Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Abstract
The scope of this keynote paper is to present the state of the art in the metrology of freeform shapes with
focus on the freeform capabilities of the most important measuring techniques and on related metrological
issues.
Some examples of products are presented, for which the metrology of freeform shapes is important to
guarantee the desired functional performance of the product. A classification of freeform measuring tasks and
the corresponding metrological requirements are presented. A review of the most important measuring
techniques is presented along with their capabilities for freeform measuring tasks. Specification and
verification of freeform surfaces, including data evaluation and comparison to specifications are discussed,
along with the measurement uncertainty and traceability of freeform measurements.
Keywords: Freeform, Dimensional, Metrology.
Acknowledgments
The authors acknowledge the following persons who
contributed to the paper with suggestions, comments,
references and corrections (* denotes CIRP member): E.
Brinksmeier*, T. Bothe (BIAS, Germany), S. Carmignato
(Univ. Padova, Italy), G. Goch*, C. Evans*, R. Fisker
(3Shape A/S, Denmark), R. Henselmans (T.U.
Eindhoven, The Nederlands), R. Hocken*, D. Imkamp
(Carl Zeiss, Germany), J.-P. Kruth*, L. Monostori*, E. P.
Morse (UNC-Charlotte, USA), T. Pfeifer*, F. Puente*, H.
Wang (Carl Zeiss, Germany), A. Weckenmann*, X. Jiang
(Univ. Huddersfield, UK).
1 INTRODUCTION
Industrial manufacturing makes extensive use of simple
shapes for the production of goods, with many products
having a geometry that is a combination of planes,
cylinders, spheres and other simple shapes. These parts
are fundamental for the functionality of most mechanical
products and, in general, they are easier and less
expensive to manufacture than complex parts. However,
in some applications they are not adequate, for instance
when the functionality of the part is given by an interaction
with a fluid or a wave, as is the case of aerodynamics and
optics, for example.
In optics, a shape that is neither a portion of a sphere nor
of a cylinder is called asphere; the most commonly used
aspheric surfaces are axialsymmetric, since they are
easier to manufacture. In general, complex shapes with
rotational symmetry are also easier to be measured, since
the measurement may rely on the acquisition of few
profiles.
Freeform surfaces, sometimes called sculptured or
curved surfaces, may be classified as complex
geometrical features. According to ISO 17450-1 [81],
complex geometrical features have no invariance degree.
The invariance degree of a geometrical feature is the
displacement of the ideal feature for which the feature is
kept identical; it corresponds to the degree of freedom
used in kinematics. In the following, the term freeform will
be used only for surfaces without rotational symmetry;
-810-
doi:10.1016/j.cirp.2007.10.008
-811-
-812-
Pyramid structure
Micro membrane
Light fibre
Basic plane
Profile tolerance
airplane
turbine
blades
mm
10 -3
10 -5
haptic
interfaces
car bodies 10 -7
optical parts
nm
mm
cm
dm
m
Part dimension
dam
-813-
Haptic sensor
surfaces
Optical parts
Turbine blades /
blisks
Automotive
body parts
Airplane
fuselage / wings
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Part dimensions
large (100 - 102 m)
medium (10-1 - 100 m)
small (10-3 - 10-2 m)
micro (10-3 m)
Shape complexity
low
medium
high
Material, surface
hard, not sensitive
deformable
specular
transparent
opaque
Relative tolerance
medium (10-4 -10-3)
fine (10-5 -10-4)
ultra fine (< 10-5)
Legend:
typical
less frequent
-814-
-815-
Fringe projection
Fringe projection is a technique in which the position of
points of interest is calculated via optical triangulation;
unlike industrial photogrammetry, in which the measured
surface is usually provided with physical markers, fringe
projection techniques measure surfaces without physical
markers.
Two approaches are distinguished [159]: the first one is
based onto the projection of a pattern on the surface and
at least two different camera views. In this case, the
pattern only serves to generate homologous points for
triangulation within the camera images. The second
approach evaluates the deformation of the pattern itself.
-816-
(a)
Spherical
wavefront
Projector
Aspherical
wavefront
Shape
under
Test
Interferometer
camera
CGH
Reference
sphere
Screen
Specular surface
(b)
Figure 12: Example of fringe reflection system: (a) picture
of an horizontal setup for small objects (see reflected
fringes in the freeform mirror) [7]; (b) a schematic optical
layout [94].
3.4 Interferometric techniques
Interferometric techniques are a well known solution for
fast measurement of surfaces with sub-nm resolution in
the direction of beam propagation [159] [66]. Form
testing of simple shapes like flats and spheres is typically
performed by imaging interferometry. Aspheres can also
be measured, using refractive or diffractive null-optics.
