learn more

Compare to CAD data

Deviation visualisation and process correction

To illustrate the deviation of the workpiece geometry from the target values, a comparison with the CAD data, e.g. with a colour-coded display of the deviations, is suitable.

Testing free-form surfaces

This method is essential for testing free-form surfaces. Modern manufacturing processes allow free shaping without restriction to regular forms. Accordingly, such contours or surfaces cannot be described by regular geometric features such as cylinders, flatnesses, straightnesses, spheres and circles in an environmental evaluation.

CAD data are the target values

The conventional calculation of measurements is also not possible. Free forms are only described by a CAD model. With the colour-coded representation, the form and position deviations of standard geometries can also be easily displayed.

For measurement, the areas of interest of the object are scanned or captured as a point cloud. Measuring software modules then compare the measured values with the CAD model. The result is documented by vectorial or colour-coded representation of the deviations from the CAD model (Fig. 53). This evaluation can be carried out as part of the measurement sequence on the machine or in offline mode at a separate evaluation station. The colours of the measurement points illustrate the deviation between the target and actual values. To include the part tolerances in the display, they are divided into four basic classes:

  • positive within tolerance
  • negative within tolerance
  • positive outside tolerance
  • negative outside tolerance.
CAD data are the target values
<p>Fig. 53: Colour-coded display of deviations from the CAD model – Alternatively, the deviations can also be displayed as "spikes".</p>

Colours show the deviations

The amount of deviation is colour coded. Depending on the task, the measurement results are either calculated or displayed in a reference coordinate system that has been measured in advance (e.g. vehicle coordinates in automotive engineering) or in a coordinate system that has been generated by optimally fitting selected surface areas relative to the CAD model (e.g. BestFit, see Machine and workpiece coordinates, p. 91 ff.).

BestFit and ...

The two fitting strategies BestFit and ToleranceFit® can be easily illustrated using the example of a 2D cross section. In the first case, the position of the measured points is optimised by minimising the distances to the target points. As different tolerances of different object areas are not taken into account, tolerance out-of-limit values may be detected, although the tolerance could be maintained by shifting the Coordinate system. This method is therefore only suitable for quality control to a limited extent.

... ToleranceFit®

The optimisation criterion of the second method (Werth ToleranceFit®) is to keep the distance between the measurement point and the tolerance limit as large as possible or, if the measurement point is outside the tolerance limit, to keep the tolerance overrun as small as possible. Figure 54 shows that the object recognised as faulty according to the BestFit method (red areas present), but not actually faulty, can be classified as functional according to the ToleranceFit® method. The contour is checked as with a gauge. The prerequisite is the conversion of the numerical values for form and dimensional tolerance usually specified by design offices into a contour-related tolerance zone system (Fig. 54), which is better adapted to the manufacturing process. The definition of tolerance structures, especially with regard to datum systems, should be agreed between the manufacturer and the customer from the outset if possible. The main advantage of this test procedure lies in the functional measurement. The output is clear and clear in graphic form, so that even operators who are not specially trained can work with it.

... ToleranceFit®
<p>Fig. 54: Comparison of the results of the Werth BestFit (a) and Werth ToleranceFit® (b) fitting methods on the same measuring object</p>

Process correction with measured data

In order to incorporate the measured or calculated deviations into the manufacturing process, the specification data can be modified with WinWerth® FormCorrect. To do this, the deviations between the original CAD model and the measured data of a sample workpiece are determined and mirrored on the model. From this, the measurement software generates a corrected CAD model that can be used to compensate for systematic production deviations in the plastic injection moulding process[8] and 3D printing. For high-resolution corrections and for the modification of internal surfaces, the use of coordinate measuring machines with X-ray tomography sensors is recommended (Fig. 55). A similar procedure is possible with the 2D BestFit software. Mould correction can be used both when running in new cutting tools (profile grinding, form milling) and during wire EDM to correct positioning deviations.

Process correction with measured data
<p>Fig. 55: Correction of an injection mold: a) initial state, b) optimised workpiece according to correction of the tool</p>