ABSTRACT

Coordinate measuring machines are relatively recent developments in measurement

technology. Basically, they consist of a platform on which the workpiece being measured is
placed and moved linearly or rotated. A probe attached to a head capable of lateral and vertical
movements records all measurements. Coordinate measuring machines are also called measuring
machines. They are versatile in their capability to record measurement of complex profiles with
high sensitivity (0.25 Micro-m) and speed.
In coordinate measuring machine(CMM) research, there is often a need to measure the same
feature repeatedly using multiple settings. The goal of this research is to determine of what
effects the selection of the measurement plane, adaptor style, stylus length, and stylus size would
have on the CMMs ability to repeatedly measure a single diameter. An analysis of variance
(ANOVA) study was conducted using a CMM. Three measurement planes (XZ, and YZ) were
selected for the study. Four measurements were taken on a sphere for each variable combination.
The results of this study indicate that if the measurement plane, stylus length, or stylus size were
changed, the CMM would not repeatedly result in the same measurement reading. However, the
user would be able to alter the adaptor style without affecting the resulting measurement As
future research is done on CMMs, care will be needed with the assumptions that are made when
researching a specific effect. Based on this study, future researchers will have to determine
whether observed changes are due to the probe head configuration or the changes they are
studying.

CHAPTER 1
COORDINATE MEASURING MACHINE
INTRODUCTION
Reductions in product life-cycle durations are driving companies to develop and produce
products at an ever-increasing rate. Industry experts are predicting the arrival of rapid
manufacturing through the use of flexible manufacturing systems. Even a brief examination of
industry periodicals such as Manufacturing Engineering, Technometrics, Production, Quality or
Supply Chain Systems, would reveal discussions about highly integrated systems that are
flexible, agile and lean. One result of these trends is the incorporation of coordinate measuring
machines (CMMs), which allow companies to perform data collection and process verification
within the manufacturing cell. Research on various coordinate metrology issues have paralleled
the increased usage of CMMs in industry as inadequacies are uncovered and new needs develop.
Research topics have covered such areas as the development of new probe compensation
algorithms, sampling strategies, part orientation optimization, and computer generated inspection
paths. As is often the case in research, assumptions have to be made in the interest of ensuring
study feasibility. One such assumption is that the part orientation will not affect the
measurements made by the CMM.
With the advent of numerically controlled machine tools, the demand has grown for some means
to support these equipment. There has been growing need to have an apparatus that can do faster
first piece inspection and many times, 100% dimensional inspection. The Coordinate Measuring
Machine (CMM) plays a vital role in the mechanization of the inspection process. Some of the
CMMs can even be used as layout machines before machining and for checking feature locations

after machining.
A coordinate measuring machine is a 3D device for measuring the physical geometrical
characteristics of an object. This machine may be manually controlled by an operator or it may
be computer controlled. Measurements are defined by a probe attached to the third moving axis
of this machine. Probes may be mechanical, optical, laser, or white light, amongst others. A
machine which takes readings in six degrees of freedom and displays these readings in
mathematical form is known as a CMM.
MACHINE SPECIFICATIONS
The specifications of the machine itself are important for correctly accommodating a workpiece and
meeting required measuring capabilities.

Measuring length: It is the total distance a probe can move for measuring in the x, y, or z
direction.
1. X-axis Measuring Length: The total travel, or measuring length that can be
performed in the x-direction. This is not necessarily the same as the measuring capacity,
which is the maximum size of the object in the x-direction that the machine can
accommodate.
2. Y-axis Measuring Length: The total travel, or measuring length that can be performed
in the y-direction. This is not necessarily the same as the measuring capacity, which is
the maximum size of the object in the y-direction that the machine can accommodate.
3. Z-axis Measuring Length: The total travel, or measuring length that can be performed
in the z-direction. This is not necessarily the same as the measuring capacity, which is
the maximum size of the object in the z-direction that the machine can accommodate.

Capacity is the maximum size of the object or work piece that the machine can
accommodate. A CMM must have a capacity sufficient to fit the size of objects the user
needs to measure.

Resolution is the smallest increment that the device can measure to. A higher resolution
denotes a more specific measurement.

MEASUREMENT CAPABILITIES
CMMs can be designed to perform different types of measurement. These include dimensional, profile,
angularity, depth mapping, digitizing/imaging, and shaft measurements.

Dimensional measurements are sizing measurements made in the x, y, and z directions.

Profile measurements are made to capture information about the form or profile of an
object. These measurements may be 2-D or 3-D, depending on the machine capabilities.

Angularity or orientation measurements are made to capture angle information between

points on an object.

