g. E0-2D;
• in the case of two dimensional systems, the number and location of the measurement
positions may be reduced;
• specifications for the magnification and illumination;
• artefact issues such as material and surface finish that affect the test results; and
4 Chapter 1
• bidirectional probing may or may not be possible depending on the artefact and
probing system.
The following parts of the standard are currently under development as of April 2011:
ISO 10360-7 Geometrical product specifications (GPS) – Acceptance and reverification tests
for coordinate measuring machines (CMMs) – Part 7: CMMs equipped with imaging probing
systems
Non-Cartesian CMMs
ISO 10360-2 does not explicitly apply to non-Cartesian CMMs, however, it may be applied
to non-Cartesian CMMs by mutual agreement.
Work is on-going within the relevant ISO technical committee (ISO/TC 213) on the
document ISO 10360-10 Geometrical Product Specifications (GPS) – Acceptance and
reverification tests for coordinate measuring systems (CMS) – part 10: Laser trackers for
measuring point-to-point distances.
Work is also under way in developing international standards for articulated arm CMMs
(AACMMs).
Sources of CMM
Error 2
• the accuracy of the components of the CMM - the guideways, the scales, the probe
system and the qualification sphere;
• the environment in which the CMM operates - the ambient temperature, temperature
gradients, humidity and vibration;
• the probing strategy used – the magnitude and direction of the probe force, the type of
probe stylus used and the measuring speed of the probe; and
• the characteristics of the workpiece – elasticity, surface roughness, hardness and the
mass of the component.
Computational errors are the errors in the estimated dimensions and form deviations of the
workpiece and are determined by:
Geometric errors of a CMM are either measured directly using laser interferometers and
specialist optics, such as those from a number of commercial suppliers or indirectly using
sequential multi-lateration using, for instance, the Etalon LaserTRACER. Once measured
these errors may be used to error correct the machine (computer-aided accuracy or CAA).
A CMM has twenty-one sources of kinematic error. Kinematic errors are errors in the
machine components due to imperfect manufacturing or alignment during assembly. The
straight-line motion of a moving component always involves six components of deviation
from the nominal path:
In addition there are the three squareness errors between pairs of axes.
7 Chapter 2
Calibrate or verify?
Three terms that are often confusingly interchanged when talking about CMMs are the terms
qualification, verification and calibration. CMM operators often erroneously talk about
calibrating the probe or getting the CMM calibrated to ISO 10360. To avoid confusion the
correct terms are listed below.
CMM verification – A task carried out at periodic intervals (often annually) to determine if
the CMM still meets the manufacturer’s specification.
CMM calibration – A task carried out on installation and then as necessary to determine the
magnitude of all the twenty-one kinematic error sources. Often referred to as error mapping a
CMM.
8 Chapter 2
ISO 10360-2: 2009
CMMs used for 3
measuring linear
dimensions
T
he main tests of a CMM are detailed in part two of the series of ISO standards. This
chapter aims to give the reader an overview of ISO 10360-2.
• to test the error of indication of a calibrated test length using a probing system without
any ram axis stylus tip offset;
• to test the error of indication of a calibrated test length using a probing system with a
specified ram axis stylus tip offset; and
• to test the repeatability of measuring a calibrated test length.
The benefits of these tests are that the measured result has a direct traceability to the unit of
length, the metre, and that the tests give information on how the CMM will perform on
similar length measurements.
Part 2 of ISO 10360 specifies performance requirements that can be assigned by the
manufacturer or the user of a CMM. It also specifies the manner of execution of the
acceptance and reverification tests to demonstrate the stated requirements, rules for proving
conformance, and applications for which the acceptance and reverification tests can be used.
The acceptance and verification tests of the CMM are essentially length-measuring tasks to
ensure that the tests conform, as closely as possible, to frequently performed measurement
procedures undertaken by the end user.
The probing error test is carried out at acceptance and reverification and is designed to assess
probing errors that are associated with probing systems operating in the discrete point
measuring mode. Because it is impossible to isolate probing errors from machine errors some
additional system errors, that have both static and dynamic origins inherent in the CMM, for
example, due to the CMM’s servo system, will also be measured by this test.
• The principle of the assessment method is to use a calibrated test length, traceable to
the metre, to establish whether the CMM is capable of measuring within the stated
maximum permissible error of length measurement for a CMM with a specified ram
axis stylus tip offset (both zero offset and 150 mm offset). Previously no offset was
specified.
• The calibrated test length may now be a ball bar or laser interferometer system.
• The single stylus probing test that appeared in ISO 10360-2: 2001 does not appear in
the current edition of ISO 10360-2. It has been moved to the new edition of ISO
10360-5 that will be replacing ISO 10360-5: 2000. ISO/PAS 12868 has been prepared
to allow the single stylus probing test to be available until the publication of the new
edition of ISO 10360-5. ISO 10360-5: 2010 has now been published and ISO/PAS
12868: 2009 cancelled.
• Many of the symbols used have changed and this is covered later in this guide.
This limitation stems from the definition of the test, which specifies the number of different
repeated measurements, and allows the test to be performed just once if the manufacturer's
environmental specifications are met. The rationale for this is the compromise to make the
test economically feasible, based on the educated experience that most CMM behaviour is
determined by this test, and the awareness that more extensive coverage would only be
achieved at an unacceptable cost of implementing the test.
Basic terminology
4
IN THIS CHAPTER Material standard of size
Error of indication
Maximum permissible error of indication of
a CMM for size measurement
Ram axis stylus tip offset
Symbols used in ISO 10360
14 Chapter 4
B efore describing the various tests and checks, the reader should be aware of some
basic terminology. For the exact definition, reference should be made to ISO 10360-1.
The user should be aware that some terms and definitions specified in ISO 10360-1
have been superseded by new definitions in ISO 10360-2.
Early versions of ISO 10360 strongly recommended that the material standard should be
either a step gauge (figure 1), end bar or a series of gauge blocks (figure 2) conforming to
ISO 3650 Geometrical Product Specifications (GPS) Length Standards Gauge blocks. The
material standard of size had to contain two or more nominally parallel planes, the distance
between the planes being specified.
The material standard of size used for the tests must be calibrated. The uncertainty of
calibration must be taken into consideration and the calibrations must be traceable to the
relevant national standard.
How much the part material changes size for a given temperature change is known as the
coefficient of linear thermal expansion. For a typical material such as steel this is expressed
as 11.6 × 10-6 ºC -1. To correct a length to 20 ºC use the following equation:
L20 = LT + (20 − T ) ⋅ α ⋅ LT
where L is length, T is the temperature at which the length was measured and α is the
coefficient of thermal expansion.
For example, a steel bar that is measured as 300.015 mm at a temperature of 23.4 ºC has a
length of
Note that if the calibrated test length is not of a normal CTE material (α < 2 × 10-6 ºC –1) then
the corresponding E0, MPE and E150, MPE values (see later) are designated with an asterisk (*)
for example E0, MPE* and an explanatory note provided giving the material and CTE.
planes, normal to one of the planes. The probing head must approach the points from
opposite directions.
