US20150153726A1 - Method for inspecting a manufacturing device - Google Patents
Method for inspecting a manufacturing device Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- US20150153726A1 US20150153726A1 US14/574,865 US201414574865A US2015153726A1 US 20150153726 A1 US20150153726 A1 US 20150153726A1 US 201414574865 A US201414574865 A US 201414574865A US 2015153726 A1 US2015153726 A1 US 2015153726A1
- Authority
- US
- United States
- Prior art keywords
- parts
- deviation
- geometric
- tolerances
- stress
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Abandoned
Links
- 238000000034 method Methods 0.000 title claims abstract description 50
- 238000004519 manufacturing process Methods 0.000 title claims abstract description 26
- 238000012545 processing Methods 0.000 claims abstract description 32
- 238000005259 measurement Methods 0.000 claims abstract description 19
- 238000013461 design Methods 0.000 claims abstract description 18
- 230000035882 stress Effects 0.000 claims description 52
- 238000009826 distribution Methods 0.000 claims description 41
- 230000008646 thermal stress Effects 0.000 claims description 23
- 230000003287 optical effect Effects 0.000 claims description 4
- 238000012916 structural analysis Methods 0.000 claims description 2
- 238000005266 casting Methods 0.000 description 3
- 238000012797 qualification Methods 0.000 description 3
- 238000004458 analytical method Methods 0.000 description 2
- 238000010586 diagram Methods 0.000 description 2
- 238000004891 communication Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000011961 computed axial tomography Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000002591 computed tomography Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000005242 forging Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000007689 inspection Methods 0.000 description 1
Images
Classifications
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G05—CONTROLLING; REGULATING
- G05B—CONTROL OR REGULATING SYSTEMS IN GENERAL; FUNCTIONAL ELEMENTS OF SUCH SYSTEMS; MONITORING OR TESTING ARRANGEMENTS FOR SUCH SYSTEMS OR ELEMENTS
- G05B19/00—Programme-control systems
- G05B19/02—Programme-control systems electric
- G05B19/418—Total factory control, i.e. centrally controlling a plurality of machines, e.g. direct or distributed numerical control [DNC], flexible manufacturing systems [FMS], integrated manufacturing systems [IMS] or computer integrated manufacturing [CIM]
- G05B19/41865—Total factory control, i.e. centrally controlling a plurality of machines, e.g. direct or distributed numerical control [DNC], flexible manufacturing systems [FMS], integrated manufacturing systems [IMS] or computer integrated manufacturing [CIM] characterised by job scheduling, process planning, material flow
- G05B19/4187—Total factory control, i.e. centrally controlling a plurality of machines, e.g. direct or distributed numerical control [DNC], flexible manufacturing systems [FMS], integrated manufacturing systems [IMS] or computer integrated manufacturing [CIM] characterised by job scheduling, process planning, material flow by tool management
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G05—CONTROLLING; REGULATING
- G05B—CONTROL OR REGULATING SYSTEMS IN GENERAL; FUNCTIONAL ELEMENTS OF SUCH SYSTEMS; MONITORING OR TESTING ARRANGEMENTS FOR SUCH SYSTEMS OR ELEMENTS
- G05B19/00—Programme-control systems
- G05B19/02—Programme-control systems electric
- G05B19/18—Numerical control [NC], i.e. automatically operating machines, in particular machine tools, e.g. in a manufacturing environment, so as to execute positioning, movement or co-ordinated operations by means of programme data in numerical form
- G05B19/401—Numerical control [NC], i.e. automatically operating machines, in particular machine tools, e.g. in a manufacturing environment, so as to execute positioning, movement or co-ordinated operations by means of programme data in numerical form characterised by control arrangements for measuring, e.g. calibration and initialisation, measuring workpiece for machining purposes
-
- G06F17/50—
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06F—ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING
- G06F30/00—Computer-aided design [CAD]
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G05—CONTROLLING; REGULATING
- G05B—CONTROL OR REGULATING SYSTEMS IN GENERAL; FUNCTIONAL ELEMENTS OF SUCH SYSTEMS; MONITORING OR TESTING ARRANGEMENTS FOR SUCH SYSTEMS OR ELEMENTS
- G05B2219/00—Program-control systems
- G05B2219/30—Nc systems
- G05B2219/37—Measurements
- G05B2219/37205—Compare measured, vision data with computer model, cad data
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G05—CONTROLLING; REGULATING
- G05B—CONTROL OR REGULATING SYSTEMS IN GENERAL; FUNCTIONAL ELEMENTS OF SUCH SYSTEMS; MONITORING OR TESTING ARRANGEMENTS FOR SUCH SYSTEMS OR ELEMENTS
- G05B2219/00—Program-control systems
- G05B2219/30—Nc systems
- G05B2219/37—Measurements
- G05B2219/37555—Camera detects orientation, position workpiece, points of workpiece
-
- Y—GENERAL TAGGING OF NEW TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS; GENERAL TAGGING OF CROSS-SECTIONAL TECHNOLOGIES SPANNING OVER SEVERAL SECTIONS OF THE IPC; TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC CROSS-REFERENCE ART COLLECTIONS [XRACs] AND DIGESTS
- Y02—TECHNOLOGIES OR APPLICATIONS FOR MITIGATION OR ADAPTATION AGAINST CLIMATE CHANGE
- Y02P—CLIMATE CHANGE MITIGATION TECHNOLOGIES IN THE PRODUCTION OR PROCESSING OF GOODS
- Y02P90/00—Enabling technologies with a potential contribution to greenhouse gas [GHG] emissions mitigation
- Y02P90/02—Total factory control, e.g. smart factories, flexible manufacturing systems [FMS] or integrated manufacturing systems [IMS]
Definitions
- This disclosure relates generally to methods for inspecting a manufacturing device and, more particularly, to methods for inspecting a manufacturing device by inspecting a plurality of parts that have been manufactured by the device.
- Various qualification methods are known for determining whether, for example, a rotor blade casting die can form a rotor blade that complies with a blade design specification.
- the blade design specification may include information regarding geometry and/or structural properties of the rotor blade.
- a typical qualification method for a rotor blade casting die includes a step of creating a surface geometry map of at least one rotor blade, formed by the die, with a mechanical contact measuring device. Data from the surface geometry map is analyzed to determine whether dimensions of the rotor blade are within tolerance of the geometry designated in the blade design specification. Such a qualification method, however, can be relatively time consuming since the mechanical contact measuring device measures one data point at a time.
- a method for inspecting a plurality of parts with an electronic measurement device and a processing system.
