1. Field of the Invention
This invention relates to apparatus for quickly retaining and releasing parts to be optically measured.
2. Background Art
Traditional manual, gauging devices and techniques have been replaced to some extent by automatic inspection methods and systems. However, such automatic inspection methods and systems still have a number of shortcomings associated with them.
WO 2005/022076 discloses a plurality of light line generators (72) which generate associated beams of light (26) that intersect a part (14) to be inspected. Each beam of light (26) illuminates at least one side of the part (14) with a line of light occluded by the part (14), and at least three light responsive sensors (104) provide for generating a signal (24) responsive to an occlusion of a corresponding line of light on a corresponding side of at least one side of the part (14). Each of the light responsive sensors is responsive to an occlusion at a different azimuthal location. A processor (28) analyzes the signals (24) in relation to a measure of relative location of the part (14) from a motion (18) or position sensor. The part (14) may be released from a clamp (52) to drop through the beams of light (26), or the beams of light (26) may be moved relative to the part (14).
U.S. Pat. No. 6,313,948 discloses an optical beam shaper for production of a uniform sheet of light for use in a parts inspection system having a light source including a coherent light generator, a diffractive beam shaper, and lens elements.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,285,031 discloses an inspection system for evaluating rotationally asymmetric workpieces for conformance to configuration criteria. The system has a track for causing the workpieces to translate through a test section. The test section includes a plurality of electromagnetic energy sources. The plurality of electromagnetic energy sources are oriented with respect to the track such that the workpieces occlude the plurality of electromagnetic energy sources upon passing through the test section. The test section further has electromagnetic energy detectors for receiving the electromagnetic energy to provide output signals related to the intensity of the occluded electromagnetic energy incident on the electromagnetic energy detectors, and a signal processor for receiving and processing the output signals.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,252,661 discloses an inspection system for evaluating workpieces for conformance to configuration criteria. The system includes a track for causing workpieces to translate through a test section. The test section includes a light source for producing a uniform sheet of light. The light source is oriented with respect to the track such that the workpieces occlude the uniform sheet of light upon passing through the test section. The test section further has a video system for receiving the occluded uniform sheet of light, providing output signals related to the intensity of the occluded uniform sheet of light incident on the video system, and a signal processor for receiving and processing the output signals.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,959,108 discloses an inspection system wherein workpieces to be inspected are consecutively and automatically launched to pass unsupported through the field of view of a plurality of cameras. As a workpiece passes through the field of view of the cameras, a sensor is activated which communicates with a computer system to activate the cameras to capture an unobstructed image, or image data, of the workpiece. The image data is then analyzed by a computer program to verify whether the image data indicates that the workpiece does not meet established criteria and therefore is considered defective. If the image does not meet the established criteria, the workpiece is rejected and segregated from workpieces which have not been identified as defective.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,608,530 discloses a laser for producing a beam of radiation which is then refined in cross-sectional dimension by use of plano-cylindrical lenses. The refined beam of radiation falls incident on a part to be measured. The unobstructed portion of the beam is then bifurcated by a pair of reflective surfaces which produce non-parallel radiating beams. Each resulting beam comprises the unobstructed portion of radiation which has passed radially opposed halves of the part. The magnitude of radiation present in each non-parallel radiating beam is then measured.
U.S. Pat. No. 4,831,251 discloses an optical device for discriminating threaded workpiece by the handedness by their screw thread profiles. The device present a pair of light beams which pass generally tangent to the workpiece at angularly displaced positions. The light beams are inclined to follow the helix direction of a given handedness of a workpiece. Upon axial advancement of a workpiece through the device, a chopped output from the photodetectors indicates that the handedness of the threads matches the inclination of the light beams. The oppositely threaded workpiece, however, provides a generally constant DC output. With appropriate signal processing electronics, an automatic system for discriminating workpieces by thread handedness is provided.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,383,021 discloses a non-contact inspection system capable of evaluating spatial form parameters of a workpiece to provide inspection of parts in production. The system causes parts to be sequentially loaded onto an inclined track where they pass through a test section. The test section includes a length detection array for measuring the length of the workpiece, which includes a source generating a sheet of light oriented in the longitudinal direction of the workpiece. The profile of the parts are evaluated by one or more light sources also creating a sheet of light oriented transversed to the longitudinal axis of the parts. Single channel photodetectors are provided for each of the sources which provides an analog output of the extent to which each sheet of light is occluded by the part. These outputs are analyzed through appropriate signal processing hardware and software to generate length and profile data related to the workpiece geometry.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,568,263 discloses a non-contact inspection system capable of evaluating spatial form parameters of a workpiece to provide inspection of parts in production. The system causes parts to be sequentially loaded onto an incline track where they pass through a test section. The test section includes a length detection array for measuring the length of the workpiece, which includes a source generating a sheet of light oriented in the longitudinal direction of the workpiece. The profile of the parts are evaluated by one or more light sources also creating a sheet of light oriented transverse to the longitudinal axis of the parts. First and second pairs of single channel photodetectors are provided for each of the light sources which provides a pair of analog outputs of the extent to which each sheet of light is occluded by the part, as well as an ability to eliminate noise or scintillation caused by a point source of light, for example with a laser light source. These outputs are analyzed through appropriate signal processing hardware and software to generate length and profile data related to the workpiece geometry.
U.S. Pat. No. 4,852,983 discloses an optical system which simulates the optical effect of traveling over a large distance on light traveling between reference surfaces.
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2005/0174567 discloses a system to determine the presence of cracks in parts. The presence of cracks is determined through the use of an imaging device and illumination source. The part is moved along a track where it is sensed by a position sensor to initiate the inspection. The illumination source projects a sheet of light onto the part to be inspected. The line formed by the intersection of the sheet of light and the part is focused onto the imaging device. The imaging device creates a digital image which is analyzed to determine if cracks are present on the part.
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2006/0236792 discloses an inspection station for a workpiece including a conveyor, a mechanism for rotating the workpiece, and a probe. The conveyor includes a fixture for locating the workpiece and the conveyor is configured to translate the workpiece in a linear manner. A mechanism, such as a belt, engages the workpiece thereby rotating the workpiece within the fixture. The probe is configured to indicate if the workpiece conforms to quality criteria. To facilitate inspection while the conveyor translates the workpiece, the probe is attached to a stage where the stage is configured to move the probe synchronously with the workpiece over an inspection region.
U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,168,458 and 5,170,306 disclose methods and systems for gaging threaded fasteners to obtain trilobular parameters.
Other U.S. patents related to the invention include: U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,315,688; 4,598,998; 4,644,394; 4,852,983; 4,906,098 and 5,521,707.
An object of the present invention is to provide an improved apparatus for quickly retaining and releasing parts to be optically measured.
In carrying out the above object and other objects of the present invention, an apparatus for quickly retaining and releasing parts having a wide range of sizes and designs at an optical measurement station is provided. The apparatus includes a rod having proximal and distal ends. The apparatus further includes a part-engaging first tip attached to the distal end of the rod to move therewith. The apparatus still further includes a part-engaging second tip. The apparatus includes a support structure for supporting the second tip and the rod. The apparatus further includes a quick-release, clamping mechanism for adjustably and releasably clamping the rod to the support structure so that the rod can move the first tip between a part-release position in which a part held between the tips is released for removal from the station and a part-retaining position in which a part is firmly held between the tips. Held parts having a wide range of sizes and designs can be optically measured at the station.
The apparatus may include a spring for spring-loading the first tip at the distal end of the rod so that the first tip can apply a variable clamping force to the part.
The support structure may include a rod support. The clamping mechanism may include first and second friction release clamps adjustably mounted on the rod for adjustably and releasably clamping the rod to the rod support. Displacement of the first clamp in a first direction along the rod may allow the rod to move in a second direction opposite the first direction towards the part-retaining position. Displacement of the second clamp in the second direction along the rod may allow the rod to move in the first direction towards the part-release position.
The support structure may include a guide support. The apparatus may further include a guide mechanism supported by the guide support for guiding sliding movement of the rod between the part-release and part-retaining positions.
Further in carrying out the above object and other objects of the present invention, an apparatus for quickly retaining and releasing parts having a wide range of sizes and designs at an optical measurement station is provided. The apparatus includes a rod having proximal and distal ends. The apparatus further includes a part-engaging first tip attached to the distal end of the rod to move therewith. The apparatus still further includes a part-engaging second tip. The apparatus includes a support structure for supporting the second tip and the rod. The apparatus further includes a guide mechanism supported by the support structure for guiding sliding movement of the rod between part-release and part-retaining positions. The apparatus still further includes a quick-release, clamping mechanism for adjustably and releasably clamping the rod to the support structure so that the rod can move the first tip between the part-release position in which a part held between the tips is released for removal from the station and the part-retaining position in which a part is firmly held between the tips. Held parts having a wide range of sizes and designs can be optically measured at the station.
The apparatus may include a spring for spring-loading the first tip at the distal end of the rod so that the first tip can apply a variable clamping force to the part.
The support structure may include a rod support. The clamping mechanism may include first and second friction release clamps adjustably mounted on the rod for adjustably and releasably clamping the rod to the rod support. Displacement of the first clamp in a first direction along the rod may allow the rod to move in a second direction opposite the first direction towards the part-retaining position. Displacement of the second clamp in the second direction along the rod may allow the rod to move in the first direction towards the part-release position.
The second tip may be a drive bit.
The first tip may be threadedly attached to the rod at the distal end.
The guide mechanism may include a pair of rod guides having aligned holes extending completely therethrough. The rod may extend through the aligned holes of the rod guides.
The apparatus may include a handle mounted at the proximal end of the rod to facilitate movement of the rod by hand.
The part may be a threaded fastener having an apertured head. The second tip may comprise a drive bit that fits into the apertured head.
The part may be a nut having threads. The second tip may comprise a threaded plug gage for threadedly receiving the nut thereon to inspect the threads of the nut.
The support structure may include a guide support for supporting the rod guides in spaced relationship along the rod.
The above object and other objects, features, and advantages of the present invention are readily apparent from the following detailed description of the best mode for carrying out the invention when taken-in connection with the accompanying drawings.
a is a perspective schematic view of the part holder base with a drive bit supported thereon and the calibration device suspended therefrom;
b is a top plan view of the base of
c is a sectional view taken along lines 3c-3c of
a is a side elevational view of the calibration device or cone of
b is a top plan view of the cone of
c is a sectional view taken along lines 4c-4c of
a-46d are top plan views of the assembly of
The overall system described herein is often referred to as “Laser Lab.” Laser Lab is a trademark of the assignee of this application. It is to be understood that numerous inventions are described herein, only some of which are claimed herein. The other disclosed inventions are claimed in the applications noted in the Cross Reference to Related Applications part of this application. It is also to be understood that a number of words and phrases are explained in a Glossary portion of this application. The Glossary explains but does not unduly limit the words and phrases contained therein.
The Laser Lab system(i.e.,
A PC tower unit (i.e.,
Part holder and upper tooling units (
An optical head (i.e.,
A slide/base unit (i.e.,
Referring again to the drawing figures,
a is a perspective schematic view of the part holder base unit 14.