Depth mapping is constructed by measuring the difference between two stereo images.
Stereo images are successive images of the same scene taken at slightly different angles.
The objects further away will move relatively little from one image to the next, whereas
objects closer to the viewer will move by a greater degree. A depth map is then created,
resulting in a single image using different intensities to represent the different depths.

Digitizing or imaging provides a digital format or image to visually capture the

geometry of the work piece from the measurements made by the CMM.

Shaft measurements are application-specific designations for measurements made by

CMMs designed specifically for inspecting shafts.

MOUNTING OPTIONS
Manufacturers use many of these terms interchangeably. Keeping this in mind, the options have
been delineated as follows to help locate the ideal item(s) for your needs.
1. Bench top: The machine mounts on a bench top or desk.
2. Free Standing: The machine does not need to be mounted. It can stand on its own.
3. Handheld: The device may be operated while being held in the hand.
4. Portable: The device may be moved freely; it is not meant to be bolted or hardwired in place.
EQUIPMENT DESIGN

Equipment design includes a CMM system's control mechanism, method of operation, mounting
style, and probe type.

Control
CMM probes are designed to be controlled either manually or via CNC. Selection is largely a
function of part quantity, complexity, and cost.

CNC (Computer Numerical Control) or DCC (Direct Computer Control) is a control

system built in the CMM to control probe movement. CNC- CMMs are best-suited for
production environments requiring a higher volume of measurements, and also in
applications requiring complex and small measurements with fine features. They tend to
be more expensive than manually controlled machines.

Manual or operator-controlled devices require an operator that physically moves the

probe along the axis to make contact and record measurements. Manual CMMs generally
cost less than CNC-CMMs of the same size, and are better suited for prototype shops
with smaller quantities of measurements.

FEATURES
1.Crash Protection: Machine has provisions to protect sensitive components in the event of an
unanticipated crash.
2. Offline Programming: Software supports offline programming using a CAD model.
3. Reverse Engineering: Machine software capable of performing reversed engineering. Reverse
engineering captures the geometry of existing physical objects and uses this data as a foundation for
designing something new as in a CAD file.
4. Shop Floor Suitable: Equipment is suitable for operation on the shop floor as opposed to a clean
inspection area.
5. SPC Software: Machine has integrated SPC software for statistical analysis.
6. Temperature Compensation: Machine automatically compensates for a change in the environmental
temperature.

COORDINATE SYSTEM

The Machine Coordinate System: There are two types of coordinate systems in the world of
measurement. The first is called the Machine Coordinate System. Here, the X, Y, and Z axes
(Figure) refer to the machines motions. When viewed from the front of the machine, the X axis
runs from left to right, the Y axis runs from front to back, and the Z axis runs up and down,
vertically perpendicular to the other two.

The Part Coordinate System: The second coordinate system is called the Part Coordinate
System where the 3 axes relate to the datums or features of the workpiece. Before the
introduction of computer software to coordinate measurement, parts were physically aligned
parallel to the machines axes so that the Machine and Part Coordinate Systems were parallel to
one another. This was very time consuming and not very accurate. When the part was round or
contoured, rather than square or rectangular, the measurement task was nearly impossible.

OVERVIEW OF CMM
(i) Description of Working Plane
There are 6 working plane in this machine such as, Z+,Z-,Y+,Y-,X+,X-.

Note: Z- will be in opposite direction of Z+ plane. Similarly, X- & Y+ will be in opposite

directions of X+ and Y- planes, respectively.
(ii) Orientation Concept of Probe

When probe is rotated about X-axis it is then called as angle A and when probe is rotated about
Z-axis, then it is called as angle B.
The probe can rotate in two directions viz A & B
A0B0:- Angle A=0, and Angle B=0

Angle B: Probe can rotate from +180 to -180 about Z- axis

Description of Remote Control Unit

TYPES OF CMM
The machine incorporates the basic concept of three coordinate axes so that precise movement in x, y, and
z directions is possible. Each axis is fitted with a linear measurement transducer. The transducers sense
the direction of movement and gives digital display. Accordingly, there may be four types of arrangement

Cantilever
The cantilever construction combines easy access and relatively small floor space requirements. It is
typically limited to small and medium sized machines. Parts larger than the machine table can be inserted
into the open side without inhibiting full machine travel. Figure shows a cantilever structure.

Column Type
The column type machine is commonly referred to as a universal measuring machine rather than a CMM.
These machines are usually considered gage room instruments rather than production floor machine. The
direction of movements of the arms is as shown in Figure. The constructional difference in column type
with the cantilever type is with x and y-axes movements.

Gantry
In a gantry type arrangement, arms are held by two fixed supports as shown in Figure Other two arms are
capable of sliding over the supports. Movements of the x, y and z-axes are also as shown in Figure 8.4.
The gantry type construction is particularly suited for very large components and allows the operator to
remain close to the area of inspection.