- the method includes steps of: (a) creating surface geometry maps of a plurality of parts utilizing the electronic measurement device, where each part was, e.g., manufactured utilizing the manufacturing device; (b) generating geometric part models of the parts utilizing the surface geometry maps; (c) comparing each of the part models to a geometric reference model to provide model comparison data indicative of geometric differences between the models; (d) processing the model comparison data to determine deviation between the part models and the reference model; and (e) evaluating the deviation to determine whether the deviation satisfies one or more predetermined geometric tolerances, where the steps of generating, comparing, processing and evaluating are performed by the processing system.
- another method for inspecting a plurality of parts with an electronic measurement device and a processing system.
- the method includes steps of: (a) creating surface geometry maps of a plurality of parts utilizing the electronic measurement device, where each part was, e.g., manufactured utilizing the manufacturing device; (b) generating geometric part models of the parts utilizing the surface geometry maps; (c) structurally analyzing at least some of the parts utilizing the respective part model to provide stress data indicative of at least one of a thermal stress distribution and a mechanical stress distribution for the respective parts; and (d) evaluating the stress data to determine whether at least one of the thermal stress distribution and the mechanical stress distribution satisfies one or more predetermined stress tolerances, where the steps of generating, analyzing and evaluating are performed by the processing system.
- another method for inspecting a plurality of parts with an electronic measurement device and a processing system.
- the method includes steps of: (a) creating surface geometry maps of the parts utilizing the electronic measurement device; (b) comparing the surface geometry maps to one another to provide an averaged surface geometry map; (c) generating an averaged geometric part model utilizing the averaged surface geometry map; (d) comparing the averaged geometric part model to a geometric reference model to provide model comparison data indicative of geometric differences between the models; and (e) evaluating the model comparison data to determine whether one or more of the geometric differences between the models respectively satisfy one or more predetermined geometric tolerances, where the steps of comparing, generating and evaluating are performed by the processing system.
- FIG. 1 is a diagrammatic illustration of a system for inspecting a manufacturing device.
- FIG. 2 is a diagrammatic illustration of a non-contact sensor included in the system illustrated in FIG. 1 .
- FIG. 3 is a flow diagram of a method for inspecting a manufacturing device.
- FIG. 4 is a statistical normal distribution comparing geometric differences between each of a plurality of part models and a reference model at a certain data point.
- the present invention includes a method for inspecting a manufacturing device and a method for inspecting a plurality of parts manufactured with the manufacturing device.
- a manufacturing device is a die (e.g., a casting die, a forging die, etc.) for manufacturing a part such as a hollow rotor blade for a gas turbine engine.
- Other examples of manufacturing devices include molds, stamping tools, etc.
- the manufacturing device can be inspected, for example, by inspecting the plurality of parts that have been manufactured utilizing the manufacturing device.
- the parts can be inspected with an electronic measurement device that includes, for example, a non-contact sensor that can measure a plurality of data points on a surface of one of the parts substantially simultaneously.
- the method can relatively quickly determine whether the manufacturing device manufactures parts that comply with a part design specification.
- the part design specification designates a set of geometric and/or structural design parameters that the parts are designed to exhibit.
- a geometric tolerance for a dimension of a feature (e.g., a radius of a fillet) on the part is an example of a geometric design parameter.
- a stress tolerance (e.g., a minimum mechanical or thermal stress tolerance) for a feature of the part is an example of a structural design parameter.
- FIG. 1 illustrates a system 10 adapted to perform the aforesaid inspection methods.
- the system 10 includes an electronic measurement device 11 , a support stand 14 and a processing system 16 .
- the electronic measurement device 11 can include a non-contact sensor 12 (e.g., a white light optical scanner) adapted to map at least a portion of a surface 18 of a part 20 .
- the term “map” is used herein to describe a process of applying a (e.g., high density) triangulated mesh of surface data points to a part surface.
- the non-contact sensor 12 includes a fringe pattern projector 22 and one or more cameras 24 .
- the projector 22 is adapted to project a point, line and/or pattern of light (e.g., white light).
- Each camera 24 is adapted to capture an image of the projected light.
- a non-contact sensor may include a laser scanning device, a blue light optical scanner, a computed axial tomography scanning (CAT Scan) device, etc.
- the electronic measurement device 11 can include a contact sensor such as, for example, a coordinate measuring machine (CMM).
- CCM coordinate measuring machine
- the support stand 14 includes a base 26 , a part support 28 and a sensor support 30 .
- the part support 28 extends from the base 26 to a part support surface 32 .
- the sensor support 30 extends from the base 26 to a first end 34 .
- the sensor support 30 includes a sensor mount 36 disposed axially between the base 26 and the first end 34 , which connects the non-contact sensor 12 to the sensor support 30 .
- the processing system 16 can be implemented using hardware, software, or a combination thereof.
- the hardware can include one or more processors, a memory, analog and/or digital circuitry, etc.
- the processing system 16 is in signal communication (e.g., hardwired or wirelessly connected) with the non-contact sensor 12 .
- FIG. 3 is a flow diagram of a method for inspecting a manufacturing device.
- a plurality of parts e.g., twenty-five or more parts
- one of the parts 20 is disposed on the part support surface 32 .
- the processing system 16 signals the non-contact sensor 12 to create a surface geometry map of the part 20 disposed on the part support surface 32 .
- the projector 22 can project a pattern of alternating parallel light (e.g., white, or any other suitable color) and dark (e.g., black) lines onto the surface 18 of the part 20 .
- the lines may be distorted by contours, edges and/or other features (e.g., apertures) of the part surface 18 .
- Images of the lines on the part surface 18 are captured by the cameras 24 , and processed by the processing system 16 (see FIG. 1 ) to provide a surface geometry map (e.g., a 3D contour plot) of the part 20 .
- the surface geometry map includes a triangulated mesh of surface points that locate corresponding points on the part surface 18 in three-dimensional space. In some embodiments, the triangulated mesh of surface points can be normalized to a predetermined reference coordinate space.
- the processing system 16 generates a geometric part model of the part 20 utilizing the surface geometry map.
- the part model can be generated, for example, by performing a surface fitting to the triangulated mesh of normalized surface points.
- the present invention is not limited to such a surface fitting technique.
- step 308 steps 302 to 306 are repeated for each of the unmapped parts such that a geometric part model is generated sequentially for each of the parts.
- the processing system 16 compares each of the part models to a geometric reference model (e.g., a predetermined geometric model of the parts as they are designed). Certain data points from each of the part models, for example, can be spatially compared to corresponding data points from the reference model to provide model comparison data.
- the model comparison data is indicative of geometric differences between the part models and the reference model (e.g., spatial differences between corresponding model data points).
- the processing system 16 processes the model comparison data to determine deviation between the part models and the reference model.