The length measurement error of a CMM is expressed in micrometres (µm) and given by the
symbol EL.
where
The expressions apply for any location and/or orientation of the material standard of size
within the measuring volume of the CMM.
Measurements must be made utilising the three axes of the machine and the expressions
apply for any position and orientation of the material standard within the working envelope of
the CMM.
The maximum permissible error of length measurement EL, MPE is newly defined as the
extreme value of the length measurement error, EL, permitted by specifications. In part 2 of
ISO 10360, L = 0 mm and L = 150 mm (default values) are specified.
Although the standard uses the above symbols it is accepted that they may not be suitable for
product documentation, etc. and so the following alternatives are specified (see table 2).
Table 3 shows the evolution of the symbols over the years.
E0, MPE maximum permissible error of length measurement with minimal offset.
E150, MPE maximum permissible error of length measurement with ram axis stylus tip offset of
150 mm.
20 Chapter 4
The acceptance
test 5
T his chapter describes the acceptance test. The acceptance test would normally be
performed on initial installation of the CMM or if the CMM has been overhauled or
upgraded.
Preliminary actions
Before and during the acceptance test the CMM must be operated in accordance with the
procedure stated in the instruction manual for the CMM. This will include machine start up,
probe qualification and probe configuration.
If the aim of the test is to verify that the machine meets its specification then the
manufacturer’s specified conditions, for example, length and type of stylus, probing speed,
reference sphere etc. should be used. The environmental conditions recommended by the
manufacturer should be adhered to.
It must be remembered that when carrying out the main length measurement verification of
the CMM the probing system will have to be qualified using the manufacturer-supplied
reference sphere (or other manufacturer-supplied artefact for probe qualifications). The
results of the ISO 10360 test are only valid for measurements made with the same reference
sphere. It is strongly recommended that the CMM be only used with the reference sphere
supplied with the machine. For stylus systems with small stylus tips an alternative reference
sphere may need to be used to qualify the stylus tip but it must be remembered that the results
of the ISO 10360 test do not apply in the case where an alternative reference sphere is used.
It should also be noted that in the past some manufacturers have used the value of the
reference sphere size in their software as a means of applying a crude software correction. In
this case the size in the software for the reference sphere is not the same as the true size of the
reference sphere. Care must be taken in these cases if the reference sphere is measured by an
independent method, or a different reference sphere is used.
NPL offers a service for the calibration of test and reference spheres. Further details can be
found at www.npl.co.uk.
If the reference sphere is damaged it should be replaced with one of similar material and
specification. The ISO 10360 test would then need to be repeated.
Environmental conditions
The environment in which it operates will affect a CMM. Limits for permissible
environmental conditions, such as temperature conditions, air humidity and vibration that
influence the measurements are usually specified by the manufacturer. In the case of
acceptance tests the environment specified by the manufacturer applies. However, in the case
of reverification tests the user can specify the environment.
23 Chapter 5
In both cases, the user is free to choose the environmental conditions under which the ISO
10360-2 testing will be performed within the specified limits.
The user is responsible for making sure that the environment surrounding the CMM, meets
the manufacturer’s specification.
Operating Conditions
When performing the acceptance test the CMM should be operated using the procedures
given in the manufacturer's operating manual.
Specific areas of the operating conditions that should be adhered to are, for example:
• the physical volume of the load supplied for testing shall lie within the measuring
volume of the CMM and the load shall be free-standing;
• the manufacturer may specify a limit on the maximum load per unit area (kg/m2) on
the CMM support (i.e. table) surface and/or on individual point loads (kg/cm2); for
point loads, the load at any specific contact point shall be no greater than twice the
load of any other contact point; and
• unless otherwise specified by the manufacturer, the load shall be located
approximately centrally and approximately symmetrically at the centre of the CMM
table.
The user and the manufacturer should pay special consideration to the loading of the CMM
table as any load may restrict access to measurement positions.
error PSTU. The value obtained for PSTU should be adequately small when compared to E0, MPE
and EL, MPE
Figure 7 An ISO 10360-2 test being carried out using gauge blocks
For example, a CMM having an operating area of 2040 mm × 1300 mm and a maximum
operating height of 570 mm has the longest space diagonal of 2485 mm.
In this case the longest length of the material standard, at a minimum of 66 % of the longest
space diagonal, will be greater than or equal to 1640 mm.
25 Chapter 5
The shortest length of material standard used in the acceptance test should be less than
30 mm.
ISO 10360-2: 1995 stated that if the manufacturer’s material standard is used for the test, no
additional uncertainty needs to be added to the value of E. If the user’s material standard is
used for the test and it has an uncertainty value, F, greater than 20 % of the value of E, then E
should be redefined as the sum of E and F. However, since 2001 the rules stated in ISO
14253-1 have been applied (see Appendix C).
When the manufacturer or agent uses his or her own material standard of length to verify a
CMM the end user should check that the calibration certificate for the standard is up to date
and that the standard has been measured to an appropriate uncertainty. If the standard has
been stored in an environment at a higher or lower temperature, e.g. the boot of a car, the user
is advised to check that adequate time is allowed for the standard to reach thermal
equilibrium with the measurement environment before being used.
Table 4 compares the advantages and disadvantages of the various standards of length.that
may be used for verifying a CMM.
Alternative artefacts
26 Chapter 5
Information on artefacts that represent a calibrated test length can be found in Annex B of
ISO 10360-2: 2009.
A calibrated test length can be produced using a laser interferometer and a gauge block. The
calibrated test length is then the sum of the calibrated length of the gauge block and the
displacement recorded by a calibrated laser interferometer system. The use of laser
interferometers is of particular advantage for larger CMMs. Note that for some CMMs tested
with laser interferometry without contact probing, the CMM error map may not be applied to
the results yielding an error of indication much larger than that obtained with contact probing.
When a laser interferometer is used to produce the test lengths the laser interferometer is
considered to be a low CTE material, hence the need for the measurement of a normal CTE
calibrated test length.
A calibrated test length may be produced using a ball bar or ball plate where the length is
equal to the calibrated sphere centre-to-centre length plus one half of the calibrated diameter
of each sphere.
27 Chapter 5
If uni-directional measurements are made then they must be supplemented by gauge block
measurements.
The user will need to take supplementary measurements for alignment purposes (for example
probing the side face of a step gauge – see Annex C of ISO 10360-2). The alignment should
be consistent with the procedures used for the calibration of the artefact. It is important that
reference is made to the latest calibration certificate for the artefact is being used. As stated
on page 14 the calibration of the test length should be traceable, preferably through the use of
a national or accredited measurement laboratory.
NPL offers a service for the calibration of length bars, gauge blocks and step gauges. Further
details can be found at www.npl.co.uk.
To carry out the acceptance test the calibrated test length should be measured in any seven
different combinations of position and orientation, three of the positions being chosen by the
user. The remaining four positions consist of the space diagonals. For each of the seven
orientations five test lengths are measured three times. The manufacturer may have pre-
written software in place to carry out the test at pre-defined positions. The user should give
the manufacturer plenty of notice as to the location of the three non-mandatory positions and
orientation he or she would prefer in case reprogramming of the CMM verification software
is necessary.