A cap 49 covers the assembly.
a is a side elevational view of the calibration cone 40. As described in detail below, the calibration cone 40 has a precisely manufactured shape that is utilized in measuring the relationship between raw digitized sensor signals and calibrated physical dimensions. Typically, the cone 40 is sent to a certified laboratory which inspects the cone 40. The laboratory then provides a long form certification that is traceable to NIST.
b is a top plan view of the cone 40 of
The calibration cone has a central hole, preferably about 1/16″, that is utilized extensively during assembly of the cone/part holder sub-assembly to the slide base unit as illustrated in
At that time, a thin rod (“calibration fine centering rod”) is inserted through the cone's central hole when the optical head is in the “down” position. The rod defines the center of the calibration cone more precisely than the constant diameter region-O which has a ⅛″ diameter. When the head is in the “down” position the light planes pass below the cone, nominally unblocked.
To use the rod, the part holder (44 in
Moving the “calibration fine centering rod” into and out of the light planes allow one to determine if the light plane center line passes through the rod. One observes the laser sensor outputs as the rod moves into and out of the beam. When both left and right sensor outputs show a slight reduction from the effect of the rod blocking the light beam, then the light beam center line passes through the centering rod.
The calibration cone is manufactured with special instructions to fabricate the central hole so that there is a “slip fit” of the “calibration fine centering rod” in the calibration cone's central hole. One rod is paired with each calibration cone, by the cone fabricator.
The use of the “calibration fine centering rod” makes it possible to measure whether or not the cone/part holder center is aligned with the optical head's 4-beam intersection point.
To move the cone/part holder with high precision and complete the alignment/centering operation, four fine-pitch “pusher screws” are utilized. Each “pusher screw” is mounted to the triangular base of the slide/base unit (
After the cone/part holder assembly is centered to the optical head beam center, the four “pusher screws” are tightened, maintaining the base plate 50 position via compression. Then the “pusher screw” locking sleeves are tightened. Then the base plate 50 hold down screws are tightened. The “pusher screw” locking sleeves can also be secured with an appropriate glue. The above-noted alignment process centers the calibration cone precisely, with respect to the beam center of the optical head.
The Laser Lab is a system for measuring the dimensions of a variety of manufactured parts and/or assembled parts such as parts manufactured in the fastener industry. These parts are typically formed from cylindrical stock by roll and impact die forming methods or by cutting with lathes. The final part can have forms that are built up from basic shape units, such as circular or tapered cylinder, threaded cylinder, or additional simple shapes such as Trilobe cylinder or hex cylinder.
Substantially all of the measurements obtained with the Laser Lab system are based on two basic components: (1) the height of a surface from the light plane split line, and (2) the positions along the optical head's stage axis corresponding to the various heights.
In addition, the Laser Lab system performs multiple measurements from (4) different measurement directions. However, it is to be understood that, depending on the part, the measurements can be taken from as few as two measurement directions. In some cases, as many as five measurement directions may be needed. This capability of being able to obtain multiple measurements from multiple directions allows the Laser Lab to explicitly utilize 3-D shape information, especially in the measurement of threaded cylinders and non-cylindrical shapes.
In this section the measurements made by a single laser are described with reference to
The light plane generator module 66 of
The PC analyzes the digitized signals from the receiver electronics and computes left and right sensor heights. The measurement computation utilizes a sensor height calibration (described later herein) to convert the raw digitized sensor signals into calibrated heights, measured in mm.
The surface height measurement is further illustrated in
In what follows the measurements that are based on light detections in the left or right receivers are referred to as left or right sensor signals or measurements, depending on the context. With (4) laser beam lines there are (8) sensor signals in the system 10. When referring to these signals in the entire system 10 the laser number is added to specify the beam line. Thus names for the sensor signals range from laser-1, left sensor through laser-4, right sensor.
As previously mentioned,
The optical head 12 generates (4) spaced apart laser light planes and is translated up and down by the moving stage system illustrated in
This combination of the linear encoder electronics, the measurement trigger signal, and the receiver electronics creates a sequential record of sensor digitized raw signals when the stage moves from bottom to top. The resulting record can be interpreted as a record of light blockage by either a part or the calibration device at a known series of positions, spaced 4 μm apart. In a preferred system the total linear length of stage movement is about 235 mm.
The position measurement system described above measures position intervals, but generally not repeatable positions. The moving stage is stopped near the top and bottom travel limits by electronic limit switches (not shown). Reaching the top or bottom travel limit switch by the stage causes the motor 20 to stop. However the actual stopped position is only approximate, since the limit switches are not precision instruments calibrated to the encoder 30 and since the distance the stage requires for stopping depends on the speed of travel. In practice this results in an uncertainty in the stopping position that can be as large as 500 μm.
To make a predictable starting position a light blockage signal is analyzed to extract the index position of the beginning of the calibration cone 40 in each sensor's digitized raw signal. The beginning of the cone 40 is preferably formed by a 0.125″ diameter cylinder 96 of the cone 40 about 0.2375″ long. The raw sensor signal is at a high level as each light plane moves towards the beginning edge of the cone 40, followed by a sharp step decrease in the response, and finally followed by a constant response along the length of the cylinder 96. The analysis software locates the midpoint of the sharp step in the response and use that index position to set the position zero for the sensor stage axis position. An example of the raw sensor signal is shown in
It is found in practice that this technique can reduce the positional uncertainty of fixed positions on the part or on the cone 40 to an amount (5 μm) that is much less than the uncertainty in the stopping position (˜300 μm).
The plane of laser light from laser-4 is blocked by the calibration cone 40 before the plane of laser light from laser-1 on this upward moving scan. That is because the light plane for the laser-1 is the lowest in the optical head 12 as shown in
As previously mentioned, the optical head 12 contains (4) beam line subsystems. The subsystems are aligned on a common central axis. Looking directly down on the optical head 12 the beam line light plane split lines preferably intersect at a common point as shown in
This arrangement, combined with the mechanical scanning of the light planes, results in (8) outline images of the part, one per sensor.
The calibrated distance between the shadow points and the light plane split line is the sensor height as shown in
As previously mentioned,
The calibration cone 40 is a device which has a precisely manufactured shape or outer surface which is scanned to obtain calibration data which, in turn, is used to convert sensor raw digitized signals to calibrated sensor height measurements. The cone 40 is a rotationally symmetric with several distinct regions, each designed to perform a different calibration function.
A symbolic sketch of the calibration cone's form is shown in
Each of the lasers 64 is mounted in the optical head 12 at a different height offset to the base plate 61 of the optical head 12 as described with reference to
The precise location of the middle of the “begin cone edge” marks the common zero (0) of each laser sensor's calibrated stage position.
It is important to select a common zero position in a plane that is perpendicular to the stage axis 28 and aligned parallel to the light planes in the optical head 12. The position zero that is selected in the calibration process is the intersection of the light planes with the center of the small cylinder 96 at the beginning of the calibration cone 40 (i.e.,
A light plane split line defines a natural zero for the sensor height measurement, but the (4) light plane split lines do not necessarily intersect in a single point as illustrated in
Adding the position offset described above makes the lines defining the position zero of each sensor's calibrated height intersect at the center of the small cylinder 96 at the beginning of the calibration cone 40. Measuring the center, after calibration, typically gives a central location that is less than 1 μm from (0,0).
The calibration cone's central axis is not necessarily exactly aligned with the axis 28 of the stage motion, due to tolerance stackup on a long path from cone 40, to part holder, to base plate, to slide support, etc., and finally to the slide.
By measuring the sensor heights of the center of two calibration cone regions, “const diam-1” and “const diam-2”, the inclination of the calibration cone's aspect vector relative to the stage axis 28 can be determined.
Typical measured angles for the calibration cone aspect vector relative to the stage axis 28 are in the range (0 . . . 1 degree) or (0 . . . 17.5 mrad).
The laser light planes are not exactly perpendicular to the calibration cone aspect vector. In order to know the angle between the light planes and the calibration cone 40, the “multi-step” region is analyzed. Signal processing software can very accurately measure the position of each one of the set of 5 step edges in the “multi-step” region. The distance between the 5 step edges is precisely known. With this information the angle of the light plane relative to the cone aspect vector can be computed. This angle is important in determining exactly how the light plane intersects the calibration cone 40 and thus in extracting calibration information from the data.
Typical measured angles of the light plane relative to the calibration cone 40 are in the range (0 . . . 0.75 degree) or (0 . . . 13.1 mrad).
The output of the laser scanned measurement, is a record of the sensor digitized raw signals for each sensor. To make sensor height measurements in physical coordinates the raw signals need to be converted to sensor heights.
Two regions on the calibration cone, “const slope-1” and “const slope-2” provide this information. For example, the diameter of the intersection between a laser light plane and “const slope-1” region varies between 0.125″ and 0.750″. The exact diameter can be computed by knowing the distance between the laser light plane and the beginning of the “const slope-1” region, since the region is manufactured to high precision.
Based on the diameter of intersection and the laser sensor outputs, calibration tables may be constructed to convert digitized raw signals to calibrated sensor heights.
The raw signal level with no cone 40 or UUT in the light plane sensor beam is also measured. For small parts it is often required to extrapolate the sensor raw signal to sensor height conversion table to smaller heights than are measured on the cone. The extrapolation is carried out with less accuracy than more direct measurements, but the extrapolation is very useful, especially for parts that are only slightly smaller than the begin cone cylinder 96 (“const diam-0” region) of the cone 40 or parts that are offset from the calibration cone central axis.
The “no blockage” signal level is also required in order to correctly find the beginning of the cone 40.
Finally, excessive variability of the “no blockage” signal level is a signature of variability of the light output of the laser 64 in a beam line. This variability of the “no blockage” signal level is monitored to generate a signal which indicates that the apparatus which generates the beam line requires repair or is temporarily unable to carry out high precision diameter measurements.
This measurement goal does not involve measurement of the calibration cone 40. However, it is required to interpret calibration cone analysis. It is made possible by the physical design of the part holder base as illustrated in
Other embodiments of the calibration cone 40 are possible while still meeting the general measurement goals of the Laser Lab system 10.
These are goals that calibration analysis of the cone data meet.
In another embodiment of the calibration cone 40, changes to overall minimum and maximum width of the cone 40 can be made.
The calibration cone's “point design” allows one to extract calibration data relevant to measuring parts in the diameter range 0.125″ to 1.500″.
The system can be designed for smaller or larger parts wherein width measurement limits could be changed. A small compact system for measuring a range of smaller diameters could utilize a calibration cone 40 with minimum and maximum diameters of 0.065″ and 0.500″ for example.
In another embodiment, changes to overall length of the cone 40 can be made.
The calibration cone's “point design” is specified as a compromise between ease of analysis and physical compactness. The lower the slope in the “const slope” regions, the more precise the data that is extracted. This is due to two reasons. First, dividing up a sloping region into “bins” and then determining the raw data to height conversion factor within an individual bin is more accurate when the mechanical diameter varies least within the bin.
Second, inaccuracies in determining the light plane twist angle or light planes that are not flat are multiplied into inaccuracies in the raw data to height conversion factors by the mechanical slope of the const slope regions in the calibration cone 40.
In yet another embodiment, changes to slope in “const slope” regions can be made. As noted in the above-noted discussion, lower slopes in the “const slope” regions translates to more accuracy in the sensor raw data-to-height conversion factor tables.
A “point design” directed towards the goal of smaller parts and towards a more compact system design might have a cone 40 with the same length, but 3× smaller width dimensions. This would allow more precision in measuring smaller parts with smaller width light planes.
In another embodiment, the cone 40 can be supported either “point down” or “point up”. The mounting direction does not matter, the calibration measurement goals can be met with either orientation. However, the mounting method should still allow a region of “no blockage” sensor signal to be measured during each up/down scan.