Horizontal
Figure shows the construction of a horizontal structure. The open structure of this arrangement provides
optimum accessibility for large objects such as dies, models, and car bodies. Some horizontal arm
machines are referred to as layout machines. There are some horizontal machines where the probe arm
can rotate like a spindle to perform tramming operations. Tramming refers to accurate mechanical
adjustment of instrument or machine with the help of tram.

PROBING SYSTEM
There are many probes available for CMMs. One of the more prevalent CMM probes currently
in use is the touch trigger probe (TTP). TTPs work by sensing the impact of the stylus tip with
the work piece. Studies have shown that touch trigger probes, similar to the one used for this
research, have inherent errors (Wozniak & Dobosz, 2003; Hocken, Raja, & Babu,1993; Shen &
Zhang, 1999; Shen & Springer, 1998). However, due to the proliferation of touch trigger probes
in both industry and academia, a common assumption made in CMM usage is that probe head
configuration errors are negligible. Currently, much of the research being done makes
assumptions about the CMMs ability to probe parts from multiple directions (Corrigall & Bell,
1991; Ziemian, 1996; Osawa, Busch, Franke & Schwenke, 2005; Piratelli-Filho &Di Giacomo,
2003). Because a features measurement plane will have a significant impact on the probe
configuration, an understanding of probe head configuration induced errors is necessary. For the

purposes of this study, the probe head configuration is comprised of the required probe head
rotational orientation (the selected measurement plane), whether or not a star adaptor or an
indexable head is used (the selected adaptor style), the stylus tip size and the stylus length.

Inductive and Optical Transmission Probe

Inductive and optical transmission probes have been developed for automatic tool changing.
Power is transmitted using inductive linking between modules fitted to the machine structure and
attached to the probe. Figure 8.6 shows a schematic of the inductive transmission probe. The
hard-wired transmission probe shown is primarily for tool setting and is mounted in a fixed
position on the machine structure.

The optical transmission probe shown in Figure allows probe rotation between gaging moves,
making it particularly useful for datuming the probe. The wide-angle system allows greater axial
movement of the probe and is suitable for the majority of installation.

Motorized

Probe

With the motorized probe, 48 positions in the horizontal axis, 15 in the vertical axis can be
programmed for a total of 720 distinct probe orientations. Figure shows some typical
applications for motorized probe. It shows that with a range of light weight extensions, the head
can reach into deep holes and recesses. The second diagram shows that head of the probe is
sufficiently compact to be regarded as an extension of the machine quill. This enables the
inspection of complex components that would otherwise be impossible or involve complex
setups.

Multiple Styluses Probe Heads

Wide ranges of styli have been developed to suit many different gaging applications. Some of the
different styli available are shown mounted on a multiple gaging head in Figure 8.9. The
selection of stylus is done based on the application for which the probe is to be used.

FACTORS AFFECTING MEASUREMENT

STYLUS SELECTION

When assessing how accurate a CMM measurement needs to be, it is common practice to use a
ratio of CMM uncertainty to feature tolerance of at least 1:5 (1:10 is ideal, but is unrealistic in
many cases). This ratio provides a safety margin that ensures the results have a relatively small
uncertainty compared to the expected range of variation of the component. As long as a 1:5 ratio
can be maintained on the tightest tolerance, this should be the end of the accuracy argument.
Unfortunately something as innocuous as changing the stylus on a probe can have a surprisingly
large influence on the real measuring accuracy that can be achieved and also causing appreciable
variation in the measurement results. It is not enough to rely on the CMMs annual calibration to
check its accuracy as this will only confirm the result with the stylus being used for the test
(usually a very short one). This is likely to be the best-case accuracy. To get a fuller
understanding of the likely precision of a wider range of measurements an appreciation of how
the stylus contributes to measurement uncertainty is required.

Aspects of stylus choice affecting CMM accuracy

Ball sphericity
The measuring tips of most styli feature a ball, most commonly made of synthetic ruby. Any
error in the sphericity (roundness) of these balls will be a factor in the CMMs measurement
uncertainty, and it is easy to lose as much as 10% of a CMMs accuracy in this way.
Ruby balls are manufactured to various levels of precision defined by their grade, which is
related to the maximum deviation of the ball from a perfect sphere. The two most common ball
specifications used are grade 5 and grade 10 (the lower the grade the better the ball).
Downgrading from a grade 5 to a grade 10 ball saves a little in terms of the cost of the stylus,
but may be enough to threaten the 1:5 ratio.
The concern is that the ball grade is impossible to detect visually and is not obviously evident in
measurement results, making it difficult to calculate if this is significant. One solution is to
specify grade 5 balls as standard: they cost a little more, but this is a minor cost when compared
with the potential of scrapping a good part, or worse, passing a non-conforming one. Perversely,
the more accurate the CMM, the more significant the effect of ball grade is. On the highest
specification CMMs, as much as 10% of accuracy can be lost in this way.
Lets look at an example
A typical probing error according to ISO 10360-2 (MPEP), established using a stylus with a grade
5 ball:

MPEP = 1.70 m

This figure is determined by measuring 25 discrete points that are each evaluated as 25 separate
radii. The range of radii variation is the MPEP value. Stylus ball roundness contributes to this
directly, and so swapping from a grade 5 to a grade 10 ball increases this value by 0.12 m and
degrades the probing error by 7% in this instance:

MPEP = 1.82 m

Note that stylus ball roundness also impacts on MPETHP, which uses four scanning paths across a
sphere to evaluate scanning probe performance.
Notes:

Grade 5 ball sphericity = 0.13 m

Grade 10 ball sphericity = 0.25 m

For the most demanding applications a range of styli employing grade 3 balls, which feature a
sphericity of just 0.08 m are available.
Stylus bending
When using touch-trigger probes such as the TP20, it is common practice to swap between stylus
modules to take advantage of different styli, each optimised for a measurement task. The reason
one long stylus isnt used for all features is that there is an accuracy penalty that increases with
longer stylus lengths. It is good practice to keep stylus as short and as stiff as possible but why?

Although the stylus is not directly responsible for

this particular error, it does magnify it with stylus length. The error originates from the variable
force required to trigger the probe in different directions. Most probes do not trigger the instant
contact is made between the stylus and the component; they require a force to be built up to
overcome the spring-loading within the sensor mechanism. This force elastically deforms the
stylus. This bending allows the probe to move a short distance relative to the part after physical
contact is made and prior to the trigger being generated. This movement is known as pre-travel.
The triangular kinematic arrangement of most probes results in differing forces being required to
generate a trigger. In the stiffer directions the probe will resist triggering until more stylus
bending has occurred. This also means the CMM will travel further, so the pre-travel will vary
with the approach angle (see diagram right). This pre-travel variation is further complicated
when compound approach angles are used (X, Y and Z-axes).

To minimise this effect all styli are calibrated on a reference sphere of known size before they are
used. In an ideal world this process would map the errors at every combination of stylus and
approach angle. In practice, a sample of angles is often taken to save time, some averaging takes
place, and a small proportion of the error can remain.

It is difficult to calculate the effect of this on

measurement uncertainty without carrying out empirical tests. The key fact to note is that any
residual pre-travel variation errors will be magnified by the flexibility of the stylus that is
selected. This emphasises the importance of materials choice in stylus design, weighing up the
flexural rigidity of the stem against other characteristics such as its weight and cost. Whilst steel
is suitable for many shorter styli, featuring a Youngs modulus E = 210 kN/mm2, the stiffest
material commonly used in is tungsten carbide (E = 620 kN/mm2), but this is also dense and is
therefore rarely used on long styli. In these instances, carbon fibre provides an excellent
combination of stiffness (E 450 kN/mm2) and light weight. Meanwhile, ceramic stems (E =
300 400 kN/mm2) are often used in applications where their light weight and thermal stability
are valued.
Stylus stiffness is also affected by joints in stylus assemblies. As a general rule of thumb, it is
best to avoid joints wherever possible as they can introduce hysteresis, although this may not be
possible when using a fixed sensor to measure complex parts. In these cases, a configuration
built up from a range of styli, extensions, connectors and knuckles may be needed. Once again, it
is important to consider the materials chosen for each element, as this will impact on the
stiffness, weight and robustness of the configuration.

Thermal stability

Fluctuations in temperature can cause serious measurement errors. Choosing the right material
for stylus extensions can provide greater stability under changing conditions, yielding more
consistent measurement results. Materials with a low coefficient of thermal expansion are
preferable, especially where long styli are being used as thermal growth is length-dependent.
As stated previously, carbon fibre is the material most commonly used for long styli and
extensions as it is stiff, light and does not change its length as temperature varies. Where metals
are needed for joints, knuckles etc. titanium provides the best combination of strength,
stability and density. Renishaw provides probe and stylus extensions that feature both these
materials.
Ball material
For most applications, ruby balls are the default choice for stylus tips. However, there are some
circumstances where other materials provide a better alternative.
With touch-trigger measurements, the stylus tip only comes into contact with the surface for
short periods and there is no relative movement. Scanning is different as the ball slides over the
surface of the component, resulting in frictional wear. This prolonged contact can, in extreme
circumstances, cause removal or deposition of materials on the stylus ball that affect its

sphericity. These effects are magnified if one region of the ball is in constant contact with the
part. Extensive research into these effects, highlighting two different wear mechanisms:

Abrasive wear
Abrasive wear is caused when scanning a surface such as cast iron, where tiny particles of
residue cause minute scratches on the stylus and workpiece, resulting in a small flat on the
stylus tip. Tough zirconia stylus tips are the optimum choice for these applications.