The length standard should be supported at the appropriate support points (usually the ‘Airy
points’). The ‘Airy points’, ensure that the surfaces towards the ends of the bar are parallel
with its axis. For a horizontally supported bar the Airy points are separated by 0.577l (where l
is the length of the material standard). Manufacturers of step gauges often indicate the
support points for both horizontal and 45° orientations, to give minimum deflection. For
further information see NPL Measurement Good Practice Guide Number 80.
For a minimal offset the choice of location of the material standard in the CMM measuring
volume will include some of the following positions. Positions 1 to 4 are mandatory. If the
user specifies no other positions, positions 5 to 7 are the default positions.
• The three in-plane diagonals (diagonals of XY, YZ and XZ planes at the mid position
of the third axis).
• Measuring lines nominally parallel to an axis (the manufacturer may specify a
separate maximum permissible error for these directions).
Position
Orientation in the measuring volume
Number
1 Along the diagonal in space from point (1, 0, 0) to (0, 1, 1)
2 Along the diagonal in space from point (1, 1, 0) to (0, 0, 1)
3 Along the diagonal in space from point (0, 1, 0) to (1, 0, 1)
4 Along the diagonal in space from point (0, 0, 0) to (1, 1, 1)
5 Parallel to the machine scales from point (0,½, ½) to (1, ½, ½)
6 Parallel to the machine scales from point (½,0, ½) to (½, 1, ½)
7 Parallel to the machine scales from point (½,½, 0) to (½, ½, 1)
Note: For specifications in this table, opposite corners of the measuring
volume are assumed to be (0, 0, 0) and (1, 1, 1) in co-ordinates (X, Y, Z)
450
5
400 6
350 3
7
300
250 1
Z
200 4
2
150
100
2
4
50
0 1
500
7
400
3
300 6
200 5
500
100 400
300
200
Y 0 100
0
X
If the user carries out an ISO 10360 test but relies on the manufacturer for service the choice
of measurement lines may serve as a check on whether adjustments made, for instance to the
machines squareness, were justified.
For each of the seven configurations the user should take and record the measurements of the
five test lengths, each test length being measured three times. For gauge blocks and length
bars each material standard should be probed once at each end. For a step gauge make sure
that a length consists of two probings in opposite direction. The fifteen measurements on the
five test lengths in one position and orientation are regarded as one configuration.
Note that each of the three repeated measurements is to be arranged in the following manner:
if one end of the calibrated test length is labelled “A” and the other end “B”, then the
measurement sequence is either A1 B1, A2 B2, A3 B3 or A1 B1, B2 A2, A3 B3.
After completion of the test in the seven configurations a total of 105 measurements will have
been made.
Calculation of results
For each of the 105 measurements the error of length measurement, EL is calculated. This
value is the absolute value of the difference between the indicated value of the relevant test
length and the true value of the material standard. Particular attention should be made to
Appendix D of ISO 10360-2 when using artefacts of low CTE.
The indicated value may be corrected to account for systematic errors if the CMM has
accessory devices or software for this purpose. If the environmental conditions in operation
30 Chapter 5
for the test are those recommended by the manufacturer then no manual correction to the
indicated values may be made manually by the user.
The true value of the material standard of length is taken as the calibrated length between the
measuring faces. This value should be temperature corrected only if this facility is normally
available in the software of the CMM. Table 6 gives an example of the calculations required.
From table 6 it can be seen that four of the thirty-five test lengths have values of the error of
length measurement greater than E0, MPE. These four values will have to be measured again
ten times each at the relevant configuration (see the section on Data rejection and repeated
measurements).
The output from another measuring machine verification is shown in figure 11. For each
measuring line three determinations of the errors have been made. The dotted lines show the
upper and lower error bounds (E0, MPE).
31 Chapter 5
Manufacturer's constant A 4
Manufacturer's constant K 200
E = A + L/K
ISO 10360 − measuring line 1 ISO 10360 − measuring line 2 ISO 10360 − measuring line 3
3 3 3
2 2 2
Deviation in micrometre
Deviation in micrometre
Deviation in micrometre
1 1 1
0 0 0
−1 −1 −1
−2 −2 −2
−3 −3 −3
0 200 400 600 0 200 400 600 0 200 400 600
Distance in mm Distance in mm Distance in mm
ISO 10360 − measuring line 4 ISO 10360 − measuring line 5 ISO 10360 − measuring line 6
4 4 4
3 3 3
Deviation in micrometre
Deviation in micrometre
Deviation in micrometre
2 2 2
1 1 1
0 0 0
−1 −1 −1
−2 −2 −2
−3 −3 −3
−4 −4 −4
0 200 400 600 0 200 400 600 0 200 400 600
Distance in mm Distance in mm Distance in mm
3
Deviation in micrometre
−1
−2
−3
−4
0 200 400 600
Distance in mm
This test is carried out under similar conditions as those for the test with no offset.
The default value for the ram axis stylus tip offset is 150 mm (± 15 mm), i.e. E150.
The direction of the ram axis stylus tip offset should be oriented perpendicular to the
measurement line defined by the calibrated test length and pointing along a CMM axis
direction. For each measurement, the user may specify the direction of the ram axis stylus tip
offset to be pointing either in the positive or in the negative axis direction, i.e. in either the
+X or –X direction for positions 1A or 1B, and in either the +Y or –Y direction for positions
2A or 2B. Hence, of the eight possible combinations of test length positions and probe
orientations, the user may choose any two for testing.
Position
Orientation in the measuring volume
Number
1A Along the YZ plane diagonal from point (½,0, 0) to (½, 1, 1)
1B Along the YZ plane diagonal from point (½,0, 1) to (½, 1, 0)
2A Along the XZ plane diagonal from point (0,½, 0) to (1, ½, 1)
2B Along the XZ plane diagonal from point (0,½, 1) to (1, ½, 0)
Note For specifications in this table, opposite corners of the measuring
volume are assumed to be (0, 0, 0) and (1, 1, 1) in co-ordinates (X, Y, Z)
The position of the stylus tip in the direction of the ram axis should be significantly different
from that used for the E0 test.
The 105 length measurement error values (E0) are compared with the manufacturers stated
value of E0, MPE. If none of the error of length values is greater than E0, MPE then the
performance of the CMM is verified. Account should be made of the measurement
uncertainty according to ISO 14253-1 and ISO/TS 23165. The repeatability range of the
34 Chapter 5
length measurement error R0 should also be within the maximum permissible limit of the
repeatability range, R0, MPL as specified by the manufacturer. Finally the length measurement
error measured with a ram axis stylus tip offset of 150 mm (E150) should be within the
manufacturers specification for the maximum permissible error of length measurement
E150, MPE.