In yet another embodiment, different number of steps in “multi-step” region can be provided. The number of steps in the “multi-step” region can be varied and the dimensions of the steps can be changed.
The calibration analysis that determines the light plane twist angle uses the difference in position between steps detected in the left and right sensors. Having more steps makes the determination more precise.
In another embodiment, changes to the number, position, or diameter of the “constant diameter” regions can be made. The calibration cone aspect vector is measured by analysis of the central axis of two constant diameter regions, “const diam-1” and “const diam-2”. Each region is the same diameter. Determination of the location of their 3-D center allow determination of the central axis of the calibration cone 40, from the two 3-D center points. It is important that both regions be the same diameter, to minimize the effect of diameter measurement errors on the calibration cone axis vector.
The regions could be a different diameter, either smaller or larger. There could also be more than two regions. Then a line could be fit through 3 or more 3-D points to determine the calibration cone axis vector. It is important that there be at least two regions, one region does not typically determine the calibration cone axis vector.
What is now described is a process oriented overview of the Laser Lab calibration procedure. In this procedure raw sensor data and geometric descriptions of the calibration cone 40 are utilized to produce calibration data. This data set can be used later to produce calibrated sensor data from raw sensor data, as described in the “data processing” section, below.
As previously mentioned, the following is a partial list of the measurement process goals that are met by the design of the mechanical calibration cone 40 and also by the calibration data analysis procedure:
After a laser lab scan of a UUT, (8) sensor digitized raw signals are stored, one each for the left and right sensors, repeated for each of (4) light planes. Each of these digitized raw sensor signals is a single “vector” or indexed list. The sensor raw signal vector has an “index” for every sample stored on the laser lab scan of the UUT; index 1999 refers to the 1999-th sample taken during the scan. The value in the vector at index 1999 is the value of the 1999-th raw signal sample.
After the raw sensor signal vectors are stored in memory of the computer or PC, the vectors are analyzed to extract calibration information. This information is extracted from the part of the digitized raw sensor signals that contains the image of the calibration cone 40. The extracted information results in a number of tables and parameters, collectively called “calibration data”.
Once calibration data has been successfully calculated it is utilized to produce a new set of vectors called “calibrated sensor data”. The new calibrated sensor data vectors contain two pieces of information at each “index”: the pair (calibrated stage position, calibrated height).
Stage position for the N-th index in the calibrated sensor data vector is the distance (in mm.) from the beginning of the calibration cone 40 to the position where the raw sensor signal at the N-th index was taken.
First the raw sensor stage indices (the index of the raw sensor signal vector) are multiplied by the stage linear encoder spacing (4 μm in the current system), producing raw sensor stage positions. Then the raw stage positions are referenced to the position of the beginning of the calibration cone 40.
Finally the raw stage positions are corrected for laser tilt. The tilt correction depends on the height of the sensor data point. If the laser plane is slightly tilted, then any non-zero sensor height also represents a slight change of stage position since the light plane, stage axis coordinate system is not orthogonal. After the correction the calibrated sensor height, calibrated sensor stage position coordinate system is orthogonal. Having an orthogonal coordinate system makes later measurement analysis much simpler.
Calibrated sensor height for the N-th index in the calibrated sensor data vector is the distance (in mm.) from the center of the calibration cone's beginning cylinder 96 to the shadow ray that produced the raw sensor signal at the N-th index.
As discussed herein above, the observations in the non-orthogonal stage position, light plane coordinate system are corrected for the effects of laser tilt.
The corrections for laser tilt result in a vector of calibrated sensor data where the stage position distances between adjacent index positions in the vector can vary around an average value of 4 μm.
Since uniformly sampled data is much easier to work with for measurement analysis; the calibrated sensor data vector is decimated or sampled a uniformly sampled calibrated sensor data vector for measurement processing. In the current system the data is decimated to the original linear encoder sample spacing of 4 μm.
Calibration analysis refers to the analysis of the raw sensor data vectors containing an image of the calibration cone 40. The output of the analysis is a set of tables and parameters called “calibration data”.
Rough edge processing discovers the presence and rough parameterization of the signal edges in the raw sensor data.
Rough edge processing attempts to find the “pattern” of edges that identify the calibration cone 40 in the raw sensor data vector. This pattern is schematically illustrated in
Two types of edges are found. The first type of edge, a “step edge”, represents a vertical segment on the calibration cone 40. A step edge detector finds one edge corresponding to the begin cone edge and (5) edges corresponding to the locations of the vertical segments in the calibration cone's multi-step region.
A second type of edge, a “slope edge” represents the location where two straight segments join with each segment having a different inclination to the vertical. A slope edge detector looks for slope edges only in locations where there is not a step edge. All step edges are also slope edges. The slope edge detector finds a first unique slope edge at the location where “const diam-0” region meets “const slope-1” region, and in (3) other places.
If the rough edge processing step does not find the calibration cone edge pattern, then the calibration analysis process is stopped.
Precise edge processing finds the exact locations of step edges in the calibration cone edge pattern. Precise edge processing utilizes outputs from rough edge processing to determine initial estimates for the edge locations, which it then refines.
A detailed description of precise edge processing is located in Appendix B.
The knowledge of the set of (8) begin cone step edges, one for each sensor, completes calibration goal G-1: stage position alignment of different sensors. This data is stored in the calibration data and utilized to convert raw sensor data to calibrated sensor data.
At 4 μm per sampled point, there can be too much data to be effectively analyzed for certain calibration processes. Data binning is the process of dividing up a set of sampled points, grouping the set into a smaller set of “bins”, each bin containing a number of adjacent sampled points.
For the tables relating the raw sensor data to calibrated sensor heights binning is utilized. For example, the “const diam-1” region on the calibration cone 40 is about 12 mm long, ranging from 3.810 mm to 15.558 mm along the cone axis. This would be about 3000 data points without binning. At the nominal bin size of 0.2 mm this works out to about 60 bins.
Another advantage of binning is that the data within the bin can be averaged and checked for consistency.
Finally, the data bins are not constructed within a “guard” region within 0.2 mm. of a detected edge. For the “const diam-1” region the edges “slope edge-1” and “slope edge-2” mark the boundaries of the region and the “guard” region assures us that the boundary data bin contains only data from the uniformly sloping region.
Four sets of data bins are produced, for each of (8) sensors:
The “const slope-n” data is used in the construction of the sensor height calibration table. The “const diam-n” data is used as input data to the process that finds the position of the calibration cone's 0.750″ diameter cylinder, for the cone aspect angle estimation process.
Laser roll processing finds the angle between a light plane and the calibration cone 40 in each laser's calibrated sensor coordinate system.
For each laser the precise edge locations for the (5) edges in the “multi step” region are obtained, one set for the left sensor and another set for the right sensor. The difference between the left sensor and the right sensor edge positions can be used as input to a least squares estimate of the laser roll angle.
The detailed method of estimation is described in Appendix B.
The estimate of the laser roll angle assumes that the light plane is flat.
The estimate of (4) laser roll angles completes calibration goal G-4: light plane angle, relative to calibration cone 40. These angles are stored into the calibration data.
The primary goal of the sensor blockage and tilt process is to generate a calibration table that relates the sensor raw signal values to the calibrated sensor heights.
Achieving the primary goal is made difficult because the calibration cone 40 may be mounted at an angle that may not be parallel to the stage axis 28. If the cone angle is not parallel to the stage axis 28 then the interpretation of exactly where the light plane hits the calibration cone 40 depends on the angle between the calibration cone 40 and the stage axis 28.
To solve this problem an iterative process was created.
First, the sensor calibration tables were created, assuming the cone angle and stage axes 28 are parallel. Then using the newly created sensor calibration table an estimate of the cone angle was made. The process is repeated (4) times. The iterative process has been found to converge in all cases. It is recommended that the mechanical alignment of the cone aspect angle to the stage axis 28 be less than (1 degree).
This process is documented in more detail in Appendix B.
The sensor blockage and tilt calibration process has two outputs.
The (8) calibrated sensor height tables complete calibration goal G-5: sensor height calibration. The 3-D cone aspect angle meets calibration goal G-3: calibration cone aspect vector, relative to stage axis 28.
The tables that correlates raw sensor data to calibrated sensor heights may need to be extended. Sometimes a small part with a center offset has a sensor height that is smaller than the minimum height in the table. There are also gaps in the data, due to the presence of “guard” regions, as discussed herein.
Data gaps are addressed by a linear interpolation method.
For sensor heights that are smaller than the minimum sensor height in the sensor height calibration table the table is extrapolated to a zero height. The last 10 points in the sensor height calibration table are fit to a line. Then additional points are added to the sensor height calibration table between the table's minimum height and a height of zero.
The same process is carried out to extrapolate the sensor height calibration table to the maximum sensor height allowed (0.750″).
The outputs of the process are additional sensor height calibration table entries, generated from linear extrapolations to zero height and to maximum height.
For each sensor calibration table an offset is computed to ensure that the sensor height is zero when the sensor views the calibration cone's begin cone cylinder 96 (const diam-0 region).
This data meets calibration goal G-2: sensor height zero position alignment of different sensors.
What follows is a description of the structure of the thread parameter estimation process. This process provides one embodiment of the standard thread measurement “feature” in the system 10.
Thread signal processing is the process of estimating the following thread parameters:
The input data to the process is “calibrated part data”. This data set consists of (8) vectors, one for each photodetector or sensor. Each vector consists of an indexed table of elements, each containing a (z,h) pair. Each (z,h) pair measures the position of the UUT's shadow ray in a coordinate system that represents each sensor's view of the UUT. z is a measurement of calibrated sensor stage axis position, and represents the distance along the stage axis between the current data point and the stage position where the light plane hits the beginning of the calibration cone. h is a measurement of calibrated sensor height and represents the distance between the middle of the beginning cylinder of the calibration cone and the shadow ray, perpendicular to the stage axis.
As the thread signal processing proceeds, a number of intermediate data products are produced in early processing stages that are further analyzed in later stages. These include:
These intermediate data products are analyzed to produce final estimates of the thread parameters. For example major diameter is estimated as twice the radius of the 3-D peak cylinder. The 3-D peak cylinder axis then depends on the precise peak/trough locations. The peak/trough locations then depend on the search intervals based on rough peak locations and pos/neg crossings, and on data from the original calibrated part data.
Inspection Region
The thread processing occurs between stage position limits called an inspection region. In the Laser Lab template editor, the user specifies the inspection region by manipulating the upper and lower stage position limits, overlaid on an image of the part.
These limits utilize the calibrated sensor stage position so that measurements by different lasers are aligned to the approximately similar physical positions on the part.
The estimation of thread parameters is specified to be an average estimate over all the data within the inspection region. In practice, some of the intermediate data products are estimated outside of the inspection region in order to allow estimation of all thread parameters within the full region. For example, a wire position within the inspection region may require a thread peak outside the inspection region.
The following requirements guide the user's placement of the inspection region on the image of the part. At present the analysis software does not detect a failure of any of the listed requirements directly.
The first assumption is that the thread parameters be constant throughout the inspection region. This enables the software to average the estimates from different positions within the inspection region and not be concerned with partitioning or segmenting the data into different regions for special processing.
This requirement excludes the following types of data from the inspection region:
A second assumption is that the inspection region contains at least 4-6 thread pitches. This amount of data is required to construct several of the intermediate data products with the required accuracy. The intermediate data product that is most closely tied to this requirement is the 3-D peak cylinder described herein.