- the model comparison data is processed, for example, by statistically comparing the geometric differences between the models at corresponding model data points using statistical normal distributions (e.g., bell curves), each having a probability density function. Data from the normal distributions can subsequently be analyzed to determine the deviation.
- the deviation can be an upper and/or a lower fourth standard deviation (e.g., +/ ⁇ 4 ⁇ ) to account for, for example, manufacturing device wear, etc.
- the data can be processed utilizing a process capability ratio (CPK) method, a mean deviation method, etc.
- CPK process capability ratio
- the processing system 16 evaluates the deviation between the part models and the reference model to determine whether the deviation satisfies predetermined geometric tolerances designated by the part design specification.
- the predetermined geometric tolerances include one or more lower (e.g., minimum) tolerance values and/or one or more upper (e.g., maximum) tolerance values.
- the deviation satisfies the predetermined geometric tolerances where, for example, values of the fourth standard deviation are greater than respective lower tolerance values, and less than respective upper tolerance values.
- the deviation may not satisfy the predetermined geometric tolerances, however, where the fourth standard deviation values are less than respective lower tolerance values, or greater than respective upper tolerance values.
- the processing system 16 structurally analyzes each of the parts 20 utilizing the respective part model to provide stress data.
- a finite element analysis (FEA) may be performed on each respective part model using one or more predetermined operating conditions (e.g., rotational speed, operating temperature, forces subjected thereon, etc.) to determine the stress data.
- the processing system 16 may collectively process one or more of the part models to provide an average structural analysis for a respective grouping of the parts.
- the stress data may be indicative of, for example, a thermal stress distribution and/or a mechanical stress distribution that the parts 20 may be subjected to during use.
- the stress data can be indicative of a thermal stress distribution and a mechanical stress distribution, which the blade is subject to when a gas turbine engine is being operating at full throttle.
- the processing system 16 evaluates the stress data to determine whether the stress distributions satisfy predetermined stress tolerances designated by the part design specification.
- the predetermined stress tolerances may include, for example, one or more thermal stress tolerance values, and/or one or more mechanical stress tolerance values.
- the thermal stress distribution satisfies the predetermined stress tolerances where, for example, thermal stress values from the thermal stress distribution are less than corresponding thermal stress tolerance values.
- the mechanical stress distribution satisfies the predetermined stress tolerances where, for example, mechanical stress values from the mechanical stress distribution are less than corresponding mechanical stress tolerance values.
- step 320 the processing system 16 determines whether the manufacturing device manufactures parts 20 that comply with the part design specification.
- the parts are determined to comply with the part design specification, for example, where the deviation satisfies the geometric tolerances and/or the stress distributions satisfy the stress tolerances.
- the processing system can compare the surface geometry maps of a plurality of the parts to provide an averaged surface geometry map.
- Values for certain data points from each of the surface geometry maps can be respectively processed (e.g., averaged) to provide averaged values thereof.
- Examples of a value can include (i) a measurement value indicative of a measured coordinate of a surface point on the part, (ii) a statistical deviation (e.g., a standard deviation) between the measured coordinate and a respective reference coordinate (e.g., included in the part design specification), (iii) a process capability ratio (CPK) between the measured coordinate and the respective reference coordinate, etc.
- CPK process capability ratio
- valves can include an upper control limit (UCL) and/or a lower control limit (LCL), which are bounds (e.g., limits) that are established by, for example, an engineering analysis using FEA, blueprint, statistics, etc.
- UCL upper control limit
- LCL lower control limit
- the averaged surface geometry map can subsequently be utilized to generate an averaged geometric part model, which can be compared to the geometric reference model to provide model comparison data.
- the model comparison data is indicative of one or more geometric differences between the models, which can be evaluated utilizing tolerances as described above.
Landscapes
- Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
- Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- General Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- Manufacturing & Machinery (AREA)
- Automation & Control Theory (AREA)
- General Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
- Theoretical Computer Science (AREA)
- Human Computer Interaction (AREA)
- Quality & Reliability (AREA)
- Computer Hardware Design (AREA)
- Geometry (AREA)
- Evolutionary Computation (AREA)
- Length Measuring Devices With Unspecified Measuring Means (AREA)
- Length Measuring Devices By Optical Means (AREA)
- Architecture (AREA)
- Software Systems (AREA)
Abstract
A method is provided for inspecting a plurality of parts with an electronic measurement device and a processing system. The method includes a step of creating surface geometry maps of the parts utilizing the electronic measurement device, where each part was manufactured utilizing the manufacturing device. Geometric part models of the parts are generated from the surface geometry maps. The part models can subsequently be analyzed to determine whether a manufacturing device that manufactured the plurality of parts manufactures parts that comply with a part design specification.
Description
- This application is a divisional of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/417,990 filed Mar. 12, 2012.
- 1. Technical Field
- This disclosure relates generally to methods for inspecting a manufacturing device and, more particularly, to methods for inspecting a manufacturing device by inspecting a plurality of parts that have been manufactured by the device.
- 2. Background Information
- Various qualification methods are known for determining whether, for example, a rotor blade casting die can form a rotor blade that complies with a blade design specification. The blade design specification may include information regarding geometry and/or structural properties of the rotor blade.
- A typical qualification method for a rotor blade casting die includes a step of creating a surface geometry map of at least one rotor blade, formed by the die, with a mechanical contact measuring device. Data from the surface geometry map is analyzed to determine whether dimensions of the rotor blade are within tolerance of the geometry designated in the blade design specification. Such a qualification method, however, can be relatively time consuming since the mechanical contact measuring device measures one data point at a time.
- According to a first aspect of the invention, a method is provided for inspecting a plurality of parts with an electronic measurement device and a processing system. The method includes steps of: (a) creating surface geometry maps of a plurality of parts utilizing the electronic measurement device, where each part was, e.g., manufactured utilizing the manufacturing device; (b) generating geometric part models of the parts utilizing the surface geometry maps; (c) comparing each of the part models to a geometric reference model to provide model comparison data indicative of geometric differences between the models; (d) processing the model comparison data to determine deviation between the part models and the reference model; and (e) evaluating the deviation to determine whether the deviation satisfies one or more predetermined geometric tolerances, where the steps of generating, comparing, processing and evaluating are performed by the processing system.
- According to a second aspect of the invention, another method is provided for inspecting a plurality of parts with an electronic measurement device and a processing system. The method includes steps of: (a) creating surface geometry maps of a plurality of parts utilizing the electronic measurement device, where each part was, e.g., manufactured utilizing the manufacturing device; (b) generating geometric part models of the parts utilizing the surface geometry maps; (c) structurally analyzing at least some of the parts utilizing the respective part model to provide stress data indicative of at least one of a thermal stress distribution and a mechanical stress distribution for the respective parts; and (d) evaluating the stress data to determine whether at least one of the thermal stress distribution and the mechanical stress distribution satisfies one or more predetermined stress tolerances, where the steps of generating, analyzing and evaluating are performed by the processing system.
- According to a third aspect of the invention, another method is provided for inspecting a plurality of parts with an electronic measurement device and a processing system. The method includes steps of: (a) creating surface geometry maps of the parts utilizing the electronic measurement device; (b) comparing the surface geometry maps to one another to provide an averaged surface geometry map; (c) generating an averaged geometric part model utilizing the averaged surface geometry map; (d) comparing the averaged geometric part model to a geometric reference model to provide model comparison data indicative of geometric differences between the models; and (e) evaluating the model comparison data to determine whether one or more of the geometric differences between the models respectively satisfy one or more predetermined geometric tolerances, where the steps of comparing, generating and evaluating are performed by the processing system.
- The foregoing features and the operation of the invention will become more apparent in light of the following description and the accompanying drawings.
-
FIG. 1 is a diagrammatic illustration of a system for inspecting a manufacturing device. -
FIG. 2 is a diagrammatic illustration of a non-contact sensor included in the system illustrated inFIG. 1 . -
FIG. 3 is a flow diagram of a method for inspecting a manufacturing device. -
FIG. 4 is a statistical normal distribution comparing geometric differences between each of a plurality of part models and a reference model at a certain data point. - The present invention includes a method for inspecting a manufacturing device and a method for inspecting a plurality of parts manufactured with the manufacturing device. An example of a manufacturing device is a die (e.g., a casting die, a forging die, etc.) for manufacturing a part such as a hollow rotor blade for a gas turbine engine. Other examples of manufacturing devices include molds, stamping tools, etc. Briefly, the manufacturing device can be inspected, for example, by inspecting the plurality of parts that have been manufactured utilizing the manufacturing device. The parts can be inspected with an electronic measurement device that includes, for example, a non-contact sensor that can measure a plurality of data points on a surface of one of the parts substantially simultaneously. In this manner, the method can relatively quickly determine whether the manufacturing device manufactures parts that comply with a part design specification. The part design specification designates a set of geometric and/or structural design parameters that the parts are designed to exhibit. A geometric tolerance for a dimension of a feature (e.g., a radius of a fillet) on the part is an example of a geometric design parameter. A stress tolerance (e.g., a minimum mechanical or thermal stress tolerance) for a feature of the part is an example of a structural design parameter.
-
FIG. 1 illustrates asystem 10 adapted to perform the aforesaid inspection methods. Thesystem 10 includes anelectronic measurement device 11, a support stand 14 and aprocessing system 16. - Referring to
FIGS. 1 and 2 , theelectronic measurement device 11 can include a non-contact sensor 12 (e.g., a white light optical scanner) adapted to map at least a portion of asurface 18 of apart 20. The term “map” is used herein to describe a process of applying a (e.g., high density) triangulated mesh of surface data points to a part surface. In the embodiment shown inFIG. 2 , thenon-contact sensor 12 includes afringe pattern projector 22 and one ormore cameras 24. Theprojector 22 is adapted to project a point, line and/or pattern of light (e.g., white light). Eachcamera 24 is adapted to capture an image of the projected light. An example of such a projector and cameras is disclosed in U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2009/0033947, which is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety. Other examples of a non-contact sensor may include a laser scanning device, a blue light optical scanner, a computed axial tomography scanning (CAT Scan) device, etc. In alternate embodiments, theelectronic measurement device 11 can include a contact sensor such as, for example, a coordinate measuring machine (CMM). - Referring again to
FIG. 1 , thesupport stand 14 includes abase 26, apart support 28 and asensor support 30. Thepart support 28 extends from thebase 26 to apart support surface 32. Thesensor support 30 extends from thebase 26 to afirst end 34. Thesensor support 30 includes asensor mount 36 disposed axially between thebase 26 and thefirst end 34, which connects thenon-contact sensor 12 to thesensor support 30. - The
processing system 16 can be implemented using hardware, software, or a combination thereof. The hardware can include one or more processors, a memory, analog and/or digital circuitry, etc. Theprocessing system 16 is in signal communication (e.g., hardwired or wirelessly connected) with thenon-contact sensor 12. -
FIG. 3 is a flow diagram of a method for inspecting a manufacturing device. Instep 300, a plurality of parts (e.g., twenty-five or more parts) are provided that were manufactured utilizing the manufacturing device. - Referring to
FIGS. 1 and 3 , instep 302, one of theparts 20 is disposed on thepart support surface 32. - In
step 304, theprocessing system 16 signals thenon-contact sensor 12 to create a surface geometry map of thepart 20 disposed on thepart support surface 32. Referring toFIG. 2 , for example, theprojector 22 can project a pattern of alternating parallel light (e.g., white, or any other suitable color) and dark (e.g., black) lines onto thesurface 18 of thepart 20. The lines may be distorted by contours, edges and/or other features (e.g., apertures) of thepart surface 18. Images of the lines on thepart surface 18 are captured by thecameras 24, and processed by the processing system 16 (seeFIG. 1 ) to provide a surface geometry map (e.g., a 3D contour plot) of thepart 20. The surface geometry map includes a triangulated mesh of surface points that locate corresponding points on thepart surface 18 in three-dimensional space. In some embodiments, the triangulated mesh of surface points can be normalized to a predetermined reference coordinate space. - Referring again to
FIGS. 1 and 3 , instep 306, theprocessing system 16 generates a geometric part model of thepart 20 utilizing the surface geometry map. The part model can be generated, for example, by performing a surface fitting to the triangulated mesh of normalized surface points. The present invention, however, is not limited to such a surface fitting technique. - In
step 308,steps 302 to 306 are repeated for each of the unmapped parts such that a geometric part model is generated sequentially for each of the parts. - In
step 310, theprocessing system 16 compares each of the part models to a geometric reference model (e.g., a predetermined geometric model of the parts as they are designed). Certain data points from each of the part models, for example, can be spatially compared to corresponding data points from the reference model to provide model comparison data. The model comparison data is indicative of geometric differences between the part models and the reference model (e.g., spatial differences between corresponding model data points). - In
step 312, theprocessing system 16 processes the model comparison data to determine deviation between the part models and the reference model. The model comparison data is processed, for example, by statistically comparing the geometric differences between the models at corresponding model data points using statistical normal distributions (e.g., bell curves), each having a probability density function. Data from the normal distributions can subsequently be analyzed to determine the deviation. Referring toFIG. 4 , the deviation can be an upper and/or a lower fourth standard deviation (e.g., +/−4σ) to account for, for example, manufacturing device wear, etc. Alternatively, the data can be processed utilizing a process capability ratio (CPK) method, a mean deviation method, etc. - Referring again to