Adhesive wear
Adhesive wear results when the stylus ball and the component material have an chemical affinity
for one another. This may be seen when scanning aluminium parts with a ruby (aluminium
oxide) ball. Material passes from the relatively soft component to the stylus, resulting in a
coating of aluminium on the stylus tip, once again affecting its roundness. In this instance,
silicon nitride is the best choice, as it is shows good wear resistance and is not attracted to
aluminium.
Material adhesion is permanent and cannot be removed through normal cleaning techniques.
Thus, as the surface material from the workpiece adheres to the ball and contacts with the
surface, like materials attract and build up can occur. Such build up will eventually degrade the

form of the stylus ball and compromise any measuring results. Factors affecting adhesive wear
include:

contact force

distance scanned

hardness of surfaces (if stylus is much harder than surface being measured)

Affinity between ball and surface materials is it a similar material?

Single point contact.

Other considerations
further considerations when selecting a stylus include:

Stylus thread size to suit the chosen sensor

Stylus type straight, star, swivel, or custom configuration

Stylus tip type ball, cylinder, disc, hemisphere

Stylus tip size to minimize the impact of surface roughness on measurement accuracy.

CHAPTER 2
MEASUREMENT UNCERTAINTY FOR CMM
1. Uncertainty contributors for CMM measurements
To evaluate the measurement uncertainty of CMM measurements, a lot of uncertainty
contributors need to be taken into account. There are several ways to classify all uncertainty
contributors. One possible classification is given in fig.
Following five classes can be identified :
Hardware This category contains the errors related to the hardware components of the CMM
like probe errors, CMM geometric errors including scale errors.
Environment Environmental conditions will have an important influence on the measurement
uncertainty. Temperature is here of extreme importance. Not only temperature deviations (from
20 _C) but also temperature gradients, in time and space, will influence the measurement
uncertainty [15]. Other environmental influences like vibrations, non-constant air supply (in case
of air bearings) and lighting conditions (in case of optical probing systems [16, 17]) can also
influence the measurement uncertainty.
Workpiece The workpiece itself also has an important influence on the measurement
uncertainty. A common source of measurement uncertainty are form deviations, but also surface
imperfections like roughness and local defects (e.g. burrs and scratches) can be important.
Sometimes also deformations due to probing forces or clamping play a role.

Probing strategy The probing strategy determines the number of measurement points and their
location. Furthermore, the measuring sequence and settings like measurement velocity can be
important. The more complex the probing system that is used, the more parameters will influence
the measurement uncertainty.

FIG: . Uncertainty contributors for CMM measurements

Evaluation Strategy The evaluation strategy covers: the type of fitting criteria (least squares,

minimum zone, . . . ), the algorithm accuracy, the possible filters used, the alignment strategy, the
selected reference surfaces, the used compensations etc.
2. Task-specific measurement uncertainties
The multiplicity of uncertainty contributors and their strong interaction make that measurement
uncertainties will depend a lot on the specific measurement task. That is why uncertainties that
take all (or most of) the uncertainty contributors and their interactions into account, are often
called task-specific uncertainties.
Interaction of form deviations and sampling strategy: circular features
The best known example of form deviations interacting with sampling strategy is the
measurement of a 3-lobed circular form deviation with six equally distributed points. If the
measurement points are taken in the tops and valleys of the 3-lobed contour, the complete out-ofroundness of the circle can be identified from the measurement, however if the start point is
rotated with 30 _ none of the out-of-roundness of the circle will appear in the measurement.

Figure: Measuring a circle with 3-lobed form deviation

Contrary to popular belief, this is not only of importance for the roundness and diameter
uncertainty but also for position uncertainty. This is illustrated in Figure (b) for a four points
measurement of a 3-lobed circle (i.e. circle with a 3-lobed form deviation).

Interaction of form deviations, sampling strategy and evaluation strategy

Measurement point distribution in combination with feature form deviations can have an
important influence on the measurement uncertainty. Figure 1.10 represents a cut plate with a
large opening that is somewhat curved (exaggerated in the figure). Suppose this plate is
measured twice: once with only 6 points (Figure (a)) and once scanned (e.g. with a laser scanner)
resulting in a very large set of measurement points (Figure (b)).
When the orientation of the least squares planes is considered, there will be a large difference in
orientation for the two measuring methods (the difference in orientation is somewhat
exaggerated in Figure (b)). Since there are more points on the left side of the plane, the
orientation of the least squares plane will be determined mainly by the orientation of this part of
the plane. If the minimum
zone fitting criterion is used instead of least squares, the difference in orientation of the
associated planes will be much smaller. This illustrates how also the evaluation strategy can
influence the measurement uncertainty.