A maximum of five of the thirty-five test length measurements may have one (and no more
that one) of the three values of the error of length measurement greater than E0, MPE. If this is
so then it is necessary for each out of tolerance test length to be measured three times at the
relevant configuration. If all the error of length values recorded from the repeat
measurements are within E0, MPE, then the performance of the CMM is verified.
If a calibrated test length is re-measured, then the range of the three repeated measurements
shall be used to determine R0 at that position, and the three original measurements shall be
discarded.
For the length measurement error with ram axis stylus tip offset of 150 mm, E150 a maximum
of two of the ten sets of three repeated measurements may have one of the three values of the
length measurement error outside the conformance zone. Each such measurement that is out
of the conformance zone, taking in to account ISO 14253-1 rules, shall be re-measured three
times at the relevant position. If all the values of the errors of indication of a calibrated test
length with ram axis stylus tip offset of 150 mm from the three repeated measurements are
within the conformance zone (again taking in to account ISO 14253-1 rules), then the
performance of the CMM is verified at that position.
Reverification test
The performance of the CMM used for measuring linear dimensions is considered to have
been reverified if E0, R0, and E150 are not greater than the maximum permissible errors,
E0, MPE, E150, MPE and maximum permissible limit, R0, MPL.
Acceptance test of
the CMM probing 6
system
T he single stylus probing test that appeared in ISO 10360-2: 2001 does not appear in
the current edition of ISO 10360-2. It has been moved to the new edition of ISO
10360-5 that will be replacing ISO 10360-5: 2000. ISO/PAS 12868 was prepared to
allow the single stylus probing test to be available until the publication of the new edition of
ISO 10360-5. ISO/PAS 12868 has been withdrawn with the publication of
ISO10360-5: 2010.
The sphere supplied by the manufacturer for probe qualifying purposes (reference
sphere) should not be used for the probing error test.
Figure 12 Reference sphere should not be used Figure 13 Use a suitable test sphere
Wrong Correct
37 Chapter 6
The probing error is a positive constant, the value of which is supplied by the CMM
manufacturer. It applies to any location of the test sphere within the working envelope and
for any probing direction.
The test sphere should be between 10 mm and 50 mm diameter. The form of the test sphere
shall be calibrated, since the form deviation influences the test result, and shall be taken into
account when proving conformance or non-conformance with the specification using ISO
14253 decision rules. The test sphere should be mounted rigidly to overcome errors due to
bending of the mounting stem. Spheres up to 30 mm in diameter are commonly used. A small
sphere is advantageous as there is less likelihood of machine errors contributing to the
probing error. The standard recommends that the form error of the test sphere should not
exceed 20 % of PFTM, MPE or PFTN, MPE as relevant.
ISO 10360-2: 1995 and ISO 10360-2: 2001 recommended that the orientation of the
stylus should not be parallel to any CMM axis. However, ISO 10360-5 now states that
the stylus orientation shall be parallel to the ram axis, unless otherwise specified.
The next step is to mounts the test sphere on the machine removing all dust particles and
finger marks. It is a requirement of the standards that one location of the test sphere shall be
chosen by the user anywhere in the measuring volume.
Twenty-five points are measured and recorded. It is a requirement that the points are
approximately evenly distributed over at least a hemisphere of the test sphere. Their position
is at the discretion of the user and, if not specified, the following probing pattern is
recommended (see figure 14):
• one point on the pole (defined by the direction of the stylus shaft) of the test
sphere;
• four points (equally spaced) 22.5° below the pole;
• eight points (equally spaced) 45° below the pole and rotated 22.5° relative to
the previous group;
• four points (equally spaced) 67.5° below the pole and rotated 22.5° relative to
the previous group; and
• eight points (equally spaced) 90° below the pole (i.e., on the equator) and
rotated 22.5° relative to the previous group.
38 Chapter 6
For direct computer control (DCC) machines it is suggested that the test be performed with a
computer numeric control (CNC) program.
For manually operated machines the above test can be difficult to perform. It is suggested
that the operator calculate the nominal positions of twenty-five points on the hemi-sphere
prior to the test and then aims to probe these points.
Calculation of results
From the data the Gaussian (least squares) sphere (substitution element) is computed using
all twenty-five points. For each of the twenty-five measurements the radial distance r is
calculated. This distance is the distance between the calculated centre of the sphere and the
probed point.
For the above example the range of radial distances is 0.000 64 mm.
The radial distance (polar distance) is calculated from x 2 + y 2 + z 2 . In table 8 the
maximum and minimum values are highlighted. The calibrated diameter of the sphere was
29.985 00 mm and the departure from roundness 0.000 052 mm. The measured diameter
from the CMM was 29.984 6 mm (see page 23 Checking the probing system prior to the ISO
10360-2 test).
Interpretation of results
If the range rmax - rmin of the twenty-five radial distances (PFTU) is no greater than the
manufacturer’s stated value of PFTU, MPE when taking into account the measurement
uncertainty, then the performance of the probing system is verified.
40 Chapter 6
14.9928
14.9926
14.9924
Radius/mm
14.9922
14.992
14.9918
14.9916
1
11
13
15
17
19
21
23
25
Point number
W hen taking into account whether a CMM meets its specification, the uncertainty of
measurement needs to be considered and ISO 14253-1 decision making rules
applied. Appendix C gives an example taken from NPL Good Practice Guide No.
80 on how the decision rules are applied. But first the uncertainty has to be calculated. The
sections below give some guidance on measurement uncertainty in general and some
specifics relating to testing CMMs.
Uncertainty of measurement
Uncertainty of measurement is covered in Bell S A A beginner's guide to uncertainty in
measurement Measurement Good Practice Guide No. 11 (Issue 2), NPL, March 2001. If the
reader is unfamiliar with measurement uncertainty it is advised they read this guide before
reading the next section.
parameter, associated with the result of a measurement, that characterizes the dispersion of
the values that could reasonably be attributed to the measurand
The recommended equation for the standard uncertainty of the probing error, u(P) is
2
⎛F⎞
u ( P) = ⎜ ⎟ + u 2 ( F )
⎝2⎠
Where F is the form error reported on the calibration certificate of the test sphere and u(F) is
the standard uncertainty of the form error stated on the certificate.
The recommended equation for the standard uncertainty of the error of indication, u(E), is
where
εfixt is the error due to the fixturing of the material standard of size.
Once the combined standard uncertainties u(P) or u(E) are evaluated in accordance with the
simplified equations, the expanded uncertainty U(P) or U(E) are obtained through
multiplication by a coverage factor, k, as follows:
Each term is fully explained in ISO/TS 23165. Worked examples can be found in Appendix
C of the standard.
44 Chapter 7
Periodic
reverification 8
The procedure and calculation detailed for the acceptance test should be carried out.
However, since 2001 the reverification test has been essentially the same as the acceptance
test with the exception that the values applicable to MPEE and MPEP can be as stated by the
customer.
With the 2009 edition of the standard the user is permitted to state the values of, and to
specify detailed limitation applicable to, E0, MPE, R0, MPL and E150, MPE.
The procedure and calculation detailed for the acceptance test of the CMM probing systems
should be carried out.