FIGS. 1 and 3 , instep 314, theprocessing system 16 evaluates the deviation between the part models and the reference model to determine whether the deviation satisfies predetermined geometric tolerances designated by the part design specification. The predetermined geometric tolerances include one or more lower (e.g., minimum) tolerance values and/or one or more upper (e.g., maximum) tolerance values. The deviation satisfies the predetermined geometric tolerances where, for example, values of the fourth standard deviation are greater than respective lower tolerance values, and less than respective upper tolerance values. The deviation may not satisfy the predetermined geometric tolerances, however, where the fourth standard deviation values are less than respective lower tolerance values, or greater than respective upper tolerance values. - In
step 316, theprocessing system 16 structurally analyzes each of theparts 20 utilizing the respective part model to provide stress data. A finite element analysis (FEA), for example, may be performed on each respective part model using one or more predetermined operating conditions (e.g., rotational speed, operating temperature, forces subjected thereon, etc.) to determine the stress data. Alternatively, theprocessing system 16 may collectively process one or more of the part models to provide an average structural analysis for a respective grouping of the parts. The stress data may be indicative of, for example, a thermal stress distribution and/or a mechanical stress distribution that theparts 20 may be subjected to during use. In embodiments where thepart 20 is a rotor blade, for example, the stress data can be indicative of a thermal stress distribution and a mechanical stress distribution, which the blade is subject to when a gas turbine engine is being operating at full throttle. - In
step 318, theprocessing system 16 evaluates the stress data to determine whether the stress distributions satisfy predetermined stress tolerances designated by the part design specification. The predetermined stress tolerances may include, for example, one or more thermal stress tolerance values, and/or one or more mechanical stress tolerance values. The thermal stress distribution satisfies the predetermined stress tolerances where, for example, thermal stress values from the thermal stress distribution are less than corresponding thermal stress tolerance values. Similarly, the mechanical stress distribution satisfies the predetermined stress tolerances where, for example, mechanical stress values from the mechanical stress distribution are less than corresponding mechanical stress tolerance values. - In
step 320, theprocessing system 16 determines whether the manufacturing device manufacturesparts 20 that comply with the part design specification. The parts are determined to comply with the part design specification, for example, where the deviation satisfies the geometric tolerances and/or the stress distributions satisfy the stress tolerances. - In alternate embodiments, the processing system can compare the surface geometry maps of a plurality of the parts to provide an averaged surface geometry map. Values for certain data points from each of the surface geometry maps, for example, can be respectively processed (e.g., averaged) to provide averaged values thereof. Examples of a value can include (i) a measurement value indicative of a measured coordinate of a surface point on the part, (ii) a statistical deviation (e.g., a standard deviation) between the measured coordinate and a respective reference coordinate (e.g., included in the part design specification), (iii) a process capability ratio (CPK) between the measured coordinate and the respective reference coordinate, etc. Other examples of valves can include an upper control limit (UCL) and/or a lower control limit (LCL), which are bounds (e.g., limits) that are established by, for example, an engineering analysis using FEA, blueprint, statistics, etc. The averaged surface geometry map can subsequently be utilized to generate an averaged geometric part model, which can be compared to the geometric reference model to provide model comparison data. The model comparison data is indicative of one or more geometric differences between the models, which can be evaluated utilizing tolerances as described above.
- While various embodiments of the present invention have been disclosed, it will be apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art that many more embodiments and implementations are possible within the scope of the invention. Accordingly, the present invention is not to be restricted except in light of the attached claims and their equivalents.
Claims (22)
1. A method for inspecting a plurality of parts with an electronic measurement device and a processing system, comprising:
creating surface geometry maps of the parts utilizing the electronic measurement device;
generating geometric part models of the parts utilizing the surface geometry maps;
comparing each of the part models to a geometric reference model to provide model comparison data indicative of geometric differences between the models;
processing the model comparison data to determine deviation between the part models and the reference model; and
evaluating the deviation to determine whether the deviation satisfies one or more predetermined geometric tolerances;
wherein the generating, the comparing, the processing and the evaluating are performed by the processing system.
2. The method of claim 1 , wherein the parts are manufactured utilizing a manufacturing device.
3. The method of claim 2 , further comprising determining that the manufacturing device manufactures parts that comply with a part design specification where the deviation satisfies the geometric tolerances.
4. The method of claim 2 , wherein the manufacturing device comprises a die.
5. The method of claim 1 , wherein:
the geometric tolerances include at least one of a lower tolerance value and an upper tolerance value; and
the geometric deviation satisfies the predetermined geometric tolerances where a value of the deviation is at least one of greater than the lower tolerance value, and less than the upper tolerance value.
6. The method of claim 1 , wherein the processing of the model comparison data comprises:
statically comparing the geometric differences between the part models and the reference model using a normal distribution; and
analyzing the normal distribution to determine the deviation.
7. The method of claim 6 , wherein the deviation comprises a fourth standard deviation.
8. The method of claim 1 , further comprising structurally analyzing each of the parts utilizing the part models to provide stress data indicative of at least one of a thermal stress distribution and a mechanical stress distribution for each of the parts.
9. The method of claim 8 , further comprising evaluating the stress data to determine whether at least one of the thermal stress distribution and the mechanical stress distribution satisfies one or more predetermined stress tolerances.
10. The method of claim 9 , further comprising determining that the parts comply with a part design specification where
the deviation satisfies the geometric tolerances; and
at least one of the thermal stress distribution and the mechanical stress distribution satisfies the predetermined stress tolerances.
11. The method of claim 1 , wherein the electronic measurement device comprises a white light optical scanner.
12. A method for inspecting a plurality of parts with an electronic measurement device and a processing system, comprising:
creating surface geometry maps of the parts utilizing the electronic measurement device;
generating geometric part models of the parts utilizing the surface geometry maps;
structurally analyzing at least some of the parts utilizing the respective part models to provide stress data indicative of at least one of a thermal stress distribution and a mechanical stress distribution for the respective parts; and
evaluating the stress data to determine whether at least one of the thermal stress distribution and the mechanical stress distribution satisfies one or more predetermined stress tolerances;
wherein the generating, the analyzing and the evaluating are performed by the processing system.
13. The method of claim 12 , wherein the structural analysis is performed for each of the parts, and wherein the stress data is indicative of at least one of a thermal stress distribution and a mechanical stress distribution for each of the parts.