A third assumption is that the thread be manufactured with a 60-degree flank angle. Thread processing implicitly utilizes this parameter in several places. One of the most direct usages is the conversion of lead deviation into functional diameter. Other flank angles or other thread form shapes would require different procedures.
A fourth assumption is that the thread has a cylindrical cross section. Non-cylindrical threads would require the 3-D peak cylinder to be suitably generalized. Incorrect fit to a non cylindrical cross section would lead to incorrect lead deviation measures in the current implementation.
A fifth assumption is that the thread has a single helix. Currently double threads are not supported.
The software does not check the assumptions. Failure to meet the requirements will typically lead to bias in the thread measurement, or in a failure to successfully measure the inspection region.
In practice these requirements limit the measurement of the following objects:
The thread model described hereinbelow is a sampled representation of one sensor's thread profile, for exactly one pitch. The thread model starts at the midpoint of a rising thread flank and ends one pitch later.
Using a correlation detector the thread model is matched to data within the inspection regions, producing thresholded detections within the inspection region, that are called crossings.
Later processing “refinements” noted herein may make the crossings more accurate. The refinements also separate the crossings into positive crossings (right flank line in
A peak/trough detector extracts rough peak and trough positions between the matched adjacent pairs of positive and negative crossings.
A pitch estimate is required for step set gage wire diameter. The estimate is required to be accurate enough to unambiguously select a unique gage wire from the set appropriate for the measurement. The current process utilizes a two-stage process.
This process may be simplified as described herein.
First Estimate
Crossing data is analyzed and averaged over all sensors to create a thread pitch estimate, the “crossing pitch”.
Second Pitch Estimate
The steps: set wire gage diameter, wire position search intervals, measure flank lines and measure 3-point diameters noted hereinbelow are completed in a first iteration. Then the wire positions are averaged over all sensors and positions to compute a pitch estimate.
Gage wires are utilized in physical thread measurements of pitch diameter in the prior art. Two wires are placed in adjacent threads on one side of the UUT, and a single wire is placed on the other side of the UUT. A micrometer measures the distance between the reference line established by the two adjacent gage wires and the reference point established by the other gage wire. A tabulated correction formula converts the micrometer distance to an estimate of the pitch diameter.
Gage wire sizes are thus selected prior to the thread measurement. To do this one estimates the thread pitch as previously described and then one selects the closest gage wire in a set to the pitch estimate. The gage wire set utilized is the one appropriate to the type of measurement; currently there is one set for the metric coarse thread sequence, and another for a similar English thread set. The gage wire sets are chosen at part template edit time, by making a selection in a pull down list.
One places “virtual” gage wires onto the calibrated sensor data throughout the inspection region. In order to place the “virtual” gage wires we must identify search intervals for each wire to be located.
A requirement of the following processing steps is that the wire positions in the inspection region have no gaps. Another requirement is that a wire position search interval consist of two valid thread peaks, one valid thread trough between the two thread peaks, and valid positive/negative crossings between the peak/trough pairs.
One then searches the set of positive/negative crossings and peak/trough positions the set of wire position search intervals to analyze. The result is a set of intervals, one set per sensor.
The specification of a valid wire position search interval means that the form of the calibrated sensor data is approximately as shown in
For the left flank line (example) we analyze all data between the rough positions of the left peak and the central trough. One then determines the height limits of a flank line data extraction region that covers 70% (a configurable parameter) of the height interval between left peak and central trough. This data is extracted into a data set and fit to a line, becoming the left flank line.
The procedure avoids the non-linear regions near the left peak and central trough. In addition a “flank line valid” flag is computed, based on the rms distance between the left flank line and the data within the left flank line data extraction region. If the rms distance between the flank line and the data points in the flank line data extraction interval is larger than 10 μm per point (a configurable parameter), then the flag is set to invalid.
The process is repeated for the right flank line and then for all wire position search intervals.
The wire positions are calculated, given the left and right flank lines and the wire size. As shown in
The position has a “valid” flag which is computed as the AND of the two flank line “valid” flags.
The 3-point technique is a method to measure the minor, major, and pitch diameters without explicitly utilizing 3-D information. All computations are carried out in the 2-D laser sensor coordinate system.
For example, consider the major diameter. It is defined as the diameter of a cylinder that contains all the inspection region's thread peaks.
In this method, the top of a thread peak in calibrated sensor (stage position, height) coordinates forms an elementary measurement. The elementary measurements are combined into triplets for further analysis. Only peaks from the two sensors of a single laser are combined.
Two adjacent thread peak positions in sensor-1 are combined with the thread peak position in sensor-2 that is closest to the average position of peaks in the first sensor. The two peaks in sensor-1 form a reference line. Then the distance from the reference line to the peak in sensor-2 is computed. This is the 3-peak distance for that peak triplet.
In this manner, the 3-peak distances from all adjacent peak triplets are computed, for all laser data. The 3-peak distances are all added to a data vector. The 3-peak diameter measurement is either the average or the median of all the 3-peak distances within the 3-peak data vector.
3-Point Minor Diameter
The 3-point minor diameter computes 3-point distances using precise trough locations in the sensor data. The 3-point minor diameter is the average of the 3-point distance vector.
3-Point Major Diameter
The 3-point major diameter computes 3-peak distances using precise peak locations in the sensor data. The 3-point major diameter is the median of the 3-point distance vector.
3-Point Wire Position Diameter
The 3-point pitch diameter computes 3-point distances using the wire positions computed in the sensor data. The 3-point wire position diameter is the median of the 3-point wire position diameter.
The measured thread peak position data is analyzed to obtain a 3-D cylinder with least squares methods. A mathematical description of the method is given in Appendix C.
The 3-D peak cylinder fit has several output parameters of interest:
Measured wire positions can be combined with the 3-D location of the 3-D peak cylinder's central axis. An imaginary disk, perpendicular to the cylinder axis that goes through the measured wire position marks a position on the 3 d peak cylinder axis.
A data set consisting of the projections of all sensor wire positions is constructed.
For a perfect helical thread and for perfectly measured wire positions the spacing between the positions in the projected wire positions should be exactly P/8, where P is the pitch of the thread. The (8) sensors each give a view that is rotated ⅛ revolution between adjacent sensors.
For a right handed thread, the wire positions project onto the axis at increasing positions in the order L1L, L2L, L3L, L4L, L1R, L2R, L3R, L4R, and then L1L, . . . , etc.
The output intermediate data is a vector, sorted from minimum to maximum sensor stage position of the projected wire positions. In addition each wire position data item is annotated with labels that specify the laser and sensor that produced the data item and other labels containing additional information.
Thread parameter estimation utilizes the intermediate data products and may also correct them based on a model of the measurement, prior to producing a final thread parameter estimate.
Thread pitch is estimated from the wire center intermediate data. For each sensor data set the adjacent pairs of wire positions are used to calculate an adjacent wire pitch, one per adjacent wire positions. For all lasers, each wire pitch is added to a wire pitch vector.
The wire pitch estimate is the median of the elements in the wire pitch vector
Thread major diameter is typically reported as the diameter of the 3-D peak cylinder.
If the 3-D peak cylinder fit was unsuccessful, the major diameter is estimated in a different way, detailed below. The cylinder fit can fail due to several factors listed here:
When the cylinder fit fails the major diameter is estimated from the 3-point major diameter data. This case is special because a previous condition (cylinder fit) has already failed. We found in practice that the cylinder fit most often failed when the threaded region was too short or the inspection extended beyond the end of the threaded region.
Because of this bias we found that a simple median of the 3-point major diameter data would typically be too low, most of the good 3-point data was concentrated at the highest measurements. In this case the major diameter estimate is the value such that 20% of the 3-point data is higher and 80% of the 3-point data is lower.
Calibration Correction
Major diameter is also corrected by a final end-to-end calibration of the total system. The reported major diameter is often too low, with bias ranging from −20 μm to 0.
After diameter calibration we expose the system to a set of measured thread plug gages. One then plots their major diameter bias as a function of diameter and fit a simple segmented line to the bias results. These bias fits then are entered into the system configuration file and are used to correct the measured major diameter with the measured bias.
Thread minor diameter is estimated with the 3-point minor diameter distance vector. The minor diameter value is the average of the elements in the distance vector.
Pitch diameter estimation uses two sets of intermediate data products, the wire positions and the 3-D peak cylinder fit.
The pitch diameter estimate calculation is presented in a step-by-step list below:
a) Compute the pitch diameter contact points with the thread flanks by calculating the intersection of the wire shape with the left or right flank lines.
b) Average the left and right points of intersection, and compute the distance (radius) from the average point to the 3-D peak cylinder fit axis. This is the pitch diameter radius for each wire position.
c) Calculate the average value of the pitch diameter radius for each sensor.
d) Correct each sensor's average wire position radius for the part projection angle, using the angle of the 3-D peak cylinder axis to the stage axis, projected into each sensor's coordinate system.
e) Add left and right sensor corrected pitch diameter radius estimates to produce an estimate of the pitch diameter for each laser.
f) Average the laser estimates to produce the system Pitch Diameter estimate.
Correction for Part Projection Angle
The computation of pitch diameter is complicated by projection effects. The laser light performs an almost perfect orthographic (shadow) projection of the thread's shape. However the projection is not the same thing as the thread cross section, which is specified in thread design documents. The cross section is the thread shape if it were cut by a plane going through the thread's central axis.
The difference is caused by the thread lead angle, which is in the range of 1-3 degrees for many typical threads. The lead angle means that the thread cross section is most accurately viewed in shadow when the viewing direction coincides with the direction of the lead.
It is impossible to position the thread so that a shadow view of the thread is simultaneously aligned with the top and bottom threads. For the example of a thread with a 3 degree lead angle, tilting the thread to align the top of the thread with the viewing angle will make the angle between the lead and the viewing angle for the bottom thread about 6 degrees.
A correction factor was developed for this effect. If one knows the tilt of the thread with respect to the viewing angle then you can correct the observed pitch diameter radius for the expected bias caused by the projection angle. This correction is precomputed and stored in a table.
For each sensor the tilt of the thread with respect to the viewing angle can be obtained from the 3-D cylinder fit axis. Separate corrections are applied to the left and right sensors.
Calibration Correction
Pitch diameter is also corrected by a final end-to-end calibration of the total system. The reported pitch diameter is often too high, with bias ranging from +5 μm to +35 μm.
After diameter calibration, one exposes the system to a set of measured thread plug gages. One then plots their pitch diameter bias as a function of diameter and fit a simple segmented line to the bias results. These bias fits then are entered into the system configuration file and are used to correct the measured pitch diameter with the measured bias.
The lead deviation estimate uses the wire pitch and the locations of the wire positions as projected onto the 3-D cylinder fit axis.
For an ideal helical thread, the wire position projections should result in a regular pattern along the 3-D cylinder fit axis. The projection of the first laser-1, left, wire position should lie about (⅛) pitch from the projection of the first laser-2, left, wire position. Lead deviation is the deviation of that pattern from the ideal, measured as a maximum distance of any projected wire position from the ideal pattern.
The computation of the lead deviation estimate follows a step-by-step procedure:
a) Create a wire position projection vector, containing all the data.
b) Sort the wire position projection vector in order of position along the 3-D cylinder fit axis.
c) Convert the wire positions of the elements of the vector into degrees, by multiplying by the factor (360/pitch) and then reducing the element values modulo 360.
d) Calculate an offset value so that the maximum absolute value of the degree-valued element positions is minimal. For example with a lead deviation of 0.010 mm for a 1 mm pitch thread, the absolute value of at least one degree-value element position would be 3.60 degrees. (0.010 mm/1 mm equals (1/100) and 360/100 is 3.60.)
e) Convert the value from degrees to mm. and report as the lead deviation estimate.