The CMM is verified if the single-stylus form error PFTU is not greater than the maximum
permissible single-stylus form error PFTU, MPE as specified by the user. The uncertainty of
measurement should be taken in to account according to ISO 14253-1.
If the probing system fails the reverification test, all probing equipment should be thoroughly
checked for dust, dirt and any faults in the stylus system assembly (for example loose joints)
that could be influencing the measurement results. Any faults should be corrected and the test
repeated once only starting from the probing system qualification. It is also important that the
qualification sphere, test sphere and stylus assembly are left for a suitable period of time after
handling to reach thermal equilibrium.
Interim check of
the CMM 9
A
nnex A of ISO 10360-2: 2009 strongly recommends that the CMM be checked
regularly between periodic reverification. The user should determine the interval
between checks according to the measurement performance required, the
environmental operating conditions and the usage of the CMM.
The standard recommends that immediately after the performance verification test calibrated
artefacts other than material standards of length be measured.
It is important that the CMM is also checked immediately after any significant event that
could affect the performance of the machine, e.g., struck by a forklift truck, impact loading,
significant temperature change, high humidity, etc.
The standard strongly recommends that the artefact has a coefficient of thermal expansion
similar to that of typical workpieces measured on the CMM.
Figure 18 Top plate with cylindrical artefacts Figure 19 A further range of artefacts
Figure 18 and figure 19 show how the top plate is interchangeable to offer a different range
of artefacts.
The advantages of purpose made test pieces are that they test more severely the capabilities
of the CMM software used. Test pieces are used to test the machine in its normal working
volume although with pallet systems this may mean that the artefact has to be repositioned
several times. The disadvantages are that if the measurement task changes a new test piece
may be needed. A further disadvantage is that the test piece may be difficult to make and
measure to high accuracy and could be costly to calibrate
A high quality, calibrated replica of the item normally measured could also be used. High
quality here means a surface finish and geometry that does not significantly affect the
uncertainty of measurement. The item should also be dimensionally stable.
labelled and used only for CMM verification. It is suggested that the test piece is measured
several times immediately after verification and then at regular intervals thereafter.
Figure 21 CMM check artefact laid horizontally Figure 22 CMM check artefact in a further
(©Carl Zeiss) orientation (©Carl Zeiss)
Figure 23 A selection of Ball Bars (©Bal-tec) Figure 24 Free Standing ball Bar Kit (©Bal-
Tec)
The advantages of ball bars are that they are low cost to manufacture (high precision balls are
available ‘off-the-shelf’), portable, lightweight, compact and the use of a metal spacing rod
makes them stable and robust. The main disadvantage of the ball bar is that its calibration is
not directly traceable as it is based on a computed surface and not a real one. The other
disadvantage is that it duplicates a measurement task seldom met in practice. The use of ball
bars is also time-consuming due to the fact that they are fixed length and it should be noted
that some composite bars are hygroscopic and dimensionally unstable.
Figure 25 An example of a ball-ended rod with magnetic cups for kinematic location
52 Chapter 9
The probe stylus slots into the end of what is in effect a reference ‘ball’ bar. The probe carries
the bar with it over a spherical path and radial readings are taken at different positions. The
range of these radial readings indicates the volumetric accuracy of the machine - this is the
maximum error between any two points in any plane, over any distance within the full
measuring range. Repetition of a sequence of readings will check the system’s repeatability
and the total gauge error is claimed to be ± 0.5 µm. Checking time is typically fifteen
minutes.
54 Chapter 9
The advantage of this type of device is that the various arm lengths can cover a large volume.
It is also very portable, stable, lightweight, simple and quick to use and is normally available
off-the-shelf. With suitable software it can be used as a diagnostic tool. For example, with the
appropriate software it can provide information on volumetric accuracy, squareness and scale
errors of the CMM.
The disadvantage is that it can only be used on machines that can vector in a circle, i.e. it may
not be suitable for manual or older CNC machines. It is not as rugged as some of the other
devices in the standard and it only tests one measuring task. It is also limited on its tests of
the CMM software.
In order to minimize the time to perform the interim test an abbreviated test procedure can be
carried out and it is suggested that this procedure should focus on those test positions that
most commonly reveal a problem with the CMM. An example would be the measurement of
a single long test length in each of the body diagonals. This test will generally reveal CMM
errors more so than the measurements of five test lengths along a CMM axis.
Each of the errors of indication from the interim test should be less than the corresponding
specification, e.g. E0, MPE, provided the test is conducted according to the procedures stated in
ISO 10360 and the environmental conditions are within those stated by the manufacturer.
ISO 10360-2: 2001 strongly recommends that different probe strategies adopted by the user
such as multiple styli, the use of stylus extensions, approach direction and speeds are checked
regularly between periodic reverification. This idea is extended in ISO10360-5: 2010.
The interim check is essentially a repeat of the main tests but with reduced extent in terms of
the number of measuring points being assessed. It is, however, recommended that the probing
58 Chapter 9
system be checked regularly and particularly after any incident which could significantly
affect the probing performance.
Improving
measurement 10
confidence
I
n addition to performing a verification test there are other ways in which users can gain
extra confidence in the measurements they are making with a CMM. One way requires
the user to adopt task-related calibration strategies in which the measurement of traceable
artefacts is used to indicate the errors associated with specific measurement tasks (ISO/TS
15530-3: 2004 Geometrical Product Specifications (GPS) — Coordinate measuring
machines (CMM): Technique for determining the uncertainty of measurement — Part 3: Use
of calibrated workpieces or standards). Calibrations of this kind are only valid for the
inspection of workpieces with essentially the same geometrical form and size as the
calibrated object, measured in the same orientation and location, and using the same probing
and measurement strategy.
Similarity conditions
The use of calibrated workpieces requires that the following similarity conditions be
observed:
The measurement procedure of the reference artefact and the actual measurement should be
the same. Conditions to consider are, for example, handling, exchange and clamping, time
elapsed between probing points, loading and unloading procedures, measuring force and
speed. In addition the environmental conditions (including all variations) during
measurement of the reference artefact and actual measurement should be considered.
Conditions to consider include temperature, temperature stabilisation time and temperature
corrections (if used).
61 Chapter 10
3. Measure the component (in this case a long tube) - figure 35.
Use the same procedure at each stage in the process, i.e. programme, probe set up, direction
of approach and speed. As in the example above it is recommended that the user measure the
reference artefact before and after the object(s) to be inspected.
If the results of the measurement of the ring gauge in the above example agree with its
calibrated size to within the combined uncertainties of the machine and the ring calibration
then it has been demonstrated that no degradation in accuracy has resulted from the choice of
62 Chapter 10
stylus. If a difference between the calibrated size of the ring and the measured size is noted,
and this difference is repeatable it may be possible to correct measurements made on the tube.
For example, if measurements made on the ring gauge are consistently large by 0.010 mm the
0.010 mm can be subtracted from all diameter measurements made on the component.