This becomes necessary because the dynamic range of
interferometers is generally insufficient to measure
aspheres with large departures from the vertex sphere.
The use of null-optics however does not only add cost but
also creates additional metrology problems and increases
measurement uncertainty. Perhaps the most problematic
aspect of aspheric surface testing using interferometers
-817-
CGH
Laser
light
Spatial filter
Test
shape
Image plane
Figure 15: Example of measurement planning for subaperture stitching interferometry (adapted from [47]).
-818-
3.5 Profilometry
In stylus profilometry, a stylus is drawn over the surface
and a transducer measures the vertical displacement with
resolutions that can be nanometric over a range of 10
millimetres or even more [31] [168]. The technique is very
common in industry for testing of rotationally symmetric
aspheric shapes for optical applications. Contact stylus
instruments with sufficient range to resolution that could
measure and analyze aspheric surfaces first appeared in
the 1980s [161].
The technique is well known and the wide acceptance of
calibration procedures for measurement traceability is one
of the main merits. Limitations are the measuring force
that can be unacceptable for delicate surfaces, the
maximum detectable slope and the difficulties related to
the exact location of profiles measured on a freeform
shape. Optical profilers can measure without physical
contact; however, the maximum detectable slope is
reduced.
An example of measuring device dedicated to the optics
industry is the Panasonic UA3P machine; it has a
measurement volume up to 400 x 400 x 90 mm, probing
force of 0.3 mN and laser interferometers for measuring
the displacement in 3 axis [166]. An example of on-going
development is the NANOMEFOS project, which aims at
developing a non-contact measuring device for freeform
optical surfaces up to 500mm diameter by 100mm height,
both convex and concave (slope max 45) with a target
measuring uncertainty of 30 nm [64] [65] [122].
Ultrasonic sensor
Measuring with ultrasound is a method which is widely
used to characterise the interior texture and detect
imperfections of manifold materials, especially of complex
or safety-relevant components. Ultrasound inspection
systems use high frequency mechanical waves with a
frequency of some MHz to several GHz. Basically two
different techniques are commonly used: the throughtransmission method, which relies on separate transmitter
and receiver probes for sending and receiving the
ultrasound pulses, and the impulse-echo method which
only requires one switchable transceiver.
Ultrasonic measurement results can be displayed as two
dimensional images which show plane cross sections of
the workpiece. Most commonly used for the visualisation
of scanned ultrasonic measurements are the so-called
B- and C-scans. The B-scan shows a vertical cut view of
the part, whereas the C-scan displays the interior texture
in a certain depth parallel to the scanning plane (see
Figure 18). When applied to a manipulator or a five axis
machine tool it is possible to save the ultrasonic
measuring data of the whole volume of even freeform
parts when the ultrasonic signals of the single parts are
put to a stack of B-Scans bitmaps without data loss [156].
Standard computer tomography (CT) software can be
used to visualise the scanned volume in three
dimensions, whereas the gray value of the voxels (volume
pixel) shows the intensity of the ultrasonic echos. By
saving all measuring data it is possible to generate and
evaluate offline any desired cross section of the part. The
-819-
Part dimensions
large
medium
small
micro
Shape complexity
low
medium
high
Material and surface
hard, not sensitive
deformable
specular
transparent
opaque
Traceability
Legend:
full match:
little match:
Table 2: Evaluation of some measuring techniques with respect to the classification proposed in Table 1.
-820-
Scanning Force
Microscopy
Confocal Microscopy
Optical Surface
topography & Profilometry
X-ray tomography
Optical CMM
Tactile CMM
Direct Comparison
Laser tracker
Tactile Surface
topography & Profilometry
Interferometry
Delamination
C-scan
Photogrammetry
B-scan
Fringe reflection /
Deflectometry
Fringe projection
Measuring uncertainty
mm
10 -3
nu
pu, v
10 -5
10 -7
vj
cij
B u B v w
vj
(1)
ij
Interferometric techniques
Systems for micro/nano scale metrology
cm
dm
m
Part dimension
ij
where
dam
ui
i 1 j 1
nu nv
i 1 j 1
Systems for
large scale
metrology
mm
B u B v w
ui
Profilometry
nm
nv
-821-
Sampling strategy
Freeform shapes have continuous curvature changes; the
optimisation of the measurement strategy is typically
based on the curvature of the part to be inspected. Areas
or directions with smaller curvature have high density of
points, while in relatively flat areas a lower point density
-822-
-823-
5.2 Filtering
Measured surface data require filtering operations for a
proper separation of form from other surface geometrical
features and for the treatment of measurement noise.
