| Literature DB >> 30104513 |
Shaowei Fu1,2, Fang Cheng3, Tegoeh Tjahjowidodo4,5, Yu Zhou6, David Butler7.
Abstract
The characterization of surface topographic features on a component is typically quantified using two-dimensional roughness descriptors which are captured by off-line desktop instruments. Ideally any measurement system should be integrated into the manufacturing process to provide in-situ measurement and real-time feedback. A non-contact in-situ surface topography measuring system is proposed in this paper. The proposed system utilizes a laser confocal sensor in both lateral and vertical scanning modes to measure the height of the target features. The roughness parameters are calculated in the developed data processing software according to ISO 4287. To reduce the inherent disadvantage of confocal microscopy, e.g., scattering noise at steep angles and background noise from specular reflection from the optical elements, the developed system has been calibrated and a linear correction factor has been applied in this study. A particular challenge identified for this work is the in-situ measurement of features generated by a robotized surface finishing system. The proposed system was integrated onto a robotic arm with the measuring distance and angle adjusted during measurement based on a CAD model of the component in question. Experimental data confirms the capability of this system to measure the surface roughness within the Ra range of 0.2⁻7 μm (bandwidth λc/λs of 300), with a relative accuracy of 5%.Entities:
Keywords: error correction; in-situ measurement; non-contact; surface roughness
Year: 2018 PMID: 30104513 PMCID: PMC6111828 DOI: 10.3390/s18082657
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1Structure of single-point confocal system. (a) Target point is on focus; (b) Target point is out of focus.
Figure 2Working principle of the laser confocal sensor. (a) Vertical scanning mechanism; (b) Lateral scanning mechanism.
Figure 3Precision roughness reference specimen and its measured surface profile.
Ra values of the precision roughness reference specimen.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Mean | Std. Dev. | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3.11 | 3.03 | 3.01 | 3.14 | 3.08 | 3.07 | 0.05 |
Figure 4Model of n-times of profile data stitching.
Figure 5(a) Laboratory set-up; (b) Extended surface profiles of the precision roughness reference specimen; (c) Enlarged partial profiles of the precision roughness reference specimen.
Stitching errors of the laser confocal profile.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Mean | Std. Dev. | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MSE (µm) | 0.034 | 0.023 | 0.022 | 0.027 | 0.016 | 0.024 | 0.010 |
Measurement results of the depth measurement standards.
| Nominal Value (µm)Instrument | 5 | 10 | 15 | 20 | 25 | 30 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Instrument | |||||||
| Stylus (µm) | 5.09 ± 0.02 | 9.95 ± 0.01 | 15.10 ± 0.02 | 19.98 ± 0.01 | 24.62 ± 0.05 | 29.99 ± 0.01 | |
| Confocal (µm) | 5.24 ± 0.04 | 10.12 ± 0.05 | 15.21 ± 0.04 | 20.15 ± 0.11 | 24.78 ± 0.07 | 30.22 ± 0.05 | |
Figure 6Three-stage movement strategy for surface measurement.
Figure 7Experimental system setup.
Figure 8Schematic of Talysurf PGI 800 during measurement of roughness standard samples.
Ra of different surfaces measured using laser confocal system and stylus profilometer.
| Machining | Stylus Profilometer Measured | Laser Confocal System Measured | Error (µm) |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 0.20 ± 0.01 | 0.22 | 0.02 |
| 0.36 ± 0.01 | 0.38 | 0.02 | |
| 0.83 ± 0.01 | 0.88 | 0.05 | |
| 1.55 ± 0.02 | 1.63 | 0.08 | |
| 3.20 ± 0.04 | 3.33 | 0.13 | |
|
| 0.40 ± 0.00 | 0.41 | 0.01 |
| 0.58 ± 0.01 | 0.59 | 0.01 | |
| 1.40 ± 0.00 | 1.46 | 0.06 | |
| 3.00 ± 0.02 | 3.16 | 0.16 | |
| 4.06 ± 0.03 | 4.19 | 0.13 | |
| 6.91 ± 0.02 | 7.17 | 0.26 | |
|
| 0.26 ± 0.01 | 0.27 | 0.01 |
| 0.54 ± 0.01 | 0.55 | 0.01 | |
| 1.52 ± 0.02 | 1.57 | 0.05 | |
| 2.70 ± 0.02 | 2.85 | 0.15 | |
| 3.25 ± 0.04 | 3.39 | 0.14 | |
| 6.35 ± 0.02 | 6.63 | 0.28 |
Figure 9Error curve of different machining surface.
Figure 10Actual and measured profiles using stylus method [46].
Figure 11Residual relative errors after linear error compensation.