4.5 Article

High-accuracy roundness measurement of small cylindrical workpieces by a high-frequency filtering method

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.precisioneng.2023.10.010

关键词

Roundness measurement; Ruby ball stylus; Small cylinder; Stitching linear scan; High-frequency data

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper introduces a stitching linear scan method for roundness and diameter measurement of small cylinders, using a ruby ball stylus as hardware filtering to eliminate the influence of high-frequency data. Experimental results show that the repeatability of the ruby ball stylus is better than the diamond stylus.
In this paper, a ruby ball stylus is employed as hardware filtering for high-frequency data in the stitching linear scan method for the roundness and diameter measurement of small cylinders (diameter less than 3 mm). The conventional rotary scan method is improper for measuring small cylinders due to the crucial alignment. Thus, the stitching linear scan method is proposed, with which the cross-sectional circle of small cylinders is divided into several arcs to be measured and stitched. Although small cylinders can be measured by this method, the final results of roundness and diameter are affected by the low-accuracy stitching due to the high-frequency data. To address this issue, a ruby ball stylus with a tip radius of 150 mu m is used for eliminating the influence of highfrequency data which is obtained by a diamond stylus with a tip radius of 2 mu m in the stitching linear scan method. Since the measuring force of the ruby ball stylus influences the measurement of the small cylinders very much, a series of new alignments are carried out. Two groups of experiments by ruby ball stylus and diamond stylus have been conducted under the same conditions respectively. Results show that the average matching coefficient of adjacent arc profiles is enhanced by 86% and the repeatability of the ruby ball stylus is better than the diamond stylus.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据