Note that all lead deviation estimates are positive.
Calibration Correction
Errors in measurement mean that the physical measurement of a perfect thread will have a positive lead deviation.
To attempt to correct for this effect, one measures the lead deviation for a set of thread plug gages and plotted them as a function of gage diameter. The most common form observed is a constant lead deviation of 0.010 mm. to 0.020 mm
This value observed in calibration with thread gages is taken to be a bias. This amount of bias is entered into the system configuration file and used to correct the measured lead deviation for this measurement bias.
Functional diameter is currently defined in practice by the fit of a special fit gage over the thread. The special fit gage is essentially a nut that is split in two by a plane cut through the central axis of the nut. The two halves of the fit gage are held in a fixture that measures the distance between the two halves. There is one special fit gage for every thread type.
Functional diameter is defined as the pitch diameter when the special fit gage is clamped tightly over a thread plug setting gage. When one puts a different UUT into the fit gage the fit gage may expand slightly, due to a summation of effects involving the differences between the UUT and the thread plug setting gage used to setup the functional diameter measurement. The functional diameter measurement is then the thread plug setting gage's pitch diameter plus the additional separation between the two fit gage pieces.
Functional Diameter—Laser Lab Estimator
In the Laser Lab, our functional diameter measurement method is an approximation of the fit gage method. We do not perform a full 3-D analog of the physical fit gage. Instead we have made an approximation that involves the use of lead deviation and the shape of the thread form.
If we imagine the thread form as perfect and also having a 60 degree flank angle then lead deviations should cause a the thread form fit gage pieces to move apart. A single lead deviation either up or down the thread form axis will cause a single split piece of the fitting gage to move outward. The amount of outward movement for a 60 degree flank angle will be equal to (√{square root over (3)}) (lead deviation). The movement provides a clearance for both positive and negative movements of the lead, relative to a perfect helical shape.
The Laser Lab estimator for functional diameter, (FD) is given below:
FD=PD+√{square root over (3)}(LeadDeviation).
The thread model is a learned sequence of points that represent a best estimate of the outline of one cycle of the thread form. The thread model is calculated when the inspection region is specified, at template edit time.
The routine measure template uses a pattern match algorithm with a sine wave pattern to identify periodicity in the inspection region data. This process determines an approximate thread pitch. The process also calculates a starting point in the data vector for the first beginning of the matched pattern, which is an approximation to the first midpoint of a right flank line.
With the pitch and the starting point in hand, the measure template routine can then calculate an average thread model. Starting with the first sample point in the matched pattern, points that are 1,2,3, . . . , N pitches later in the inspection region are averaged to form the first point of the thread model. The process is repeated for all the rest of the points in the first matched pattern. The thread model is then stored in the template for later use.
The following is a description of the structure of the trilobe or trilobular estimation process.
Trilobe signal processing analyzes calibrated part data within the inspection region and produces intermediate data products that are analyzed by the trilobe -parameter estimation process described hereinbelow. Eight values are produced in trilobe signal processing, four laser-n diameters and four laser-n centers.
For the trilobe blank, the laser diameter and center are estimated as simple averages of calibrated sensor data within the inspection region.
The laser-n diameter is the average of the mean left sensor height and the mean right sensor height.
The laser-n center is the difference of the mean right sensor height and the mean left sensor height.
For the trilobe threaded region, one wants to estimate the parameters of a trilobe cylinder that touches all the thread peaks within the threaded region.
This process can be subdivided into three parts:
One obtains thread peak locations from the thread region global feature processing object, keeping only thread peaks that are within the inspection region, and that are also labeled as “FULL” peaks (having height >95% of median peak). For a valid inspection region there would then be 5-10 thread peak points per sensor for typical usage of the trilobe feature.
To estimate the sensor heights one needs an estimation process that is robust enough to tolerate several invalid thread peaks. A preferred process uses a “robust” line fit procedure to obtain a line fit through the thread peaks that will not be influenced by 1 or 2 invalid peak data items. Once the “robust” line is found, the sensor height estimate is the “robust” line's height at the midpoint of the inspection region.
Robust Line Fit Procedure
The robust line fit is a simple parameter sampling process. For every pair of points in the data set to be fit, an evaluation line is produced. A figure of merit for every evaluation line is produced and is the rms distance per point between the data and the evaluation line. The rms distances are sorted and the evaluation line with the median rms distance is chosen.
This procedure is computationally costly but can work correctly with up to 49% of the data as “outliers.”
Potential Issues with Trilobe Region Signal Processing
Inspection Region Taper May Bias Results
The estimation process is model-based and the model is a trilobe “cylinder.” Thus, a taper in the threaded region, such as near a thread point, would provide data that the model fitting process would not be capable of analyzing accurately.
Trilobe Threaded Region Peaks Should Be Accurately Located
The thread region processing that locates the thread peak input data for the threaded trilobe estimation process is very general and may misfit peak shapes that do not match the thread region “peak model.”
Trilobe parameter estimation utilizes the intermediate data products, laser-n diameter and laser-n center, to compute the following trilobe parameters.
The trilobe D parameter can be estimated as the average of the laser-n diameter measurements in the four lasers.
All the values should agree, within the margin of sensor errors.
If one measures a perfect trilobe shape gage, the differences between the laser-n diameters and “D” are diagnostic of measurement accuracy and bias. The rms distance between the laser-n diameters and “D” is a measure of diameter measurement uncertainty. The maximum difference between “D” and laser-n diameter is a measure of the maximum per sensor diameter measurement bias.
Iterative Computation of K Angle, xCenter, yCenter Parameters
The computation of the K, angle, xCenter, and yCenter parameters uses only the laser-n center intermediate data product. The four laser-n center data items are exactly enough items to compute the four unknown trilobe parameters, there is no redundancy.
A direct four parameter search process is difficult. The search was simplified to an iterative two parameter search with the following analysis.
If one assumes that the (xCenter, ycenter) centerline coordinates of the trilobe shape are known, one can estimate K, angle with an exhaustive search process, described hereinbelow. Once one has estimates of D, K, and angle, one has a complete description of the trilobe shape.
With the trilobe shape description one can calculate the different projections of the trilobe shape onto the left and right sensors. With the left and right sensor projections of the trilobe shape one can use the laser-n center data to estimate the trilobe centerline coordinates, xCenter and yCenter.
Finally, with the trilobe centerline coordinates one can change the origin of the coordinate system specifying the laser-n center data so that the origin of the next set of laser-n center data is at the trilobe centerline coordinate estimate. Then the process is repeated with the transformed laser-n center data as input. In this process, the K, angle search progress is presented with data that eventually has a centerline that is very close to (0,0). At that point, one knows all the trilobe parameters, K, angle, D, xCenter, and ycenter.
Here is a short description of the process.
K, Angle Search
The K, angle search is carried out by exhaustive enumeration. A 2-dimensional grid is constructed with 1-dimension being the possible discrete values of K in the interval (0 . . . kmax) and the other dimension being the possible discrete value of angle in the interval (0 . . . 60) degrees. At each grid point K, angle, xCenter, ycenter are used to calculate the laser-n center values that would have produced those values and then an rms distance between the calculated and actual laser-n center values.
In a preferred implementation, the discrete grid is sized 25×25 resulting in 625 K, angle parameter values and 625 rms values. The minimum rms grid value selects the K, angle output value.
K, Angle Fine Search
The K, angle search is increased in precision by a subdivided search. A rectangular region of K, angle space equal to a 2×2 grid in the original K, angle discrete grid is subdivided into a 25×25 grid and searched.
Then the process is repeated a second time, subdividing the fine grid in the same manner.
The result is a more accurate K, angle calculation at much less cost than a brute force search through a 3906×3906 grid. (The cost is about 3× times a 25×25 grid search.)
Determine xCenter, yCenter
Once K and angle are known a new estimate for the trilobe centerline coordinates can be obtained.
(1) Estimate sensor height difference caused by trilobe shape, for all four lasers. This difference is a function of the difference between the laser and trilobe shape angles.
ΔH(laser, trilobe)=f(K, Angle−laserAngle).
(2) Correct the sensor height difference for the trilobe contribution.
ΔH(laser)=ΔH(laser, data)−ΔH(laser, trilobe).
(3) Compute the trilobe centerline coordinates by a least squares fit of the corrected sensor height differences.
(xCenter, yCenter)=g(ΔH(1), ΔH(2), ΔH(3), ΔH(4)).
Convergence Criteria
One says the iteration converged when the difference between the estimates of K from the current and the previous iteration is less than a predetermined parameter (nominal value 0.0001).
The derived parameters can be computed from the estimated parameters D and K.
C=D−K.
E=D+K.
These notes are to guide future improvements in the code.
Trilobe Thread Parameter Estimation—Differences from
Trilobe region thread estimation has some differences from standard thread processing.
Most of the differences arise from the fact that standard thread processing utilizes a cylinder of circular cross section whereas trilobe thread processing utilizes a cylinder with a trilobe cross section.
The scanning optical head system described above produces a sampled image of the amount of light and shadow in a particular sensor's beam. A sample is produced each 4 μm of stage travel. The absolute stage position is not precise or repeatable, as also discussed.
In order to make the stage position coordinates refer to a common physical position, the sensor signal is analyzed to find the position of the step edge that marks where the sensor passes the beginning of the calibration cone 40 at the cylinder 96.
Once the sensor stage positions are all referenced to the common begin cone position, the positions of all other features are repeatable to high accuracy from scan to scan.
The calibration process that relates sensor digitized raw signals to sensor heights calibrates the relative sensor blockage between the 0.125″ cone minimum diameter and the 1.500″ cone maximum diameter.
After the table relating the raw signals to sensor heights is constructed, the table is used to compute the center of the cone 0.125″ beginning cylinder 96. That position is used as an offset to make the calibrated sensor heights read out zero at the center of the 0.125″ cone cylinder 96. This process establishes a common (x,y) center reference coordinate for each of the (4) light planes.
Measure 3 d Alignment to Stage Axis with
The calibration cone 40 has two regions of 0.750″ diameter that define a cylinder in space that is concentric with the calibration cone's central axis. By measuring the position of the 0.750″ cylinder as seen by the sensors, the calibration software determines the alignment of the stage axis 28 and the calibration cone axis.
It is important that the regions measured to define the calibration cone aspect vector have the same diameter. That means that errors in the sensor height calibration have a minimal influence on the accuracy of the aspect vector computation.
Measure Light Plane Angle with “Multi-step” Region
The calibration cone's “multi-step” region contains (5) precisely positioned mechanical steps. These steps are utilized to compute the twist angle of the light plane with respect to the calibration cone's central axis.
Signal processing software measures the precise location of each of the (5) steps. When the light plane has a twist angle with respect to the calibration cone 40, the difference in position between the step positions computed from a laser's left and right sensors is proportional to the sine of the twist angle.
The analysis software utilizes the data from all (5) steps in a least square minimization procedure that computes the twist angle.
Previous experimental designs of calibration cones used stepped edges for the purpose of relating raw digitized sensor signals to calibrated sensor heights. If the sensor response varied between the height of two adjacent steps then the calibration process would not directly measure the variation and the resulting calibration might make mistakes at intermediate diameters.
The present design provides data at all sensor heights, in the diameter range 0.125″ to 1.500″.