This applies also to freeform metrology, even though the
level of implementation of filtering operations is limited if
compared to other form measurements (i.e. roundness).
Today, most software tools for the analysis of freeform
measured data perform very basic filtering operations,
mainly for the elimination of outliers based on threshold or
statistical detection, and for the reduction of the number
of points in case of too large data sets.
Four classes of filters have been proposed by the recent
ISO 16610 series of standards [80]:
x
-824-
-825-
CMM probe
probing direction
actual
point
CAD surface
-826-
Deformation effects
The effect of forces due to gravity, measuring principle or
clamping operations on a deformable object may lead to a
significantly higher measuring uncertainty in freeform
metrology [183]. The deformation introduced by clamping
is more significant for freeform shapes, due to their
complexity.
Different approaches have been proposed for the
reduction of these effects. A functional approach is to use
a fixture that simulates the assembly of the part, as
shown in Figure 30. The limitations of this approach are
time and costs for the preparation of the fixture. An
alternative approach is to rely on rapid prototyping
systems for the preparation of a freeform dedicated fixture
with the same external geometry of the part being
inspected.
-827-
-828-
calibration and
verification of CMMs
Computer simulation
A modern solution for the assessment of uncertainty is
represented by the Computer Simulation approach [173],
but currently it has been implemented for simple features
only. In principle, the method may be extended to
freeform features, since the CAD model of the object and
the CNC measurement program well represent the
geometrical model of the measurement process. The
interaction of tip geometry, form errors, positioning
accuracy and misalignment should be taken into account
for extension of the method to freeform geometry.
Length-measuring
capability of CMMs
form and
dimensions of objects
relative position
of objects
Modular
Freeform Gauge
(MFG)
Experimental uncertainty
assessment procedure
(ISO TS 15530-3)
Actual freeform object
measured on the CMM
10 -3
mm
Application
specific artefacts
10 -5
10 -7
m
Fiber
artefact
Modular
Freeform
Gauge
nm
mm
cm
dm
m
Part dimension
dam
-829-
7 CONCLUSIONS
Freeform shaped parts are of increasing interest in many
applications, within the automotive, aerospace, household
appliances and other industries, where freeform geometry
has a great influence on the performances of a product.
They represent challenging measurement tasks for a
number of instruments such as coordinate measuring
machines, laser trackers, stand still optical systems,
interferometric systems and others including X-ray
tomography.
Tolerance specification and verification in connection with
freeform geometries rely on the use of a CAD model, with
a number of difficulties related to measurement strategy,
registration of multiple views, filtering, alignment and
evaluation.
Metrological issues related to performance verification
and traceability rely on the existence of calibrated
workpieces. However, in freeform metrology the main limit
of this approach is related to the availability of artefacts
with sufficient precision, stability, reasonable cost and
sufficiently small calibration uncertainty.
There is a clear need for other methods to ensure
traceability of measurements on freeform shaped parts.
One area that needs attention is software, in terms of
both calculation of evaluation parameters and data
exchange among design, manufacturing and metrology
systems, in which these operations may be a significant
error source.
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
[18]
8 REFERENCES
[1] 3Shape A/S, www.3shape.com, June 2006.
[2] Ainsworth, I., Ristic, M., Brujic, D., 2000, CAD-based
measurement path planning for free-form shapes
using contact probes, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol.,
16:23-31.
[3] Arnold, S. M., 2004, Design and Analysis of
Diffractive Aspheric Nulls, Proc. of the 2004 ASPE
Winter Top. Meeting, North Carolina, USA.
[4] Bartscher, M., Neuschaefer-Rube, U.; Waldele, F.,
2004, Computed tomography a highly potential tool
for industrial quality control and production near
measurements, VDI Berichte, 1860:477-482.
[5] Blaurock, J. E., 2004, Haptische Wahrnehmung
rechnerinterner
Freiformflchen,
Dissertation,
Technische Universitt Kaiserslautern, Germany.
[6] Blum, L.; Masser, H.; Rauh, W., 2005, Messen von
kunststoffteilen
mit
einem
multisensor-CT
(Measuring plastic parts with multisensor computer
tomography), VDI Berichte, 1914:209-216.
[7] Bothe, T., Li, W., Kopylow, C., Jptner, W., 2004,
High-resolution 3D shape measurement on specular
surfaces by fringe reflection, Proc. SPIE, 5457:411422.
[8] Bothe, T., Li, W., Kopylow, C., Jptner, W., 2005,
Fringe Reflection for high resolution topometry and
surface description on variable lateral scales, Proc.
FRINGE 05, Springer, 362-371.