14. The method of claim 12 , wherein the parts are manufactured utilizing a manufacturing device.
15. The method of claim 14 , further comprising determining that the manufacturing device manufactures parts that comply with a part design specification where the at least one of the thermal stress distribution and the mechanical stress distribution satisfies the predetermined stress tolerances.
16. The method of claim 12 , wherein:
the predetermined stress tolerances have a thermal stress tolerance value; and
the thermal stress distribution satisfies the predetermined stress tolerances where a thermal stress value of the thermal stress distribution is less than the thermal stress tolerance value.
17. The method of claim 12 , wherein:
the predetermined stress tolerances have a mechanical stress tolerance value; and
the mechanical stress distribution satisfies the predetermined stress tolerances where a mechanical stress value of the mechanical stress distribution is less than the mechanical stress tolerance value.
18. The method of claim 12 , further comprising:
comparing each of the part models to a geometric reference model to provide model comparison data indicative of geometric differences between the models;
processing the model comparison data to determine deviation between the part models and the reference model; and
evaluating the deviation to determine whether the deviation satisfies one or more predetermined geometric tolerances.
19. The method of claim 18 , wherein the processing of the model comparison data comprises:
statically comparing the geometric differences between the part models and the reference model using a normal distribution; and
analyzing the normal distribution to determine the deviation.
20. The method of claim 19 , wherein the deviation comprises a fourth standard deviation.
21. The method of claim 20 , further comprising determining that the parts comply with a part design specification where
the deviation satisfies the geometric tolerances; and
at least one of the thermal stress distribution and the mechanical stress distribution satisfies the predetermined stress tolerances.
22. The method of claim 12 , wherein the electronic measurement device comprises a white light optical scanner.
Priority Applications (1)
Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
---|---|---|---|
US14/574,865 US20150153726A1 (en) | 2012-03-12 | 2014-12-18 | Method for inspecting a manufacturing device |
Applications Claiming Priority (2)
Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
---|---|---|---|
US13/417,990 US8942837B2 (en) | 2012-03-12 | 2012-03-12 | Method for inspecting a manufacturing device |
US14/574,865 US20150153726A1 (en) | 2012-03-12 | 2014-12-18 | Method for inspecting a manufacturing device |
Related Parent Applications (1)
Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
---|---|---|---|
US13/417,990 Division US8942837B2 (en) | 2012-03-12 | 2012-03-12 | Method for inspecting a manufacturing device |
Publications (1)
Publication Number | Publication Date |
---|---|
US20150153726A1 true US20150153726A1 (en) | 2015-06-04 |
Family
ID=49114789
Family Applications (2)
Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
---|---|---|---|
US13/417,990 Active 2033-07-19 US8942837B2 (en) | 2012-03-12 | 2012-03-12 | Method for inspecting a manufacturing device |
US14/574,865 Abandoned US20150153726A1 (en) | 2012-03-12 | 2014-12-18 | Method for inspecting a manufacturing device |
Family Applications Before (1)
Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
---|---|---|---|
US13/417,990 Active 2033-07-19 US8942837B2 (en) | 2012-03-12 | 2012-03-12 | Method for inspecting a manufacturing device |
Country Status (2)
Country | Link |
---|---|
US (2) | US8942837B2 (en) |
WO (1) | WO2013138331A1 (en) |
Cited By (1)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US20230304476A1 (en) * | 2022-03-23 | 2023-09-28 | Raytheon Technologies Corporation | Feedback inspection systems and methods |
Families Citing this family (10)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US9216821B1 (en) * | 2012-01-03 | 2015-12-22 | The Boeing Company | Methods and systems for helicopter rotor blade balancing |
US8942837B2 (en) * | 2012-03-12 | 2015-01-27 | United Technologies Corporation | Method for inspecting a manufacturing device |
US9784460B2 (en) * | 2013-08-01 | 2017-10-10 | Nautilus Data Technologies, Inc. | Data center facility and process that utilizes a closed-looped heat management system |
DE102014218132A1 (en) * | 2014-09-10 | 2016-03-10 | Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft zur Förderung der angewandten Forschung e.V. | Method and device for determining a quality of a component |
CN104537251B (en) * | 2015-01-06 | 2016-02-24 | 西安交通大学 | A kind of shock load recognition methods of fan blade |
FR3032975B1 (en) * | 2015-02-23 | 2017-03-10 | Sidel Participations | PROCESS FOR PLASMA PROCESSING OF CONTAINERS COMPRISING A THERMAL IMAGING PHASE |
US9983566B2 (en) * | 2015-12-03 | 2018-05-29 | The Boeing Company | Part inspection system and method |
GB201609858D0 (en) * | 2016-06-06 | 2016-07-20 | Rolls Royce Plc | A method of manufacturing and inspecting gas washed components in a gas turbine engine |
GB201615376D0 (en) * | 2016-09-09 | 2016-10-26 | Univ Of Warwick The | Three-Dimensional shape error detection |
US10121237B1 (en) | 2017-04-17 | 2018-11-06 | Rohr, Inc. | Component inspection method |
Citations (32)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US5424634A (en) * | 1994-02-18 | 1995-06-13 | International Business Machines Corporation | Non-destructive flex testing method and means |
US6091846A (en) * | 1996-05-31 | 2000-07-18 | Texas Instruments Incorporated | Method and system for anomaly detection |
US6246787B1 (en) * | 1996-05-31 | 2001-06-12 | Texas Instruments Incorporated | System and method for knowledgebase generation and management |
US6271924B1 (en) * | 1998-12-29 | 2001-08-07 | Bryan Kok Ann Ngoi | Noncontact acoustic optic scanning laser vibrometer for determining the difference between an object and a reference surface |
US6292582B1 (en) * | 1996-05-31 | 2001-09-18 | Lin Youling | Method and system for identifying defects in a semiconductor |
US20030130758A1 (en) * | 2001-12-12 | 2003-07-10 | Satoru Hirano | Design support apparatus and method |
US20030151167A1 (en) * | 2002-01-03 | 2003-08-14 | Kritchman Eliahu M. | Device, system and method for accurate printing of three dimensional objects |
US20050043837A1 (en) * | 1999-11-30 | 2005-02-24 | Rudger Rubbert | Interactive orthodontic care system based on intra-oral scanning of teeth |