As previously mentioned, the (4) laser light planes are arranged parallel to the bottom plate 61 of the optical head 12, in a regularly spaced array of heights. Adjacent laser light planes are preferably separated by about 2.5 mm. The arrangement is shown schematically in
This “layer cake” arrangement was chosen specifically to eliminate or reduce “cross talk” between different laser beam lines. For example, light from beam line-1 might scatter from the surface of the UUT and go into the sensor for beam line-2.
The primary means of interference is due to scattering from cylinders that are aligned with the stage axis 28, a geometry similar to the geometry of
When the laser light planes are at different heights, light from laser-2 (for example) which is scattered by the UUT, arrives at the sensor for laser-1 at a height of 2.5 mm relative to the expected light from the laser-1 light plane. This scattered light can be blocked by a light plane receiver aperture slit as described in Appendix A with reference to
The light plane receivers 68 each have linear slit apertures, about 1.5 mm high, that accept light from its corresponding light plane generator. Each aperture slit is mounted in the optical head 12 at a different height, matched to the height of its corresponding light plane. Light from different light plane generators or transmitters 66, scattered by the UUT, is effectively blocked, thereby increasing measurement accuracy.
Each light plane receiver 68 includes photodiodes which are each fitted with circular apertures that make the light plane receiver 68 “telecentric”. This aperture pinhole accepts light rays from the nominal angle of incidence and/or from angles of incidence that are only slightly different (<1-2 degrees). This means that light beams that enter the light plane receiver 68 at larger angles of incidence will be blocked by the pinhole mask and not recorded by the measurement circuitry. Appendix A describes this.
The pinholes reduce systematic measurement errors caused by shiny cylindrical parts. For those parts forward scattered light will tend to systematically reduce the diameter measured because scattered light that would be blocked by a rough dark surface finds its way into the light plane receiver 68.
The Laser Lab measurement system 10 has a requirement that the light rays from each light plane generator module 66 be parallel and not divergent.
The apparent diameter of a 0.500″ [12.7 mm] cylinder should not change by more than 0.0001″ [0.0025 mm] as the cylinder center is moved (±) 0.0394″ [1 mm] from the center of the measurement area. This requirement couples a required measurement accuracy bias (0.0001″ [0.0025 mm]) with an estimated accuracy of part placement by customers (±0.0394″ [1 mm].).
This requirement places limits on the alignment accuracy of the light rays within the light plane, or its divergence. In the worst case, the beam through the center of the cylinder is at an angle of zero, the left shadow ray is at an angle of −φ, and the right shadow ray is at an angle of +φ. This would mean the maximum misalignment angle for any shadow ray in the light plane is less than 1.3 mrad.
These maximum misalignment angles translate to an accuracy of focus when manufacturing or assembling the light plane generator module 66. An align and focus instrument or alignment fixture, generally indicated at 100 in
The Laser Lab measurement system 10 also has a requirement that the light plane be generally flat. It was discovered that if the optical elements of the light plane generator module 66 were misaligned then the light plane's image on a flat target would be curved, rather than straight.
A curved light plane would make the light plane-to-calibration cone angle calibration described above invalid. A curved light plane would also make the sensor height calibration described above inaccurate. The curve in the light plane would make predicting the diameter of the calibration cone 40 as a function of stage position much less accurate and make the sensor height calibration much less accurate.
The align and focus method as noted above and as described in Appendix D is designed to allow the light beam flatness of the light plane generator module 66 to be effectively minimized during module production. It was found that the angular and rotational alignment of the lens 310, 312 and 316 to the module base plane was an important variable. These alignments when performed sequentially allow the light plane generator module 66 to be setup to meet the flatness requirement, at which point the adjustments are permanently fixed in place by tightening adjustment screws and gluing mechanical attachment points to prevent movement.
Flatness is eliminated primarily by the adjustment of the lens 316,
The rotating arm's clamp holds the plate 318,
Rotation of the clamp 188 causes the laser line image at the target 210 to transition between line shapes on the target of curved upwards, flat, and curved downwards.
A secondary adjustment is by rotating the lens 316. This adjustment primarily affects the inclination of the laser line image at the target 210, not the curvature. The inclination is adjusted to make the laser line image horizontal.
The adjustment of lenses 316 and 312 is inter-dependent.
The light plane receiver modules 68 also have alignment requirements. The optical elements of the modules 68 are precisely positioned so that they precisely focus the light from their respective light plane generator module 66 within the pinhole apertures of the detectors (i.e.,
The receiver module 60 accepts the light from all possible light rays within the light plane at approximately the same efficiency, so the generator/receiver subsystem (i.e., 66 and 68, respectively) will have a smooth light acceptance profile, as a function of distance across the light plane. This is a requirement from the sensor height calibration process.
The light plane receiver modules 68 and the light plane generator modules 66 are capable of working together when mounted on the optical head base plate 61 at standard hole positions.
The receiver light plane split line is centered within the light plane. The align and focus method allows for the proper assembly and subsequent testing of the light plane receiver module 68 and its components as described herein.
Referring now to
A rear one of the mirrors 306 is held within an adjustable mirror mount 322 which is mounted at a back reference surface 323 of the mount 304 (i.e.,
The mirrors 306 are preferably made of BK-7 material whereas the lenses 310, 312 and 316 are made of SF-11 material. The lenses 310, 312 and 316 are optimized for a laser beam wavelength of 650 nm. Also, the nominal affective focal lengths for the lenses 310, 312 and 316 are 107 mm, 154 mm and 2.75 mm, respectively.
The following sequence of assembly steps for the transmitter module 66 are followed, which steps are described in detail in Appendix D:
Referring now to
Referring now to
The photodetector mount 502 includes upper and lower halves 501 and 503, respectively, which are secured together by screws 505.
Typically the lenses 508 are secured to the lens mount 504 with a UV adhesive. Then the lens mount 504 is secured to the mount 500 by screws 516 and their associated washers 518, as illustrated in
The apertured elements 510 are secured within spaced holes in the photodetector mount 502 so that the elements 510 are intimate with or immediately adjacent to the supported detectors 514 and centered within the mount 500. The following sequence of assembly steps are followed which are described in detail in Appendix D:
After the above-noted steps are performed, all the fasteners and adjusted components are secured using an epoxy adhesive.
The detector PCB assembly mount 512 is secured at the back surface of the mount 500 by screws 520 and their respective spacers 522.
While embodiments of the invention have been illustrated and described, it is not intended that these embodiments illustrate and describe all possible forms of the invention. Rather, the words used in the specification are words of description rather than limitation, and it is understood that various changes may be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention.
Scattering of light from a cylinder will cause a systematic underestimate of the cylinder's diameter in the split laser system. Light incident near the surface of the cylinder is scattered at a glancing angle as illustrated in
One can imagine a beam of light that hits the cylinder and is reflected. The beam's direction of travel would reach a depth of ΔH within the cylinder if the beam direction were continued on a straight line. The beam is deflected by an angle θrefl=2θ by the perfectly reflecting surface as shown in
For a cylinder of diameter d the following relationships hold between the scattering angle, θrefl=2θ, the depth ΔH, and the depth, d.
ΔH=d(1−cos θ)
ΔH≅d(θ2/2)=d(θrefl)2/8
θrefl≅2√{square root over (2ΔH/d)}
For ΔH=0.0001″, d=0.5000″, then θ≅2√{square root over (0.0004)}=0.04 radian=2.3 degree.
For ΔH=0.001″, d=0.5000″, then θ≅2√{square root over (0.004)}=0.13 radian=7.2 degree.
In the ideal case, with no scattering, the amount of light that reaches the detector is from line generator light rays that do not intersect the part. The light signal is then related to the orthographic projection of the part, perpendicular to the beam direction.
With scattering, light that would have been blocked may enter the detector.
The scattered light could fail to enter the detector due to one of the following effects:
One can calculate an upper limit to the underestimate of light blockage by a perfectly reflecting cylinder. It is assumed that all light scattered through angles smaller than angle θmax will be received in the laser light receiver. All light scattered through larger angles is lost and is not received in the laser light receiver.
The diameter blockage underestimate is:
Diameter Blockage Underestimate≡2ΔH d(θmax)2/4
As illustrated in
In this model, when a light ray is incident on the focusing lens at a different angle, then the light is focused at a slightly different place in the len's focal plane.
The change in position at the focal plane between light incident along the optical axis and light incident at an angle θ, is Δpos=f tan(θ)≈f(θ), where f is the focal length of the lens.
A pinhole aperture is added in front of the laser diode to make the laser receiver sensitive to light only in a small range of incident angles. Similar apertures are used in the construction of telecentric lenses. The pinhole aperture size is shown in the following table.
pin hole size=2fθmax
Light Deflection from a Cone Section
The deflection of light from a reflective cone is also of interest, since conical shapes (i.e., frustums) are utilized in the Laser Lab calibration fixture 40 as illustrated in
The normal to the cone at the point where the incident beam is just tangent is:
{circumflex over (n)}=[−cos(θcone),+sin(θcone),0].
The normal to the cone rotated an angle θrot about the y-axis (see
{circumflex over (n)}=[−cos(θrot)cos(θcone), +sin(θcone)−sin(θrot)cos(θcon)].
The incident light's direction of travel is:
{circumflex over (l)}=[0,0,1].
The incident light's direction of travel after reflection from a mirror is:
The angle θrefl between incident and reflected light beams can be computed.
cos(θrefl)=({circumflex over (l)}refl•{circumflex over (l)})=cos(2θrot)+2 sin2(θrot) sin2(θcone).
For a cylinder, (θcone=0), one gets the expected result:
θrefl=2θrot.
For small angles scattering angles, (θrot<<1), and arbitrary cone angles one has:
cos(θrefl)=1−sin2(θrot)cos2(θcone)
1−(θreft)2/2≈1−2(θrot)2 cos2(θcone).
θreft≈2θrot cos(θcone)
The Laser Lab cone fixture 40 has cone sections (i.e., frustums) with cone angle θcone=35 degrees and cos(θcone)=0.820. What this means in practical terms is that the scattering angle on the cone sections is about 20% less than the scattering angles on the cylindrical sections. The approximate scaling developed in the previous sections indicates that the diameter underestimate would then be about 10% more than for the straight cylinder case.
If the cylinder surface were coated with a light absorbing coating, then it might be that the reflected light would continue on in the same direction as the perfectly reflecting case, but with reduced intensity.
One can develop a model similar to the one noted above. In that model all light scattered between angles 0 and θmax enters the split laser detector of
2ΔH≈(1−fabsorb)d(θmax)2/4.
Thus, the underestimate is improved by the factor (1−fabsorb).
This Appendix describes in detail one embodiment of the Laser Lab calibration process.
For cone parameters, reference drawing
The signal is plotted with full open sensor level shown at the bottom of the figure and fully blocked sensor level shown at the top of the figure.
Full Open Region—beginning of scan to beginning of cone.
In this section the processing and analysis are described that occur prior to creating a sensor blockage calibration table and determining the cone tilt angle.
In this section, the raw sensor data is processed and yields features in the (stage position, sensor level) space.
In the Laser Lab system, the conversion between stage position encoder count and stage position is simple and requires no calibration. The stage encoder count is multiplied by the Sampling Interval (0.004 mm) to produce the stage position.
In this section stage positions may be specified interchangeably using encoder counts or position values.
The first step is to partition the data into regions for more detailed processing. With the smooth cone calibration design the partition can be accomplished with a combination of the positions of the step edges and known positions of features on the calibration cone.