[9] Bothe, T., Li, W., Riemer, O., Jptner, W., 2004,
Evaluation methods for gradient measurement
techniques, Proc. SPIE, 5457:300-311.
[10] Bothe, T., Schulte, H., Li, W., Riemer, O., Jptner,
W., 2006, Fast sub-m Optical Removal Rate
Evaluation for Polishing, Proc. 6th euspen Int. Conf.,
Baden, Austria, 1:442-445.
[11] Brecher, C., Lange, S. Merz, M., Niehaus, F.,
Wenzel, C., Winterschladen, M., Weck, M., 2006,
[19]
[20]
[21]
[22]
[23]
[24]
[25]
[26]
[27]
-830-
NURBS
Based
Ultra-Precision
Free-Form
Machining, Annals of the CIRP, 55/1:547-550.
Brennan, J. K., Crampton, A., Jiang, X., Leach, R.,
Harris, P., 2005, Reconstruction of continuous
surface profiles from discretely sampled data, Proc.
5th euspen Int. Conf., Montpellier, France, 1:257260.
Brinksmeier, E., Autschbach, L., 2004, Ball-end
milling of free-form surfaces for optical mold inserts,
Proc. 19th Ann. Meeting ASPE.
Brinksmeier, E., Grimme, D., Preuss, W., 2002,
Generation of freeform surfaces by diamond
machining, Proc. 17th Ann. Meeting ASPE.
Brinksmeier, E., Preuss, W., 1996, Diamond
machining of the 3 m reflector of the KOSMA
submillimeter telescope by a single-point fly-cutting
process, Proc. 11th Ann. Meeting ASPE, 56-61.
Brinksmeier, E., Riemer, O., Preu, W., Klocke, F.,
Pfeifer, T., Weck, M., Michaeli, W., Mayr, P., Stock,
H.-R., Mehner, A., Goch, G., Lucca, D. A., 2004,
Process Chains for the Replication of Complex
Optical Elements, Annals of the WGP, I/04.
Burge, J. H., Wyant, J. C., 2004, Use of Computer
Generated Holograms for Testing Aspheric
Surfaces, Proc. of the ASPE Winter Top. Meeting,
North Carolina, USA.
Carbone V., Carocci M., Savio E., Sansoni G., De
Chiffre L., 2001, Combination of a vision system and
a coordinate measuring machine for the reverse
engineering of free-form surfaces, Int. J. Adv.
Manuf. Technol., 17:263-271.
Carmignato S., Savio E., De Chiffre L., 2004, CT
techniques for reconstructing 3D geometrical
models of complex parts: an approach for
traceability
establishment
and
uncertainty
evaluation, Proc. of 2nd
Int. Symposium on
Measurement, Analysis and Modeling of Human
Functions & 1st Mediterranean Conf. on
Measurement, IMEKO, IEEE, SICE, Genova, Italy,
387-390.
Carmignato, S., 2005, Traceability of coordinate
measurements on complex surfaces, Ph.D. Thesis,
Universit di Padova, DIMEG, Italy.
Carmignato, S., Neuschaefer-Rube, U., Schwenke,
H., Wendt, K., 2006, Tests and artefacts for
determining the structural resolution of optical
distance sensors for coordinate measurement, Proc.
6th euspen Int. Conf., Baden, Austria, 1:62-65.
Chen, F., Brown, G. M., Song, M., 2000, Overview
of three-dimensional shape measurement using
optical methods, Optical Engineering, 39/1:10-22.
Chen, L.-C., Lin, G. C., 1997, An integrated reverse
engineering approach to reconstructing free-form
surfaces, Comp. Integr. Manuf. Systems, 10:49-60.
Chen, Y., Medioni, G., 1992, Object modelling by
registration of multiple range images, Image Vis.
Comput., 10:145-55.
Chow, W., Lawrence, G., 1983, Method for
subaperture testing interferogram reduction, Optics
Letters, 8:468-470.
Claytor, N. E., Combs, D. M., Mader, J. J., Lechuga,
O., Udayasankaran, J., 2004, An Overview of
Freeform Optics Production, Proc. of ASPE Winter
Top. Meeting, North Carolina, USA.
Cramer, C., 2005, Dimensional Management of
Composite Tooling for the Worlds Largest One
Piece, All Composite Aircraft Fuselage, CMSC
2005, Austin, Texas, USA.
-831-
[65]
[66]
[67]
[68]
[69]
[70]
[71]
[72]
[73]
[74]
[75]
[76]
[77]
[78]
[79]
[80]
[81]
[82]
[83]
[84]
-832-
-833-
-834-
-835-