Figure : Measuring a curved plate

Interaction of temperature with sampling strategy and clamping
Although most accurate CMM measurements are done in a temperature controlled room,
temperature will still have an influence on the measurement uncertainty. Consider the workpiece
of Figure . The most narrow tolerance applies to the distance between the first and last step of the
shaft (450 mm). This should be kept in mind when measuring the part. Instead of measuring all
steps sequentially one should measure the first and last step immediately after each other. This
will reduce the influence of thermal effects (of machine and workpiece) significantly. For
measurements that take quite some time it can be important where the workpiece is clamped. The
error due to thermal expansion (or shrinkage) of the workpiece can be reduced by 50% just by
clamping the workpiece of Figure in the middle instead of at the side.

Figure : Measuring a stepped axis.

Measurements that are ill conditioned: measuring a circle segment
A well known example of ill conditioned measurements is the measurement of a circle segment
[18]. The measurement of a small circle segment will always result in very high measurement
uncertainties on both diameter and position. A small measurement error will have a large
influence on the measurement results. This is illustrated in Figure where both circles seem to fit
to the measured points quite well.

Measurements that are ill conditioned: measuring coaxiality

Figure (a) shows another example of an ill conditioned measurement. The coaxiality tolerance is
given with respect to datum A, which is a very short cylinder. This means that a small
measurement error can result in a large error on orientation of the datum axis. It is very likely
that the measured coaxiality value is dominated by the measurement error on the datum axis.
This kind of measurements will result in high measurement uncertainties.
Figure (b) shows the same part but now the datum feature and the tolerance feature are
interchanged. Since the datum feature is much larger in this case, the errors on the orientation of
the datum axis will be much smaller. As a consequence the measurement uncertainty on the
coaxiality value will also be much smaller. Some people argue that Figure 1.13(a) is rather an
example of a badly designed part than it is an example of a part that will result in high
measurement uncertainties.
It is true that the represented part also suffers from an ill conditioned design, but this does not
necessarily mean that it is a bad design. It regularly occurs that these types of tolerances are
inevitable. The designs in Figure (a) and (b) are completely different, and should thus also fulfil
another function.

Figure : Measuring a coaxiality tolerance

3.Influence of form deviations on measurement uncertainty
Feature form deviations (shortly form deviations) are deviations from the perfect form of the
feature. A circle will never be perfectly round, a line never perfectly straight and a plane never
perfectly flat, whatever manufacturing process is used. The type of form deviation is usually
related to the manufacturing process that is used, therefore it is also called the manufacturing
signature. Chapter 3 discusses typical form deviations for several types of features. That chapter
also illustrates that
form deviations are often the most important source of measurement uncertainty. People who
tried to determine task-specific measurement uncertainties for CMMs focussed until now almost
only on CMM hardware uncertainties (see Chapter 2). To obtain reliable uncertainty statements,
all uncertainty contributors should be incorporated, including feature form deviations.

CHAPTER 3
ANOVA (ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE)
In statistics, analysis of variance (ANOVA) is a collection of statistical models, and their
associated procedures, in which the observed variance in a particular variable is partitioned into
components attributable to different sources of variation. In its simplest form, ANOVA provides
a statistical test of whether or not the means of several groups are all equal, and therefore
generalizes t-test to more than two groups. Doing multiple two-sample t-tests would result in an
increased chance of committing a type I error. For this reason, ANOVAs are useful in comparing
two, three, or more means.

An ANOVA analysis technique was used to evaluate the hypotheses presented. ANOVA was
selected due to its ability to make multiple comparisons without accumulating the effects of
alpha (). In the case of this study, the ANOVA allowed for a simultaneous comparison of each
of the variables, including all interactions. Specific attention was paid to the various interactions,
because they would indicate which combinations of variables either encouraged or discouraged
use.

The tests in an ANOVA are based on the F-ratio: the variation due to an experimental treatment
or effect divided by the variation due to experimental error. The null hypothesis is this ratio
equals 1.0, or the treatment effect is the same as the experimental error. This hypothesis is
rejected if the F-ratio is significantly large enough that the possibility of it equaling 1.0 is smaller
than some pre-assigned criteria such as 0.05 (one in twenty).

