全部 标题 作者
关键词 摘要

OALib Journal期刊
ISSN: 2333-9721
费用:99美元

查看量下载量

相关文章

更多...
ISRN Optics  2013 

Uncertainty Estimation due to Geometrical Imperfection and Wringing in Calibration of End Standards

DOI: 10.1155/2013/697176

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib

Abstract:

Uncertainty in gauge block measurement depends on three major areas, thermal effects, dimension metrology system that includes measurement strategy, and end standard surface perfection grades. In this paper, we focus precisely on estimating the uncertainty due to the geometrical imperfection of measuring surfaces and wringing gab in calibration of end standards grade 0. Optomechanical system equipped with Zygo measurement interferometer (ZMI-1000A) and AFM technique have been employed. A novel protocol of measurement covering the geometric form of end standard surfaces and wrung base platen was experimentally applied. Surface imperfection characteristics of commonly used 6.5?mm GB have been achieved by AFM in 2D and 3D to be applied in three sets of experiments. The results show that there are obvious mapping relations between the geometrical imperfection and wringing thickness of the end standards calibration. Moreover, the predicted uncertainties are clearly estimated within an acceptable range from 0.132?μm, 0.164?μm and 0.202?μm, respectively. Experimental and analytical results are also presented. 1. Introduction In nonmetrology, estimation of uncertainty in dimension measurements is a vital part in calibration processes. The uncertainty estimation is always influenced by the procedures and the conditions of length measurement. End-to-end effects in calibration of end standards are constantly a necessary part in length metrology. From the calibration of primary length standards (a stabilized laser wavelength) to the calibration of secondary end standards (gauge blocks, GBs), it was important to accurately identify the major impacts on the uncertainty estimation. There are many grades of gauge blocks (00, , 0, and industrial grade) that are commonly working as end standards in different accurate industrial applications, especially in automotive and airspace industries. One must know the requirements of gauge blocks: the surfaces must have a smooth finish, the surfaces must be flat, the double faces must be parallel, and the actual size must be known as a natural expression of the nominal size [1, 2]. Materials of GBs are made including specific conditions such as hardness, temperature stability, corrosion resistance, and high-quality finish. Figure 1 emphasizes the truth of the metrologists saying “No surface is perfectly smooth.” The surface of GB is rarely so flat or smooth, but most commonly it is a combination between the tolerances limits and due to the surface finish quality. In dimensional metrology, such calibration should be performed to

References

[1]  ISO 3650, Geometrical Product Specifications (GPS)-Length Standards-Gauge Blocks, International Organization for Standardization, 2008.
[2]  H. Castrup and S. Castrup, Uncertainty Analysis for Alternative Calibration Scenarios, NCSLI Workshop & Symposium, Orlando, Fla, USA, 2008.
[3]  J. E. Decker and J. R. Pekelsky, “Uncertainty evaluation for the measurement of gauge blocks by optical interferometry,” Metrologia, vol. 34, no. 6, pp. 479–493, 1997.
[4]  I. Naeim and S. Khodier, “Nanometer positioning accuracy over a long term traveling stage based on heterodyne interferometry,” International Journal of Metrology and Quality Engineering, vol. 3, pp. 97–100, 2012.
[5]  M. Wengierow, L. Sa?but, and Z. Ramotowski, “Interferometric multiwavelength system for long gauge blocks measurements,” in Optical Measurement Systems for Industrial Inspection VII, vol. 8082 of Proceeding of SPIE, Munich, Germany, May 2011.
[6]  S. H. R. Ali, “Advanced nanomeasuring techniques for surface characterization,” International Scholarly Research Network, ISRN Optics Journal, vol. 2012, Article ID 859353, pp. 1–23, 2012.
[7]  R. Thalmann and H. Baechler, “Issues and advantages of gauge block calibration by mechanical comparison,” in Recent Developments in Traceable Dimensional Measurements II, vol. 5190 of Proceeding of SPIE, pp. 62–69, August 2003.
[8]  BIPM, “Evaluation of measurement data-guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement,” JCGM 100, 2008, http://www.bipm.org/utils/common/documents/jcgm/JCGM_100_2008_E.pdf.
[9]  L.-C. Chen, S.-L. Yeh, A. M. Tapilouw, and J.-C. Chang, “3-D surface profilometry using simultaneous phase-shifting interferometry,” Optics Communications, vol. 283, no. 18, pp. 3376–3382, 2010.
[10]  K. Hidaka, A. Saito, and S. Koga, “Study of a micro-roughness probe with ultrasonic sensor,” CIRP Annals, vol. 57, no. 1, pp. 489–492, 2008.
[11]  Steel gauge block surface, “Data is measured with AFM microscope,” height mode, http://www.sciencegl.com/3dsurf/shots/screenshots.htm.
[12]  A. Godina, T. Vuherer, and B. Acko, “Possibilities for minimising uncertainty of dissimilar materials gauge blocks calibration by mechanical comparison,” Measurement, vol. 45, no. 3, pp. 517–524, 2012.
[13]  ZMI-1000A, Operating Manual, Zygo Corporation, Middlefield, Conn, USA, 1999.
[14]  EAL-G21, Calibration of Gauge Block Ccomparators, 1996.
[15]  T. Doiron and J. Beers, The Gauge Block Handbook, NIST monograph 180 with Corrections, 1995.

Full-Text

Contact Us

service@oalib.com

QQ:3279437679

WhatsApp +8615387084133