Because of the complex error structure inherent in CMMs, procedures of this kind are only
valid for objects with the same geometrical form and size as the reference artefact used,
measured in the same location and using the same measurement strategy. Provided that
suitable reference artefacts are available this type of approach to measurement can achieve
high accuracy with relatively little effort.
Where a user is involved in measuring the same geometric form on a number of components
the measuring strategy would involve assessing the error sources associated with that type of
inspection in one particular part of the working volume of the CMM. However, if the
components were to be measured at different locations in the working volume then a much
more rigorous evaluation of the variation in measuring capability with position would have to
be undertaken to indicate whether the position and orientation of the component would effect
the accuracy of the result.
This idea is extended further in ISO/TS 15530-3: 2004 Geometrical Product Specifications
(GPS) — Coordinate measuring machines (CMM): Technique for determining the
uncertainty of measurement -- Part 3: Use of calibrated workpieces or standards where the
information is used to calculate measurement uncertainties.
CMMs using
multiple stylus 11
probing systems
S
O far only the single-stylus probing error has been covered when referring to
ISO 10360-5. The tests described in part 5 of ISO 10360 are also applicable to CMMs
that use more than one stylus or stylus orientation when measuring a workpiece.
Experience has shown that the errors as calculated in accordance with part 5 of the standard
for multiple probing systems are significant and, at times the dominant errors in the CMM.
However, due to the virtually infinite variety of probing system configurations on modern
CMMs the tests as defined are limited to only providing a format for testing. The tests are
intended to provide information about the ability of a CMM to measure a feature or features
using multiple styli, probes, or articulated-probe positions.
The procedure will be helpful in minimising uncertainty components of the probing system
for specific measuring tasks. The user can reduce errors by removing contributing elements
(e.g. long extensions, long styli) and re-testing the new configuration set. The test described
in part 5 of the standard is sensitive to many errors attributable to both the CMM and the
probing system.
The tests detailed in ISO 10360: 5 are performed in addition to the length-measuring test
according to ISO 10360-2 that is conducted using only one stylus.
If a stylus or probe changing system is supplied with the CMM, five changes are performed,
one before each stylus is used. For each group of twenty-five points taken with a single
stylus, a least-squares sphere fit is associated with the points, for a total of five sphere fits.
The ranges of the centre coordinates (X, Y and Z) of all five spheres are calculated. In
addition, a least-squares sphere fit using all 125 points is examined for the form and size
errors of indication.
highly dependent on the probe-tip-offset length, a series of tip offset lengths needs to be
considered. Sample lengths are given in the standard.
66 Chapter 11
Assessment and
reverification tests 12
for CMMs with the
axis of a rotary
table as the fourth
axis
R otary tables are used on CMMs for a number of types of measurements, these include
the measurement of gears, brake drums, spline drives and where the user requires the
stylus tip to remain in a static position whilst the workpiece is orientated in a
rotational sense.
The errors of indication are designated FR, FT and FA and are expressed in micrometres. FR
is the radial four-axis error; FT is the tangential four-axis error and FA the axial four-axis
error.
These errors, which shall not exceed the maximum permissible errors MPEFR, MPEFT and
MPEFA are expressed in micrometres and are:
Environmental conditions
Limits that govern temperature conditions, air humidity and vibration at the installation site
are specified by:
In both cases, the user is free to specify the conditions within the specified limits.
Stylus system
The limits placed on the stylus configuration to which the stated values of MPEFR, MPEFT
and MPEFA apply are specified by:
In both cases the user is free to select the stylus system within the specified limits.
69 Chapter 12
Operating conditions
The CMM should be operated using the procedures described in the manufacturers operating
manual for
3. cleaning procedures for stylus tip and reference sphere; (The stylus tip and reference
sphere should be cleaned before the probing system qualification. The cleaning process
should not leave a residual film that could affect the measuring or test result.)
The principle of the assessment is to establish whether the CMM is capable of measuring
within the stated maximum permissible errors by determining the variation of the measured
co-ordinates of the centres of two spheres mounted on the rotary table.
The centre of each test sphere is measured with a series of measurements at different angular
positions of the rotary table. Each test sphere centre is determined in three directions: radial,
tangential and axial.
The errors of indication are calculated for each test sphere as the range between the
maximum and minimum measurement results for each of the three directions.
Measuring equipment
Two test spheres with certified form designated A and B, whose diameters should be not less
than 10 mm and not greater than 30 mm are used. The diameters of the spheres need not be
calibrated since only the centres of the spheres are used to determine the three four-axis
errors. The spheres must be mounted rigidly to the rotary table to avoid errors due to bending.
The test spheres should be mounted on the rotary table in accordance with table 9 (see Figure
1 of ISO 10360-3: 2000 for an illustration of this set-up).
70 Chapter 12
Combination Number ∆h r
mm mm
1 200 200
2 400 200
3 400 400
4 800 400
5 800 800
The values in table 9 are default values. The manufacturer must specify one of the above
combinations. Other values may be used with agreement between the user and manufacturer.
Test sphere A should be positioned as close to the rotary table surface as possible at a
radius r.
Test sphere B should be approximately at the same radius r and approximately diametrically
opposite to the test sphere A, but higher from the table surface by an amount ∆ h .
The user should define a Cartesian workpiece co-ordinate system on the rotary table that
meets the following conditions:
2. the primary axis, which defines the axial direction, shall be parallel to the axis of the
rotary table; and
3. the secondary axis, which defines the radial direction, shall lie in the plane that contains
the primary axis and the centre of the test sphere A.
The user should begin the test by measuring test sphere B in its original position (position 0).
The angular position should be any position other than the zero reading on the rotary table.
The rotary table is rotated through a series of seven angular positions, and the test sphere A is
measured in each position.
ISO 10360-3: 2000 recommends that the positions of the seven angular positions extend at
least 720o from the start position.
The rotary table is now rotated in the opposite direction to seven angular positions and the
test sphere A is once again measured at each position.
71 Chapter 12
The rotary table is returned to its original position and both test spheres should be measured
(position 14).
The rotary table is now rotated in the same direction to seven different angular positions and
then rotated in the opposite direction to seven angular positions. The test sphere B is
measured at each position. On returning the rotary table to its original position both test
spheres are now measured (position 28), see table 10.
Note:
1. Angular position W1 applies to CMMs with partial coverage of the rotary table.
2. Angular position W2 applies to CMMs with full coverage of the rotary table.
3. Only one of these columns applies to a specific machine being tested.
4. A dash (–) means that no measurement is taken at that location of that test sphere in that
angular position.
72 Chapter 12
Results
Using measurements from positions 0 to 28, the three four-axis errors (FR, FT and FA) as the
peak-to-peak variation of each of the radial, tangential and axial co-ordinates respectively of
both test sphere centres are computed.
XA and XB are the radial components of spheres A and B and are used to calculate the radial
four-axis error FRA and FRB.
YA and YB are the tangential components of spheres A and B and are used to calculate the
tangential four-axis error FTA and FTB.
ZA and ZB are the axial components of spheres A and B and are used to calculate the axial
four-axis error FAA and FAB.