The following step edge positions should be identified in the data. The edges will be identified with a low precision edge finder, using finite difference detection, with smoothing.
The following slope edge (2-nd derivative) positions should be identified in the data. The edges will be identified with a low precision edge finder, using finite difference detection, with smoothing.
If either of checks 1, 2, 3 fail, the calibration process is stopped and diagnostic and logging messages are generated on the computer or PC.
The sensor data partition table gives the rough stage position of boundaries between the calibration data regions, on a per sensor basis. The table is used by downstream functions to provide rough starting points for find location modules.
The full open signal level is computed from data in the full open estimation region, shown in
The median and the order statistic corresponding to “sigma” are computed, from the sample data within the full open estimation region.
If these checks fail, the calibration fails and diagnostic and logging messages are generated on the computer or PC.
High precision step edge position processing uses the rough edge step positions as initial locations to find high precision edge parameters for 7 step edges. The step edges are the begin part edge, the part support cylinder end step, and the 5 steps in the roll angle data. For each step edge, 4 parameters are computed, the step position, step height, the beam width, and a step quality measure.
The high precision edge detector uses three line fits to the step edge data, one before the step edge, one after the step edge, and one in the step edge transition region. A fixed size guard region, LineFitRegionSize, keeps non-linear data out of the before/after step line fit regions. The central LineFitCentralRegion percent of the transition region data is used for the transition region line fit.
The fit degree in the before/after part regions can be adjusted to be either const (degree-1) or linear (degree-2). For example the begin cone step edge requires before step fit degree-1 and after step fit degree-2. The first step edge requires before step fit degree-2 and after step fit degree-1. Steps 2 . . . 5 require both before/after step fits to be degree-1.
For each step a feature is generated, containing:
If these checks fail, the calibration fails, diagnostic and logging messages are generated on the computer or PC.
The set of high precision step edge positions at the begin cone step edge defines a position offset for each sensor.
The position scale is defined separately for each laser sensor. The position offset defines the 0-position for feature processing.
Laser roll is computed from the high precision step edge positions found in the roll angle data region.
The measurements and parameters utilized are the following.
StepPos(laser,sensor,i)=high precision step edge position, for i-th step. Diam(i)=diameter of i-th step, defined to the midpoint of the step.
The difference between StepPos(laser, Left, i) and StepPos(laser, Right, i)
ΔstepPos(laser, i)=StepPos(laser,Right, i)−StepPos(laser,Left, i),
is related to the roll angle of the laser line, β. β is positive when the Left sensor edge position is less than the Right sensor edge position. β would be viewed as a counter clockwise rotation if the left sensor height is plotted as a positive number and the right sensor height is plotted as a negative number.
ΔstepPos(laser,i)=sin(β)Diam(i).
The 5 equations relating AstepPos(laser,i) to Diam(i), can be expressed as the matrix vector equation below,
A sin(β)=b.
The data can be reduced with a least squares solution of the matrix vector equation, producing a single parameter estimator, ⊖esl
Raw sensor readings are processed in the cone slope region to produce a set of (sensor level, stage position) features. Typically each feature is based on a small region (10-500 samples) of data. The features are only generated in regions of valid data, for example they are kept away from step edges by a guard region.
The first cone slope data region lies between the begin cone step edge and the beginning of a const diameter data angle region. The second region starts at the end of the same const diameter cone aspect angle region and extends to the position of the first roll angle step.
Approximate per sensor boundaries of the cone slope data regions are available from the Sensor Data Partition Table, computed in Data Partitioning and Consistency Checks step.
Data is only binned further than GuardRegion counts from the cone slope region boundaries, to prevent systematic diameter calibration offsets.
The regions are divided into the number of bins specified by the RegionBinSize and the number of sample positions in the cone slope region. If the number of available sample positions is not divided by RegionBinSize, then extra samples are added to the guard regions.
The data bins are not overlapping.
Sensor data observations within the bin are processed, forming estimates of sensor levels and variance within the bin.
Position data within the bin are processed to form a bin position average.
The data within a bin are fit to a first order linear model.
For each data bin, a feature is generated, containing:
The cone's const diameter regions are processed similarly to the cone slope regions.
Two constant diameter data regions are processed, see
Data binning, averaging, feature generation, and consistency checks are the same as for the diameter calibration data regions.
Cone signal processing produces a laser roll angle estimate and tables of sensor data at specified stage positions, for cone slope and cone constant diameter regions.
What is actually required is the projection of the cone 40 onto the light beam, as a function of the stage position. This projection depends on two angles, the laser roll angle β, and the cone tilt angle α, the angle between the stage travel axis and the cone symmetry axis.
Each of the angles is defined per laser, the full set of laser and cone angles is {Bi, αi}, where the laser index-i is in the interval (1 . . . 4).
The laser roll angle is known, but the cone tilt angle must be calculated. Since the cone tilt angle is small, typically less than 1-degree, an iterative process can be successfully defined.
Initially one can assume that cone tilt angle a is equal to zero. With this assumption one can use the cone model to generate the expected projection of the cone onto the sensor as a function of stage position. The set of cone projections paired with corresponding sensor responses is used to make the Sensor Blockage Table. After construction, the table gives the amount of material blocking the sensor, as a function of the expected sensor response.
The sensor blockage table is then utilized to process the constant diameter region data, producing an estimate of the cone tilt angle a.
With the cone tilt angle estimate a, the expected cone projections onto the sensor and the sensor blockage table are recalculated.
The process is repeated until there is negligible change in the cone tilt angle and the sensor blockage table estimates.
Cone Projection onto Sensor
H1 is the radius of the start of the cone.
HN is the radius at distance-N along the cone axis.
β is the laser roll angle.
α is the cone tilt angle.
γ is the inclination angle of the cone.
Δp is the position offset due to laser roll.
δ is the change in radius due to laser roll.
Using the spatial relationships shown in
(ΔH−δ) tan(β)=Δp
Δp tan(γ+α)=δ
ΔH tan(β)=Δp tan(γ+α) tan(β)+Δp
Δp=ΔH tan(β)/(1+tan(γ+α) tan(β))
Finally, one can obtain the change in projection as a function of the laser roll angle, the cone inclination angle, and the projected cone aspect angle.
Signal processing of the cone slope data regions produces a list of features, one for each sensor data bin. The feature specifies the stage position and the average sensor level within the data bin:
{SensorBlockagei}={StagePositioni, SensorLeveli}.
The {SensorBlockagei} feature is processed to create a calibrated sensor blockage feature:
{CalibratedSensorBlockagei}={SensorLeveli, StagePositionOffseti, SensorHeighti}.
The StagePosition of the SensorBlockage data bin and the StagePosition of the begin cone step edge are used to compute the stage position offset from the beginning of the cone:
StagePositionOffseti=StagePositioni−StagePosition(BeginCone).
Then the height difference between the begin cone step edge and the stage position is computed:
Δhi=ConeHeight(StagePositionOffseti)−ConeHeight(BeginCone).
The correction to ΔHi, uses estimates of angles α, β, γ to compute the change in the cone projection, as seen by the sensor:
δi=δi(ΔHi, α, β, γ),
SensorHeighti=ΔHi−δi.
The following steps summarize the computation:
The Sensor Blockage Table is analyzed by an interpolating function. The interpolating function calculates CalibratedSensorBlockage as a function of SensorLevel.
Min,max SensorLevel limits is utilized to specify the region of valid input for the interpolation function.
Configuration file parameter SensorLevelInterpolationType is utilized to select different interpolation methods at run time.
Linear nearest neighbor interpolation.
The interpolation error estimate compares the sensor height, SensorHeighti=Shi at stage position offset, StagePositionOffseti=Spi, with the interpolated sensor height derived from positions (i+1) and (i−1).
InterpolationErrorEsti=(SHi+1−SHi−1)(SPi−SPi−1)/(SPi+1−SPi−1)−SHi,
InterpolationErrorEsti=ηSHi+1+(1−η)SHi−1−SHi, where
η=(SPi−SPi−1)/SPi+1−SPi−1).
Signal processing of the cone's constant diameter data regions produces a list of features, one for each sensor data bin. The feature specifies the stage position and the average sensor level within the data bin:
{SensorBlockagei}={StagePositioni, SensorLeveli].
The Sensor Blockage Table is used to compute features from SB features.
The calibrated constant data region features are utilized to compute a linear fit to the sensor height data as a function of StagePositionOffseti=SPi.
Left and Right sensor data are fit simultaneously for each laser, since the cone tilt angle a affects both. Tilt angle α positive causes the sensor heights to increase in the Left sensor and decrease in the Right sensor.
This equation can be expressed in matrix form:
The least squares solution is:
The ATA and Atb have a simple form:
The laser roll angle widens the step profile, and also biases the positon.
The 3-D cone direction unit vector, {right arrow over (α)}, is observed in each of the 4 laser systems as the cone tilt angle. The projection of the cone unit vector, {right arrow over (α)}, into the laser system “I” is (αix, αiy, αiz).
In
The x,y components of the cone unit vector, {right arrow over (α)}, are projected into laser system “i” with the following equation (the z component along the stage axis is unchanged):
The “y” relation is the only one used, since one only measures the αiy, αiz components, the sensor does not measure αix.
αny=−αx sin θn+αy cos θn.
Using measurements in all 4 laser systems one can solve for the two components (αx, αy) of the cone unit vector, {right arrow over (α)}, by solving the following linear equation.
These equations can be solved by the least squares method:
The distance along the travel axis is different from the distance along the cone axis, to second order in the angle between the cone axis and the travel axis.
Calibration model analysis is an iterative process. The number of iterations computed is MaxIterations. After computing the last iteration the Iteration Control stopping criteria is evaluated to determine if a valid Sensor Blockage Table was constructed. (See consistency checks c-3 and c-4 below.)
In this section one can see how known errors in the elementary data items, such as step edge positions and median sensor values, affect the system measurements.
Suppose that during calibration there was a roll angle error. Then the left sensor actual height would be overestimated and the right sensor actual height would be underestimated and systematic diameter measurement errors would occur. In this situation, the placement offset of the center of a cylindrical object from the center of the calibration axis would cause a systematic offset in the measured diameter.
Roll angle that is too large causes a underestimate of the correct projection of the cone for the left sensor and an overestimate for the right sensor.
H
L
=H
L
0(1−ε)
H
R
=H
R
0(1+ε)
The measured diameter can then be shown to have a systematic offset that is proportional to the roll angle error.
D=H
L
+H
R
=H
L
0(1−ε)+HR0(1−ε)
D=(HL0+HR0)+HL0−HR0)ε
D=D
0+ε(CtrPosition), where the center position is defined as
CtrPosition=(HL0−HR0).
The relative error in the diameter measurement, due to the roll angle error is:
Roll angle errors couple with the cone slope to systematically (example) overestimate the left sensor actual height and underestimate the right sensor actual height, in the Sensor Blockage Table.
H
L
=H
L
0(1−tan(β) tan(γ))
For a small roll angle:
δH=±H0 tan(γ)δ (tan(β))
For H=0.500″, γ=35°, δH=0.0001″, one should have δβ≦0.3 mrad=0.016 degree.
A simple method to find the roll angle finds the position of two step edges, and computes the angle from the difference in step positions.
tan(β)=(ΔStepPos)/Diameter
δ(tan(β))=δ(ΔStepPos)/Diameter
The difference in two uncorrelated step positions has approximately 40% greater uncertainty than a single step position.