CLASSES OF MODELS
There are three classes of models used in the analysis of variance, and these are outlined here.
Fixed-effects models (Model 1)
The fixed-effects model of analysis of variance applies to situations in which the experimenter
applies one or more treatments to the subjects of the experiment to see if the variable values
change. This allows the experimenter to estimate the ranges of response variable values that the
treatment would generate in the population as a whole.
Random-effects models (Model 2)
Random effects models are used when the treatments are not fixed. This occurs when the various
factor levels are sampled from a larger population. Because the levels themselves are random
variables, some assumptions and the method of contrasting the treatments (a multi-variable
generalization of simple differences) differ from the fixed-effects model.
Mixed-effects models (Model 3)
A mixed-effects model contains experimental factors of both fixed and random-effects types,
with appropriately different interpretations and analysis for the two types.
Example: Teaching experiments could be performed by a university department to find a good
introductory textbook, with each text considered a treatment. The fixed-effects model would

compare a list of candidate texts. The random-effects model would determine whether important
differences exist among a list of randomly selected texts. The mixed-effects model would
compare the (fixed) incumbent texts to randomly selected alternatives.
Defining fixed and random effects has proven elusive, with competing definitions arguably
leading toward a linguistic quagmire.

The calculations of ANOVA can be characterized as computing a number of means and

variances, dividing two variances and comparing the ratio to a handbook value to determine
statistical significance. Calculating a treatment effect is then trivial, "the effect of any treatment
is estimated by taking the difference between the mean of the observations which receive the
treatment and the general mean.

Partitioning of the sum of squares

ANOVA uses traditional standardized terminology. The definitional equation of sample variance
is
where the divisor is called the degrees of freedom (DF), the summation is called the sum of
squares (SS), the result is called the mean square (MS) and the squared terms are deviations from
the sample mean. ANOVA estimates 3 sample variances: a total variance based on all the
observation deviations from the grand mean, an error variance based on all the observation
deviations from their appropriate treatment means and a treatment variance. The treatment
variance is based on the deviations of treatment means from the grand mean, the result being
multiplied by the number of observations in each treatment to account for the difference between
the variance of observations and the variance of means. If the null hypothesis is true, all three
variance estimates are equal (within sampling error).

The fundamental technique is a partitioning of the total sum of squares SS into components
related to the effects used in the model. For example, the model for a simplified ANOVA with
one type of treatment at different levels.

The number of degrees of freedom DF can be partitioned in a similar way: one of these
components (that for error) specifies a chi-squared distribution which describes the associated
sum of squares, while the same is true for "treatments" if there is no treatment effect.

The F-test
The F-test is used for comparisons of the components of the total deviation. For example, in oneway, or single-factor ANOVA, statistical significance is tested for by comparing the F test
statistic

Where MS is mean square,

to the F-distribution with

= number of treatments and

,

= total number of cases

degrees of freedom. Using the F-distribution is a

natural candidate because the test statistic is the ratio of two scaled sums of squares each of
which follows a scaled chi-squared distribution.
The expected value of F is

(where n is the treatment sample size)

which is 1 for no treatment effect. As values of F increase above 1 the evidence is increasingly
inconsistent with the null hypothesis. Two apparent experimental methods of increasing F are
increasing the sample size and reducing the error variance by tight experimental controls.
The textbook method of concluding the hypothesis test is to compare the observed value of F
with the critical value of F determined from tables. The critical value of F is a function of the

numerator degrees of freedom, the denominator degrees of freedom and the significance level
(). If F FCritical (Numerator DF, Denominator DF, ) then reject the null hypothesis.
The computer method calculates the probability (p-value) of a value of F greater than or equal to
the observed value. The null hypothesis is rejected if this probability is less than or equal to the
significance level (). The two methods produce the same result.
The ANOVA F-test is known to be nearly optimal in the sense of minimizing false negative
errors for a fixed rate of false positive errors (maximizing power for a fixed significance level).
To test the hypothesis that all treatments have exactly the same effect, the F-test's p-values
closely approximate the permutation test's p-values: The approximation is particularly close
when the design is balanced. Such permutation tests characterize tests with maximum
power against all alternative hypotheses, as observed by Rosenbaum. The ANOVA Ftest (of the
null-hypothesis that all treatments have exactly the same effect) is recommended as a practical
test, because of its robustness against many alternative distributions.

Balanced experiments (those with an equal sample size for each treatment) are relatively easy to
interpret; unbalanced experiments offer more complexity. For single factor (one way) ANOVA,
the adjustment for unbalanced data is easy, but the unbalanced analysis lacks both robustness and
power. For more complex designs the lack of balance leads to further complications. "The
orthogonality property of main effects and interactions present in balanced data does not carry
over to the unbalanced case. This means that the usual analysis of variance techniques do not
apply. Consequently, the analysis of unbalanced factorials is much more difficult than that for
balanced designs." In the general case, "The analysis of variance can also be applied to
unbalanced data, but then the sums of squares, mean squares, and F-ratios will depend on the
order in which the sources of variation are considered." The simplest techniques for handling
unbalanced data restore balance by either throwing out data or by synthesizing missing data.
More complex techniques use regression.

EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE
The experimental procedure for calculating CMM is as follows:
1.Here the software used in LK-DMIS Version-55 & Patch-8
2.Firstly,take a probe of diameter 1.5mm and now calibrate it.
3. Standard sphere of diameter 20mm is taken and achieved value is 19.995 mm.
4.Record the diameter of the sphere.
5. With that sphere check the diameter of the probe.
6. Due to program already present in the software the circle,plane and sphere can be measured
automatically.
7. Repeat the same above procedure forn different lengths such as 50 mm, 60 mm, 70 mm.

8. Machine size specification are:

X-AXIS- 600
Y-AXIS-500
Z-AXIS-400
9.Reading achieved are as shown below

Probe Dia

Sample Length

Orientation

Reading

Error

1.5

50

50.02

0.02

1.5

60

60.0061

0.0061

1.5

70

70.0292

0.029

50

49.9877

0.0123

60

59.9771

0.0229

70

70.0032

0.0032

50

49.9961

0.0039

60

59.9961

0.0039

70

70.0021

0.0021

1.5

50

50.266

0.0266

1.5

60

60.007

0.007

1.5

70

70.002

0.002

50

49.9671

0.032

60

60.003

0.003

70

69.99

0.01

50

49.9913

0.08

60

60.004

0.004

70

69.997

0.002

10. Now calculate the error for the above readings by ANOVA method.

RESULTS
1.
Prob
e Dia

Sample
Length

Orienta
tion

1.5

50 Y

1.5

60 Y

1.5

70 Y

50 Y

3
3

60 Y
70 Y

50 Y

60 Y

70 Y

ANOVA
TABLE

Readi
ng
50.26
6
60.00
7
70.00
2
49.96
71
60.00
3
69.99
49.99
13
60.00
4
69.99
7

Error
0.026
6
0.007
0.002
0.032
0.003
0.01
0.08
0.004
0.002

SS Total
SS
Probe
SS S.L
SS Error

SS
5229.6
09
478.83
56
3450.0
36
1300.7
38

DO
F
8
2
2
4

MSS
653.701
1
239.417
8
1725.01
8
325.184
4

F
0.7362
52
5.3047
36

2.

Probe
Dia
1.5
1.5
1.5
3
3
3
6
6
6

Sample
Length
50
60
70
50
60
70
50
60
70

Orientati
on
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

Readin
g
50.02
60.0061
70.0292
49.9877
59.9771
70.0032
49.9961
59.9961
70.0021

Error
0.02
0.0061
0.029
0.0123
0.0229
0.0032
0.0039
0.0039
0.0021

ANOVA TABLE

SS Total
SS Probe
SS
S.Lenght
SS Error

SS
811.028888
9
348.242222
2
1.82888888
9
460.957777
8

DO
F
8
2
2
4

MSS
101.37
86
174.12
11
0.9144
44
115.23
94

F
1.5109
51
0.0079
35

3.

Probe
Dia
1.5

Sample
Length
50

Orientat
ion
X

1.5

60

1.5

70

50

60

70

50

60

70

1.5
1.5
1.5

50
60
70

Y
Y
Y

3
3
3

50
60
70

Y
Y
Y

6
6
6

50
60
70

Y
Y
Y

Readi
ng
50.02
60.006
1
70.029
2
49.987
7
59.977
1
70.003
2
49.996
1
59.996
1
70.002
1
50.266
60.007
70.002
49.967
1
60.003
69.99
49.991
3
60.004
69.997

Error
0.02
0.006
1
0.029
0.012
3
0.022
9
0.003
2
0.003
9
0.003
9
0.002
1
0.026
6
0.007
0.002
0.032
0.003
0.01
0.08
0.004
0.002

ANOVA
TABLE

SS Total

SS

DO
F

6262.54

17

MSS
368.38
47

SS S.Lenght
SS
Orientation

13.1433
3
1797.92
3
2357.85
3

SS Error

2093.62

SS Probe

CONCLUSION

2
2
1
12

6.5716
67
898.96
17
2357.8
53
174.46
83

0.0376
67
5.1525
78
13.514
51

REFERENCES
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coordinate-measuring_machine
http://maja.uni-mb.si/files/apem/APEM2-3_127-134.pdf
Literatures of coordinate measuring machine
http://www.mes.p.dendai.ac.jp/papersstock/2011j05.pdf