US20050056783A1 (en) * | 1999-07-01 | 2005-03-17 | General Nanotechnology, Llc | Object inspection and/or modification system and method |
US20050066739A1 (en) * | 2003-09-26 | 2005-03-31 | Lam Research Corporation | Method and apparatus for wafer mechanical stress monitoring and wafer thermal stress monitoring |
US20050121422A1 (en) * | 2003-09-10 | 2005-06-09 | Virtek Vision International Inc. | Laser projection system, intelligent data correction system and method |
US7149677B2 (en) * | 2000-10-30 | 2006-12-12 | Translation Technologies, Inc. | Geometric model comparator and method |
US7162319B2 (en) * | 2002-08-07 | 2007-01-09 | Kimberly-Clark Worldwide, Inc. | Manufacturing information and troubleshooting system and method |
US20080015827A1 (en) * | 2006-01-24 | 2008-01-17 | Tryon Robert G Iii | Materials-based failure analysis in design of electronic devices, and prediction of operating life |
US7327857B2 (en) * | 2004-03-09 | 2008-02-05 | General Electric Company | Non-contact measurement method and apparatus |
US7474407B2 (en) * | 2003-02-20 | 2009-01-06 | Applied Science Innovations | Optical coherence tomography with 3d coherence scanning |
US20090033947A1 (en) * | 2007-07-31 | 2009-02-05 | United Technologies Corporation | Method for repeatable optical determination of object geometry dimensions and deviations |
US20090089020A1 (en) * | 2007-09-28 | 2009-04-02 | United Technologies Corporation | Method of inspecting turbine internal cooling features using non-contact scanners |
US7573586B1 (en) * | 2008-06-02 | 2009-08-11 | United Technologies Corporation | Method and system for measuring a coating thickness |
US20090254286A1 (en) * | 2005-12-02 | 2009-10-08 | Pratt & Whitney | Systems and Methods for Modeling Surface Properties of a Mechanical Component |
US7612893B2 (en) * | 2006-09-19 | 2009-11-03 | Zygo Corporation | Scanning interferometric methods and apparatus for measuring aspheric surfaces and wavefronts |
US20100125356A1 (en) * | 2008-11-18 | 2010-05-20 | Global Filtration Systems | System and Method for Manufacturing |
US20100215247A1 (en) * | 2008-12-22 | 2010-08-26 | Tadashi Kitamura | System And Method For A Semiconductor Lithographic Process Control Using Statistical Information In Defect Identification |
US20100296725A1 (en) * | 2007-11-22 | 2010-11-25 | Thomas Seiffert | Device and method for obtaining a three-dimensional topography |
US7869026B2 (en) * | 2007-12-21 | 2011-01-11 | United Technologies Corp. | Targeted artifacts and methods for evaluating 3-D coordinate system measurement accuracy of optical 3-D measuring systems using such targeted artifacts |
US20130030773A1 (en) * | 2011-07-29 | 2013-01-31 | Hexagon Metrology, Inc. | Coordinate measuring system data reduction |
US20130238109A1 (en) * | 2012-03-12 | 2013-09-12 | United Technologies Corporation | Method for inspecting a manufacturing device |
US20130232803A1 (en) * | 2012-03-08 | 2013-09-12 | United Technologies Corporation | System and method for measuring a workpiece relative to a common measurement coordinate system |
US9115909B2 (en) * | 2011-11-10 | 2015-08-25 | Lennox Industries Inc. | System and method for monitoring and reporting energy recovery ventilator status |
US9206991B2 (en) * | 2011-11-09 | 2015-12-08 | Lennox Industries Inc. | System and method for monitoring and reporting energy recovery ventilator power consumption and service and maintenance needs |
US20160003607A1 (en) * | 2013-02-27 | 2016-01-07 | United Technologies Corporation | Inspecting one or more apertures of a component using moldable material |
US9283518B2 (en) * | 2010-09-07 | 2016-03-15 | Dais Analytic Corporation | Fluid treatment systems and methods using selective transfer membranes |
Family Cites Families (6)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
JP2003093190A (en) | 2001-09-25 | 2003-04-02 | Shin Caterpillar Mitsubishi Ltd | Seat for vehicle |
JP4007857B2 (en) * | 2002-05-30 | 2007-11-14 | 本田技研工業株式会社 | Functional quality inspection method using 3D solid model |
JP3988588B2 (en) | 2002-08-29 | 2007-10-10 | 日産自動車株式会社 | 3D measuring device |
JP4887919B2 (en) | 2006-06-13 | 2012-02-29 | 横浜ゴム株式会社 | Tire mold member inspection method, tire mold member inspection apparatus, and mold member manufacturing process accuracy inspection method |
KR20090039942A (en) | 2007-10-19 | 2009-04-23 | 삼성중공업 주식회사 | Method and apparatus for scanning iron plates formed round for vessel |
JP2009264956A (en) | 2008-04-25 | 2009-11-12 | Toyota Motor Corp | Three-dimensional shape-position quality evaluation system and its method |
-
2012
- 2012-03-12 US US13/417,990 patent/US8942837B2/en active Active
-
2013
- 2013-03-12 WO PCT/US2013/030508 patent/WO2013138331A1/en active Application Filing
-
2014
- 2014-12-18 US US14/574,865 patent/US20150153726A1/en not_active Abandoned
Patent Citations (33)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US5424634A (en) * | 1994-02-18 | 1995-06-13 | International Business Machines Corporation | Non-destructive flex testing method and means |
US6091846A (en) * | 1996-05-31 | 2000-07-18 | Texas Instruments Incorporated | Method and system for anomaly detection |
US6246787B1 (en) * | 1996-05-31 | 2001-06-12 | Texas Instruments Incorporated | System and method for knowledgebase generation and management |
US6292582B1 (en) * | 1996-05-31 | 2001-09-18 | Lin Youling | Method and system for identifying defects in a semiconductor |
US6271924B1 (en) * | 1998-12-29 | 2001-08-07 | Bryan Kok Ann Ngoi | Noncontact acoustic optic scanning laser vibrometer for determining the difference between an object and a reference surface |
US20050056783A1 (en) * | 1999-07-01 | 2005-03-17 | General Nanotechnology, Llc | Object inspection and/or modification system and method |
US20050043837A1 (en) * | 1999-11-30 | 2005-02-24 | Rudger Rubbert | Interactive orthodontic care system based on intra-oral scanning of teeth |
US7013191B2 (en) * | 1999-11-30 | 2006-03-14 | Orametrix, Inc. | Interactive orthodontic care system based on intra-oral scanning of teeth |
US7149677B2 (en) * | 2000-10-30 | 2006-12-12 | Translation Technologies, Inc. | Geometric model comparator and method |
US20030130758A1 (en) * | 2001-12-12 | 2003-07-10 | Satoru Hirano | Design support apparatus and method |
US20030151167A1 (en) * | 2002-01-03 | 2003-08-14 | Kritchman Eliahu M. | Device, system and method for accurate printing of three dimensional objects |
US7162319B2 (en) * | 2002-08-07 | 2007-01-09 | Kimberly-Clark Worldwide, Inc. | Manufacturing information and troubleshooting system and method |