Acceptance test
The performance of the CMM and rotary table is verified if none of the four-axis errors (FRA,
FTA, FAA, FRB, FTB and FAB) are greater than the three maximum permissible errors
(MPEFR, MPEFT and MPEFA) as specified by the manufacturer.
Reverification test
The performance of the CMM and rotary table is verified if none of the four-axis errors (FRA,
FTA, FAA, FRB, FTB and FAB) are greater than the three maximum permissible errors
(MPEFR, MPEFT and MPEFA) as specified by the user.
Interim check
A reduced reverification test may be used periodically to demonstrate the probability that the
CMM will conform to specified requirements regarding the three maximum permissible
errors. The reverification test may be reduced in the following areas, number of test spheres,
number of angular positions and number of measurements performed
If a rotary table is fixed to the CMM the acceptance test may be sufficient to quantify all
errors related to all machine axes. It will not be necessary to check all linear axes, if the
performance of the machine is verified for FR, FT and FA as all axes must be in good
working order.
Verification of large
CMMs 13
T he techniques described in this guide and, before the latest revision, in ISO 10360 are
mainly applicable to CMMs with operating axes of 1 m or less.
Further information can also be found in the final and synthesis reports for contract MAT1-
CT94-0012 entitled Calibration of Large Artefacts.
Other work has also been carried out at NIST and PTB on methods for the evaluation of large
CMMs. The NIST method is described in S. D. Phillips, D. Sawyer, B. Borchardt, D. Ward,
D. E. Beutel, 2001 A novel artefact for testing large coordinate measuring machines
Precision Eng., 25 (1).
Figure 36 Checking a large CMM with a tracking interferometer (Image © Etalon Ag)
It is good practice to measure the normal CTE artefact along a measurement line that was
previously measured using the interferometer. The consistency of the errors of indication
from the laser interferometer and the normal CTE artefact serves as a check that refractive
index corrections and compensation of the artefact CTE are being implemented correctly.
Figure 37 Checking a large CMM with an interferometer (Image © Renishaw plc 2011)
76 Chapter 13
his measurement good practice guide has provided an overview of the ISO
T 10360 series of standards. The key good practice guidelines for carrying out
CMM performance verification can be summarised as follows:
Glossary of terms
T erms defined below are based on the VIM, 3rd edition, JCGM 200:2008
(International Vocabulary of Metrology - Basic and General Concepts and
Associated Terms) and ISO 10360 Parts 1 and 2.
Error of indication of a CMM The indication of a CMM minus the (conventional) true
value of the measurand.
Geometric errors The departures from the ideal geometry caused by a lack of
mechanical perfection in the moving elements of the CMM.
Length measurement error Error of indication when measuring a calibrated test length
using a CMM with a ram axis stylus tip offset of L, using a
single probing point (or equivalent) at each end of the
calibrated test length
W hen checking a machine for compliance to ISO 10360 any local safety rules
should be adhered to and a risk assessment undertaken before starting the
work. If working at a customer’s site be aware of any evacuation
procedures and any extra risks such as moving vehicles and overhead cranes. Some
specific things to look for when carrying out a risk assessment are listed below.
Mechanical hazards
Many of the length standards mentioned in this guide are relatively heavy. The
appropriate lifting techniques and equipment should always be used and safety shoes
worn. Operators should wear laboratory coats or overalls for safety reasons and to
prevent fibres shed from clothing from falling on items being measured.
Machines under direct computer control may move without warning. The operator
should stand back from the machine during an automatic run.
NOTE
Important safety information
A rough guide to laser safety stickers would say that any laser
system with a visible output of less than 0.2 mW is considered
a Class 1 laser and is not dangerous. While any visible laser of
between 0.2 mW and 1.0 mW output power is considered a
Class 2 and relies on sensible people blinking before any
damage is done to their vision. Class 3B refers to power levels
above 5.0 mW and can cause damage to your retina and
should on the whole be treated with a great deal of respect
because once damaged your eyes are irreparable and
irreplaceable! Class 4 involves powers above 0.5 W and will
blind you, burn holes through your hand and generally ensure
that you have a really bad day. (For a more detailed
description of the classes have a look at BS EN 60825-1
2007.)
Chemical hazards
Chemicals may need to be used for cleaning purposes. Make sure the manufacturer’s
safety guidance is followed and the relevant personal protective equipment worn.
Substances may be covered by the COSHH regulations.
Appendices
17
IN THIS CHAPTER Appendix A Links to other useful sources of
information.
Appendix B Further reading.
86 Chapter 17
"When you can measure what you are speaking about and express it in numbers you
know something about it; but when you can not express it in numbers your knowledge
is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind."
The National Physical Laboratory (NPL) is the UK’s national measurement institute
and is a world-leading centre of excellence in developing and applying the most
accurate measurement standards, science and technology available. For more than a
century NPL has developed and maintained the nation’s primary measurement
standards. These standards underpin an infrastructure of traceability throughout the
UK and the world that ensures accuracy and consistency of measurement.
NPL ensures that cutting edge measurement science and technology have a positive
impact in the real world. NPL delivers world-leading measurement solutions that are
critical to commercial research and development, and support business success across
the UK and the globe.
NPL's measurements help to save lives, protect the environment, enable citizens to
feel safe and secure, as well as supporting international trade and companies to
87 Chapter 17
NPL employs over 500 scientists, based in south west London, in a laboratory, which
is amongst the world’s most extensive and sophisticated measurement science
buildings.
NIST is the equivalent of NPL in the United States of America. Founded in 1901,
NIST is a non-regulatory federal agency within the U.S. Department of Commerce.
NIST's mission is to promote U.S. innovation and industrial competitiveness by
advancing measurement science, standards, and technology in ways that enhance
economic security and improve quality of life.
The NIST web site at www.nist.gov often contains documents relevant to this guide in
Adobe PDF.
A.1.3 EURAMET
EURAMET serves the promotion of science and research and European co-operation
in the field of metrology.
For more information visit the EURAMET web site at: www.euramet.org
More information about GPS can be found at the Institute for Geometrical Product
Specification website www.ifgps.com. Click on resources for more information on
GPS.
A.2 Networks
This special interest group reflects a range of interests from a number of sectors,
including advanced manufacturing and engineering, transport and energy. It aims to
ensure that the needs of members with an interest in dimensional, mass, temperature
and optical measurement are reflected in the range of events held under the
Measurement Network. These events provide a forum which enable members to
exchange views and information.
SSfM is an programme that underpins the NMS, focussing on the use of mathematics
and computing in metrology. It aims to achieve a balance between research and
89 Chapter 17
development, whilst also extending the range of techniques and applications available
to meet the continually changing needs of metrology. The overall aim of the SSfM
Programme is to tackle a wide range of generic issues, some of which are problems in
metrology that require the application of established software engineering practices,
whilst others require advances in mathematics, software engineering or theoretical
physics. The programme, thus, includes work in metrology, mathematics, software
and theoretical physics, with strong links between the various disciplines.