δ(tan(β))=δ(StepPos)√{square root over (2)}/Diameter
Step positions have σ≈0.005 mm, and at a Diameter=1.400″, this works out to σ(tan(β))≈0.2 mrad.
The system diameter bias has an error distribution that is similar to the repeatability distribution for a diameter measurement.
Multiple scans for calibration reduces the bias.
In general, this appendix describes how to fit a cylinder to a set of points. The set of points could be determined in any manner. The application within Laser Lab is the fitting of a cylinder to the set of “thread peak” locations. This cylinder is used to estimate the thread region's major diameter. The data for a thread peak cylinder measurement is a set of (stage z coordinate, sensor height) pairs. These data points are the observed locations of the thread peaks. For a 6-pitch thread inspection region, the number of data points per thread is 4 (lasers)*2 (sensors)*2 (flanks)*6 (pitches)=96 (data points).
One would then like to fit all the data points to a simple linear model of the thread peak cylinder in space with 5 free parameters:
The 8 data sets one has to work with are:
For example, the data set for the laser-2, right sensor is {(zi(2, R), hi(2, R))}.
To fit one laser's data, one can develop a linear matrix equation. The parameters are:
a(l)=slope of cylinder line in laser−l coordinates.
b(l)=intercept of cylinder line in laser−l coordinates.
r=radius of cylinder.
The one laser equation can be expressed in block form.
The new vector s(l), is a column of ±1 values, with +1 for the left sensor values and −1 for the right sensor values.
One can develop a block matrix equation for a fit of all 4 lasers' data to 9 parameters. The parameters are:
a(1), a(2), a(3), a(4),
b(1), b(2), b(3), b(4), r.
The radius parameter is shared by all 4 lasers, reducing the parameter count to 9 from 12.
Note: Z specifies the matrix containing data from all 4 lasers, and Z(l) specifies the data matrix containing data from just one laser.
The new 4 laser equation can be solved by standard least squares techniques. We will show the solution to develop the structure of the ZT Z and ZT H matrices. We don't actually solve for this set of 9 parameters in practice. In the next section, we will transform the equation to eliminate the dependencies among the a(l) and b(l) parameters, and reduce the number of unknown parameters to 5.
One now determines the numerical results for the important submatrices.
First, the ZT(l)Z(l) submatrix for laser l.
The result is quite simple, a matrix containing the accumulated sensor positions, the accumulated sensor positions squared, and the number of measurements for laser l. For this case, you don't have to sum separately for L and R sensors.
Second, the ZT(l)i(l) vector for laser −1.
This is also simple, containing the difference between left and right positions and the difference between the number of left and right data items. Separate L and R sensor sums are required here.
Third, the vector ZT(l)h(l).
This vector contains the correlation between heights and stage coordinates and the accumulated sum of sensor heights.
Fourth, the value
This is the accumulated height difference between L and R sensors.
Finally, the value
This is the difference between the number of left and right data points.
A look back at the required terms shows there are only 5 different terms that each need to be accumulated for each set of laser and sensor indices. This makes a total of 40 unique values.
Sums and differences of terms can be expressed in a simple notation.
If the sensor argument is suppressed, then the sum of L and R sensors is indicated as:
sSqZ(l)=sSqZ(l, L)+sSqZ(l, R).
If the laser argument is suppressed, then the sum over all lasers is indicated as:
The symbol Δ indicates a left sensor minus right sensor difference as:
ΔN(l)=N(l, L)−N(l, R),
ΔN=N(L)−N(R),
ΔsZ(l)=sZ(l, L)−sZ(l, R).
With these accumulated values
Projection of 3-D coordinates to Laser Coordinates
The parameters a(i), b(i) specified as 8 parameters of the above 9 parameter fit are actually projections of the 3-D thread axis parameters ax, ay, bx, by. A projection matrix, P, defines the mapping from the 5-parameter fit to the 9-parameter fit. The angles αi are the angles of the laser beams with respect to the stage (x,y) axes. For example, laser-1 is incident at 22.5 degrees, laser-2 at 67.5 degrees, laser-3 at 112.5 degrees, and laser-4 at 157.4 degrees.
Using the projection matrix we can reduce the previous matrix vector equation from a 9-dimension problem to a 5-dimension problem.
For just one laser, the equation is quite simple.
z
i(l, s)a(l)+b(l)+δ(s)r=hi(l, s), where
a(l)=−sin(αi)ax+cos(αi) αy,
This is the least squares solution:
(ax y bx by r)T=(PT(ZTZ)P)−1(PTZT)H.
The vector (PTZT)H can be computed in the simplified value notation. It is just the linear combination of sumHZ(l) or sumH(l) terms weighted by cos(αl) or sin(αl) factors.
The matrix (PT ZT ZP) also can be computed in the simplified value notation.
intermediate result:
The final result is a 5×5 matrix with the sin( ) and cos( ) terms mixing the data from individual lasers.
One can define a set of 4-element vectors to make the previous results look more compact.
The final results are below.
Every term is the dot product of a geometrical vector representing the incident angles of each of the 4 lasers and a data vector representing what is observed in each of the 4 lasers. There are 15 independent numbers to be calculated for (PT(ZT Z)P) and 5 for PT(ZT H).
Suppose the cylinder is exactly aligned with the z-axis, and the data is exactly centered above and below each sensor's center line. Then in each sensor, the left sensor will have a measurement points of type (x, h) and the right sensor will have measurements of type (x, −h). This will mean that the sHZ and sH terms will be zero. The term ΔsH will be a sum of +h and −(−h) terms or ΔsH≈Nh.
The solution equation would then read:
This has the solution
ax=ay=bx=by=0,
r=Nh/N=h.
The method of assembly and alignment of the optical and mechanical components of the light plane generator receiver and light plane generator modules is executed utilizing the alignment fixture 100 of
The alignment fixture 100 further includes a references laser 118, aligned such that the center line of its light beam is horizontally parallel to the reference breadboards 120 and 151 and lens and mirror mount 304 interfaces. Preferably, the laser 118 is a spatially filtered solid state laser such as the 40001 available from LumenFlow Corp. of Middleville, Mich.
Also shown supported on the breadboard 120 is a reference prism (i.e., rhomboid prism) assembly 122, the use of which is detailed herein. As it is the method of assembly that is important to proper functioning modules, this disclosure emphasizes the interfacing components of the fixture while focusing on the detailed steps of the method to produce the modules.
Alignment fixture 100 of
The alignment fixture 100 further includes a transmitter stage assembly, generally indicated at 112. The transmitter stage assembly 112 includes an L1 (i.e., first lens) manipulator stage assembly, generally indicated at 113, an L2 (i.e., second lens) manipulator stage assembly 114 and an L3 (i.e. third lens) manipulator stage assembly 116.
Each of the assemblies 113, 114 and 116 are supported together with the laser 118 and its support bracket 119 on the breadboard or substrate 120.
Also shown supported on the breadboard 120 is the reference prism (i.e., rhomboid prism) assembly 122, an alignment aperture 124, a filter mount 126 and a post holder 128.
The precision rhomboid prism assembly 122 is important to the assembly of the modules, calibration of the align and focus instrument, and to assembly of the optical head.
The assembly 122 includes two metal plates, two dowel pins, and a rhomboid prism.
The rhomboid prism assembly 122 is the gage that establishes the height difference between the height of laser light entering the transmitter (through lens 316) (preferably, 0.984″) and the height of laser light exiting the transmitter (through lens 310) (preferably, 1.679″).
The height is set by:
The rhomboid prism has the property that a straight beam of light entering the prism exists the prism in a straight line and in a path exactly parallel to the beam path of the entry beam. The height difference between the entry and exit beams is set by the rotational angle of the prism, relative to the entry beam.
The alignment fixture 100 also includes a clamp post assembly 130 with a kinematic ball also supported on the breadboard 120.
The alignment fixture 100 further includes a relay telescope assembly, generally indicated at 132, which, in turn, includes a relay doublet assembly 134 and an IR doublet 136. The relay telescope 132 is mounted on its carriage 110 by a scope mount 138.
Mounted on the rail 106 is another carriage 110 on which a post 140 is supported at one end of the fixture 100. The post 140 supports a filter or target holder 142. In turn, the holder 142 supports a target 210.
The alignment fixture 100 also includes a receiver stage assembly 150 which, in turn, includes the breadboard or substrate 151. The receiver stage assembly 150 includes an alignment assembly 152 including an alignment aperture 154.
The receiver stage assembly 150 further includes an optical rail 156 supported on the breadboard 151. The detector assembly, generally indicated at 159, is adjustably mounted on the rail 156. The detector assembly 159 includes electronic boards 157, together with the sensor mount with an aperture 155. The receiver stage assembly 150 further includes a filter mount 160 and a vertical slit 162.
The receiver stage assembly 150 also includes a manipulator bracket 164 and an assembly 166 having a kinematic ball 168 mounted at a distal end thereof.
The receiver stage assembly 150 further includes an L4 (i.e., fourth lens) manipulator stage assembly 170.
The L1 manipulator stage assembly 113 includes the breadboard 180 on which an x-y stage assembly 184, together with a kinematic base 186 are mounted. Adjustment screws 182 are provided to adjust the position of the stage assembly 184. Clamping arms 188 are mounted at a distal end of the stage assembly 113.
Overview of the transmitter alignment process.
The alignment of the transmitter module's optical components is important to the operation of the Laser Lab system. The alignment is accomplished with the align and focus (i.e., A&F) instrument or fixture 100.
The transmitter module is mounted in the A&F instrument 100, using reference surfaces “A”, “B”, and “C” of the module. Reference surface “A” mounts flat to base plate 120, which has been aligned parallel to the laser beam used in the A&F instrument 100, generated by the laser 118. Reference surface “C” is made flush to two kinematic mounts that have been aligned parallel to the laser beam 118. Reference surface “B” is flush to one kinematic mount and establishes the correct position along the beam line of the laser 118.
Mirror-2 is mounted to reference surface “E” on module 304. Mirror-1 is mounted to plate 322 which is mounted to reference surface “F”.
In the alignment process the optical components are configured to meet system requirements using the process previously detailed. During the alignment process the A&F instrument 100 holds the parts in place with a set of clamps and piece holders. When the alignment process is completed, the optical components are fixed to the surfaces of module 304 with a glue that permanently holds them in place.
The following is a list of transmitter optical module components and their adjustments that are fixed in the align and focus instrument 100:
Thus, there are a total of eight independent adjustment parameters for the transmitter module. Each parameter is optimized in the alignment process, and fixed with glue before removal of the module 66 from the A&F instrument 100.
θ=(d2−d1)/(Λ2−Λ1)
Ensure lens 310 is intimate with machined lens and mirror mount 304.
This application is related to the following commonly-owned U.S. patent applications which are filed on the same day as this application: 1) Method and System for Optically Inspecting Parts (Attorney Docket No. GINS 0120 PUS);2) Method for Estimating Thread Parameters of a Part (Attorney Docket No. GINS 0122 PUS);3) Optical Modules and Method of Precisely Assembling Same (Attorney Docket No. GINS 0123 PUS);4) Method and Inspection Head Apparatus for Optically Measuring Geometric Dimensions of a Part (Attorney Docket No. GINS 0124 PUS);5) Calibration Device for Use in an Optical Part Measuring System (Attorney Docket No. GINS 0126 PUS); and6) Method and System for Generating Calibration Data For Use In Calibrating A Part Inspection System (Attorney Docket No. GINS 0127 PUS).