US7474407B2 (en) * | 2003-02-20 | 2009-01-06 | Applied Science Innovations | Optical coherence tomography with 3d coherence scanning |
US20050121422A1 (en) * | 2003-09-10 | 2005-06-09 | Virtek Vision International Inc. | Laser projection system, intelligent data correction system and method |
US20050066739A1 (en) * | 2003-09-26 | 2005-03-31 | Lam Research Corporation | Method and apparatus for wafer mechanical stress monitoring and wafer thermal stress monitoring |
US7327857B2 (en) * | 2004-03-09 | 2008-02-05 | General Electric Company | Non-contact measurement method and apparatus |
US20090254286A1 (en) * | 2005-12-02 | 2009-10-08 | Pratt & Whitney | Systems and Methods for Modeling Surface Properties of a Mechanical Component |
US20080015827A1 (en) * | 2006-01-24 | 2008-01-17 | Tryon Robert G Iii | Materials-based failure analysis in design of electronic devices, and prediction of operating life |
US7612893B2 (en) * | 2006-09-19 | 2009-11-03 | Zygo Corporation | Scanning interferometric methods and apparatus for measuring aspheric surfaces and wavefronts |
US20090033947A1 (en) * | 2007-07-31 | 2009-02-05 | United Technologies Corporation | Method for repeatable optical determination of object geometry dimensions and deviations |
US20090089020A1 (en) * | 2007-09-28 | 2009-04-02 | United Technologies Corporation | Method of inspecting turbine internal cooling features using non-contact scanners |
US20100296725A1 (en) * | 2007-11-22 | 2010-11-25 | Thomas Seiffert | Device and method for obtaining a three-dimensional topography |
US7869026B2 (en) * | 2007-12-21 | 2011-01-11 | United Technologies Corp. | Targeted artifacts and methods for evaluating 3-D coordinate system measurement accuracy of optical 3-D measuring systems using such targeted artifacts |
US7573586B1 (en) * | 2008-06-02 | 2009-08-11 | United Technologies Corporation | Method and system for measuring a coating thickness |
US20100125356A1 (en) * | 2008-11-18 | 2010-05-20 | Global Filtration Systems | System and Method for Manufacturing |
US20100215247A1 (en) * | 2008-12-22 | 2010-08-26 | Tadashi Kitamura | System And Method For A Semiconductor Lithographic Process Control Using Statistical Information In Defect Identification |
US9283518B2 (en) * | 2010-09-07 | 2016-03-15 | Dais Analytic Corporation | Fluid treatment systems and methods using selective transfer membranes |
US20130030773A1 (en) * | 2011-07-29 | 2013-01-31 | Hexagon Metrology, Inc. | Coordinate measuring system data reduction |
US9206991B2 (en) * | 2011-11-09 | 2015-12-08 | Lennox Industries Inc. | System and method for monitoring and reporting energy recovery ventilator power consumption and service and maintenance needs |
US9115909B2 (en) * | 2011-11-10 | 2015-08-25 | Lennox Industries Inc. | System and method for monitoring and reporting energy recovery ventilator status |
US20130232803A1 (en) * | 2012-03-08 | 2013-09-12 | United Technologies Corporation | System and method for measuring a workpiece relative to a common measurement coordinate system |
US20130238109A1 (en) * | 2012-03-12 | 2013-09-12 | United Technologies Corporation | Method for inspecting a manufacturing device |
US20160003607A1 (en) * | 2013-02-27 | 2016-01-07 | United Technologies Corporation | Inspecting one or more apertures of a component using moldable material |
Non-Patent Citations (1)
Title |
---|
Nigam, Swami D., and Joshua U. Turner. "Review of statistical approaches to tolerance analysis." Computer-Aided Design 27.1 (1995): 6-15. * |
Cited By (1)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US20230304476A1 (en) * | 2022-03-23 | 2023-09-28 | Raytheon Technologies Corporation | Feedback inspection systems and methods |
Also Published As
Publication number | Publication date |
---|---|
WO2013138331A1 (en) | 2013-09-19 |
US20130238109A1 (en) | 2013-09-12 |
US8942837B2 (en) | 2015-01-27 |
Similar Documents
Publication | Publication Date | Title |
---|---|---|
US8942837B2 (en) | Method for inspecting a manufacturing device | |
US12001191B2 (en) | Automated 360-degree dense point object inspection | |
US9846933B2 (en) | Systems and methods for monitoring components | |
CN114041168A (en) | Automated 360-degree dense point object inspection | |
US9097514B2 (en) | Device and method for inspecting tyre shape | |
US9230318B2 (en) | Analysis of the digital image of the external surface of a tyre and processing of false measurement points | |
US20150239043A1 (en) | Cast Features for Location and Inspection | |
US9967523B2 (en) | Locating systems and methods for components | |
KR101882511B1 (en) | Method and system for wafer registration | |
TW201333421A (en) | Tire shape inspection method and tire shape inspection device | |
JP2013186100A (en) | Shape inspection method and device | |
US9638606B2 (en) | Tire shape inspection method and tire shape inspection device | |
US7187436B2 (en) | Multi-resolution inspection system and method of operating same | |
JP5913903B2 (en) | Shape inspection method and apparatus | |
JP2009259036A (en) | Image processing device, image processing method, image processing program, recording medium, and image processing system | |
Wang et al. | Structured-light three-dimensional scanning for process monitoring and quality control in precast concrete production. | |
US9230337B2 (en) | Analysis of the digital image of the internal surface of a tyre and processing of false measurement points | |
US20170358073A1 (en) | Systems and Methods for Monitoring Components | |
Kholkhujaev et al. | Non-contact articulated robot-integrated gap and flushness measurement system for automobile assembly | |
Bračun et al. | A method for surface quality assessment of die-castings based on laser triangulation | |
Galan et al. | Shadow identification and height estimation of defects by direct processing of grayscale images | |
CN114862816A (en) | Glitch detection method, system, and computer-readable storage medium | |
Ntoulmperis et al. | 3D point cloud analysis for surface quality inspection: A steel parts use case | |
Middendorf et al. | Fast Measurement of Complex Geometries Using Inverse Fringe Projection | |
Middendorf et al. | Fast Measurement of Complex Geometries Using Inverse Fringe |
Legal Events
Date | Code | Title | Description |
---|---|---|---|
STPP | Information on status: patent application and granting procedure in general |
Free format text: FINAL REJECTION MAILED |
|
STCB | Information on status: application discontinuation |
Free format text: ABANDONED -- FAILURE TO RESPOND TO AN OFFICE ACTION |