The SSfM Club is aimed at users and suppliers of metrology software, giving them a
say in the direction of the Programme. It is the focal point for the distribution of
general information arising from the Programme.
ISO 3650 Geometrical Product Specifications (GPS) Length Standards Gauge blocks
BS 4064/5 Specification for Plain Setting rings For Use With Internal Diameter
Measuring Machines
A.4 Traceability
Traceability in measurement is the concept of establishing a valid calibration of a
measuring instrument or measurement standard, by a step-by-step comparison with
better standards up to an accepted or specified standard. In general, the concept of
traceability implies eventual reference to an appropriate national or international
standard.
For the majority of industrial applications, companies can establish a link to national
measurement standards through the calibration and testing services offered by United
Kingdom Accreditation Service (UKAS) accredited laboratories, which are in turn
traceable to NPL. However, for challenging or novel measurements to the highest
standards of accuracy, which are not catered for by UKAS-accredited laboratories,
NPL can often provide a traceable measurement solution directly to industry.
91 Chapter 17
The United Kingdom Accreditation Service is the sole national accreditation body
recognised by government to assess, against internationally agreed standards,
organisations that provide certification, testing, inspection and calibration services.
The following UKAS laboratories are able to undertake ISO 10360 tests (correct
as of July 2011).
To provide:
• the underpinning knowledge and expertise for anyone who uses measurement
tools or requires an appreciation of the importance of measurement,
• the principle knowledge and practical training for people who are required to
use dimensional measurement techniques to complete their daily tasks; and
• the tools to instil and encourage questioning culture.
Enabling:
Course Content
A four day training course for those who have a good basic understanding of
measurement principles gained through the Level 1 training course.
To provide:
• the underpinning knowledge and expertise for anyone who uses measurement
tools or requires an appreciation of the importance of measurement,
• the principle knowledge and practical training for people who are required to
use co-ordinate measurement techniques to complete their daily tasks; and
• the tools to instil and encourage questioning and planning culture
Enabling:
Course Content
Process Control A
Content covered:
Statistical Process Control theory; Variation – common, special causes;
Prevention versus detection; Collecting and calculating data when
using measuring tools; Callipers; micrometers; Basic charts – Tally
chart/Frequency Table, Histogram, Control Chart; Reacting to
variation; Benefits of process control; Standard deviation; Capability
indices; Fundamentals of Gauge R&R.
Co-ordinate Principles A
Content covered:
Application of equipment: First principles; Co-ordinate Measuring
Machine; Optical and vision machines; Articulating arm; Laser tracker;
Projector; Microscopes; Height gauge with processor; Contour
measurement equipment.
Machine performance: Calibration standards; Self-
verification/artefacts; Measurement volume.
Alignment Techniques: 321/point system alignment; Flat face
alignment; Axes alignment; Car line/engine centre line.
Machine appreciation: Ownership; Care; Respect; Cost; Contribution
to the business.
Work Holding: Fixturing; Rotary table; Clamping; How to hold the
part; Influence of component weight, size, shape; Free state;
Restrained state.
Co-ordinate geometry: Points; Plane; Line; Circle; Cylinder; Cone;
Sphere; Ellipse.
Sensor Types: Probing Strategies; Relevant standards; Environment.
Measurement Strategies: Number of points; Partial arc; Contact/non
contact.
A.6 Manufacturers
The following is a list of manufacturers providing products or services relevant to this
guide. The appearance of a manufacturer in this list is not an endorsement of its
96 Chapter 17
products or services. The list contains those companies known to the author and may
not be complete.
Bal-Tec
1550 E. Slauson Avenue
Los Angeles,
A 90011-5099
ETALON AG
Premises of the Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt (PTB)
Bundesallee 100
38116 Braunschweig
GERMANY
97 Chapter 17
Renishaw are manufacturers of the machine checking gauge and laser interferometer
systems
Renishaw plc
New Mills
Wotton-under-Edge
Gloucestershire
GL12 8JR
United Kingdom
Saphirwerk Industrieprodukte AG
Erlenstrasse 36
CH-2555 Brügg
Switzerland
Website: www.saphirwerk.com/english/
98 Chapter 17
When making a measurement you may think that it is a simple mater of the result
falling within the tolerance band to prove conformance. This is not the case as the
following example shows.
The designer has specified that a hole should be 50 mm ± 0.005 mm (top and bottom
lines in figure 38). The first operator measures the size with a traceable micrometer as
50.004 mm and states that the hole conforms to the drawing. However, the foreman,
looking at this result examines the uncertainty of the micrometer. The measurement
uncertainty of the micrometer is 0.003 mm and applying this uncertainty he realises
that the actual size could lie between 50.001 mm and 50.007 mm. He gets the hole re-
measured on a bore comparator that has a 0.001 mm uncertainty. The measurement
comes out at 50.006 mm and conformance is not proven. As a general rule the
measurement uncertainty of the equipment should be no greater than ten percent of
the tolerance band.
Note that in this case both measurement results agree to within their uncertainties. For
measurement 1, however, the measured value is less than the uncertainty away from
the upper specification limit (USL) and no real information has been obtained about
whether the true value is inside or outside the specification limits.
50.008
50.006
50.004
50.002
Diameter/mm
50.000
USL
49.998 LSL
Measurement
49.996
49.994
49.992
49.990
49.988
1 2
Operator
ISO 14253 recommends that the following rules be applied for the most important
specifications controlling the function of the workpiece or the measuring equipment.
At the design stage the terms “in specification” and “out of specification” refer
to the areas separated by the upper and lower tolerance (double sided) or either
LSL or USL for a one sided specification (see figure 39 areas 1 and 2, line C).
These rules are to be applied when no other rules are in existence between supplier
and customer. ISO 14253 allows for other rules to be agreed between customer and
supplier. These rules must be fully documented.
Figure 39 Uncertainty of measurement: the uncertainty range reduces the conformance and non-
conformance zones (Copyright BSI – extract from BS EN ISO 14253-1:1999)
2
A complete statement of the result of a measurement includes information about the uncertainty of
measurement.
100 Chapter 17
50.015
50.010
50.005
Size/mm
USL
50.000 LSL
Measurement
49.995
49.990
49.985
1 2 3
Item number
Referring to figure 40, three items have been measured. The purple line shows the
LSL, the blue line the USL.
In the case of item 1 the result of measurement, complete statement straddles the USL
and neither conformance nor non-conformance with a specification can be proven. In
the case of item 2 the result of measurement, complete statement is above the USL
and so non-conformance is proven. In the case of item 3 the result of measurement,
complete statement is above the LSL and below the USL and so conformance is
proven.
The supplier shall prove conformance in accordance with clause 5.23 of BS EN ISO
14253 using their estimated uncertainty of measurement.
When evaluating the measurement result the uncertainty is always at the disadvantage
of the party with onus on proof.
In the past the measurement uncertainty has been ignored when ascertaining
conformance with a specification as long as the uncertainty was 1/10th of the
specification width. This procedure is no longer acceptable.
3
Rule for proving conformance with specification.
4
Rule for proving non-conformance with specifications.