Next Article in Journal
Applications of Open Source GMAW-Based Metal 3-D Printing
Next Article in Special Issue
Prediction of Feed-Rate Slowdowns in Precise Micromilling Processes
Previous Article in Journal
Prediction and Optimization of Drilling Parameters in Drilling of AISI 304 and AISI 2205 Steels with PVD Monolayer and Multilayer Coated Drills
Previous Article in Special Issue
Material Impact on Diamond Machining of Diffractive Optical Structures for UV-Application
Open AccessArticle

Random and Systematic Errors Share in Total Error of Probes for CNC Machine Tools

Institute of Metrology and Biomedical Engineering, Faculty of Mechatronics, Warsaw University of Technology, św. A. Boboli 8 St., 02-525 Warszawa, Poland
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2018, 2(1), 17; https://doi.org/10.3390/jmmp2010017
Received: 9 February 2018 / Revised: 26 February 2018 / Accepted: 6 March 2018 / Published: 8 March 2018
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Precision Manufacturing)
Probes for CNC machine tools, as every measurement device, have accuracy limited by random errors and by systematic errors. Random errors of these probes are described by a parameter called unidirectional repeatability. Manufacturers of probes for CNC machine tools usually specify only this parameter, while parameters describing systematic errors of the probes, such as pre-travel variation or triggering radius variation, are used rarely. Systematic errors of the probes, linked to the differences in pre-travel values for different measurement directions, can be corrected or compensated, but it is not a widely used procedure. In this paper, the share of systematic errors and random errors in total error of exemplary probes are determined. In the case of simple, kinematic probes, systematic errors are much greater than random errors, so compensation would significantly reduce the probing error. Moreover, it shows that in the case of kinematic probes commonly specified unidirectional repeatability is significantly better than 2D performance. However, in the case of more precise strain-gauge probe systematic errors are of the same order as random errors, which means that errors correction or compensation, in this case, would not yield any significant benefits. View Full-Text
Keywords: touch-trigger probes; CNC machine tools; accuracy; random errors; systematic errors touch-trigger probes; CNC machine tools; accuracy; random errors; systematic errors
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Wozniak, A.; Jankowski, M. Random and Systematic Errors Share in Total Error of Probes for CNC Machine Tools. J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2018, 2, 17.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop