Error evaluation method for complex measurement system

Abstract

The invention relates to the technical field of engine assembly testing, in particular to an error evaluation method of a complex measurement system. The invention provides an error evaluation method of a complex measurement system, which comprises the following steps of: S1, simplifying and customizing a standard sample piece of a complex object to be measured based on the critical dimension of the complex object to be measured; s2, performing calibration detection on the standard sample piece by adopting calibration equipment to obtain a calibration value of the standard sample piece; s3, detecting the standard sample piece by adopting the complex measurement system to be detected to obtain a detection value of the standard sample piece; and S4, according to the calibration value and the detection value, obtaining a precision evaluation value of the to-be-detected complex measurement system. According to the method, the measurement precision of the complex measurement system is evaluated through the standard sample piece, the accuracy of equipment precision evaluation is remarkably improved, the key assembly size of the to-be-detected complex object is detected, the detection precision of the to-be-detected complex object is remarkably improved, the assembly detection difficulty is reduced, and the assembly efficiency and quality are improved.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of engine assembly and testing technology, and more specifically, to an error assessment method for complex measurement systems. Background Technology

[0002] The development process of an aero-engine comprises two main stages: design and manufacturing. First, a conceptual design of the engine is required, considering its performance, reliability, and cost, followed by simulations and testing. Then, detailed design and manufacturing proceed based on the design drawings and process documents, including component machining, assembly, and testing. Throughout the process, numerous tests and modifications are necessary to ensure the engine's performance and quality meet requirements.

[0003] During the development of aero-engines, due to the unique structure of the engine and the narrow spaces created by some of its components, numerous non-standard and complex pieces of equipment are required to complete the manufacturing and assembly of the aero-engines. Among these pieces of equipment are many complex measurement systems. However, before these measurement systems are used, their measurement accuracy must be evaluated and tested to ensure that they can meet the requirements of manufacturing and assembly.

[0004] However, due to the complexity of the engine component under test, it is difficult to determine the true value of the measured location, and even more difficult to discern the difference between the results obtained using a customized, non-standard, complex measurement system and the actual true value. Therefore, the accuracy of the testing system is difficult to assess, and whether the test results can be applied to manufacturing assembly quality analysis remains to be confirmed. Summary of the Invention

[0005] The purpose of this invention is to provide an error evaluation method for complex measurement systems, thereby solving the problem that existing technologies struggle to evaluate the detection accuracy of complex measurement systems.

[0006] To achieve the above objectives, the present invention provides an error evaluation method for complex measurement systems, comprising the following steps:

[0007] Step S1: Based on the key dimensions of the complex object to be tested, simplify and customize a standard sample of the complex object to be tested;

[0008] Step S2: Use calibration equipment to calibrate and test the standard sample to obtain the calibration value of the standard sample;

[0009] Step S3: Use the complex measurement system to be inspected to test the standard sample and obtain the test value of the standard sample;

[0010] Step S4: Based on the calibration value and the detection value, obtain the accuracy evaluation value of the complex measurement system under test.

[0011] In one embodiment, step S1 further includes:

[0012] Based on the detection location of the key structure of the complex object to be tested, select the key dimensions of the complex object to be tested.

[0013] In one embodiment, step S1 further includes:

[0014] The standard sample has the same key dimensions as the real part of the complex object to be tested.

[0015] In one embodiment, the calibration device in step S2 is a higher-level detection device:

[0016] The preceding level detection equipment has at least one key structural accuracy of the complex object under test that is better than that of the complex measurement system under test, while the accuracy of the remaining key structures is greater than or equal to that of the complex measurement system under test.

[0017] In one embodiment, after step S4, the method further includes:

[0018] The complex measurement system under test is used to perform multiple repeatability tests on a real part of the complex object under test to obtain the repeatability error assessment value.

[0019] In one embodiment, after step S4, the method further includes:

[0020] Based on the accuracy assessment value and repeatability error assessment value of the complex measurement system under test, the final uncertainty assessment result of the complex measurement system under test is obtained.

[0021] In one embodiment, the complex object to be tested is an aircraft engine.

[0022] In one embodiment, the upstream detection device is a coordinate measuring machine.

[0023] In one embodiment, the calibration values ​​in step S2 include concentricity and / or runout calibration values;

[0024] The detection values ​​in step S3 include concentricity and / or bounce detection values;

[0025] The accuracy evaluation value in step S4 includes the accuracy evaluation value of concentricity and / or bounce.

[0026] In one embodiment, the repeatability error assessment value includes repeatability error assessment values ​​for concentricity and / or bounce.

[0027] The error assessment method for complex measurement systems proposed in this invention uses standard samples to evaluate the measurement accuracy of complex measurement systems, which significantly improves the accuracy of equipment accuracy assessment, realizes the detection of key assembly dimensions of complex objects under test, significantly improves the detection accuracy of complex objects under test, reduces the difficulty of assembly inspection, and improves assembly efficiency and quality. Attached Figure Description

[0028] The above and other features, properties and advantages of the present invention will become more apparent from the following description taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings and embodiments, in which the same reference numerals always denote the same features, wherein:

[0029] Figure 1 A step diagram of an error evaluation method for a complex measurement system according to an embodiment of the present invention is disclosed;

[0030] Figure 2 A flowchart illustrating the error assessment method for a complex measurement system according to yet another embodiment of the present invention is disclosed.

[0031] Figure 3 A schematic diagram of the combined eccentric vector to be measured position of a real engine component according to an embodiment of the present invention is disclosed.

[0032] Figure 4 A schematic diagram of a standard sample of an engine according to an embodiment of the present invention is shown;

[0033] Figure 5a A first schematic diagram illustrating repeatability testing of a real engine component according to an embodiment of the present invention is shown.

[0034] Figure 5b A second schematic diagram illustrating repeatability testing of a real engine component according to an embodiment of the present invention is shown.

[0035] Figure 5c A second schematic diagram is shown illustrating the repeatability test of a real engine component according to an embodiment of the present invention. Detailed Implementation

[0036] To make the objectives, technical solutions, and advantages of this invention clearer, the invention will be further described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings and embodiments. It should be understood that the specific embodiments described herein are for illustrative purposes only and are not intended to limit the invention.

[0037] The error assessment method for complex measurement systems proposed in this invention effectively solves the problems of detecting complex engine positions, analyzing the measurement accuracy of complex engine structures, and assessing the quality before applying complex measurement systems. Furthermore, this method organically combines standard sample evaluation with real-part evaluation, solving the problem of true value assessment of real engine parts, further promoting the improvement of engine inspection accuracy and engine assembly manufacturing quality, and increasing the engine assembly pass rate.

[0038] Figure 1 A step diagram of an error evaluation method for a complex measurement system according to an embodiment of the present invention is disclosed, as follows: Figure 1 As shown, the present invention proposes an error evaluation method for complex measurement systems, comprising the following steps:

[0039] Step S1: Based on the key dimensions of the complex object to be tested, simplify and customize a standard sample of the complex object to be tested;

[0040] Step S2: Use calibration equipment to calibrate and test the standard sample to obtain the calibration value of the standard sample;

[0041] Step S3: Use the complex measurement system to be inspected to test the standard sample and obtain the test value of the standard sample;

[0042] Step S4: Based on the calibration value and the detection value, obtain the accuracy evaluation value of the complex measurement system under test.

[0043] In some embodiments, step S1 further includes:

[0044] Based on the detection location of the key structure of the complex object to be tested, select the key dimensions of the complex object to be tested.

[0045] In some embodiments, step S1 further includes:

[0046] The standard sample has the same key dimensions as the real part of the complex object to be tested.

[0047] In some embodiments, the calibration device in step S2 is a higher-level testing device:

[0048] The preceding level detection equipment has at least one key structural accuracy of the complex object under test that is better than that of the complex measurement system under test, while the accuracy of the remaining key structures is greater than or equal to that of the complex measurement system under test.

[0049] In some embodiments, the complex object to be tested is an aircraft engine, and the next-level testing equipment is a coordinate measuring machine.

[0050] A coordinate measuring machine (CMM) is an instrument that can measure geometric shapes, lengths, and circumference divisions within a six-sided spatial area. It is also known as a coordinate measuring machine or a coordinate measuring bed.

[0051] This invention proposes an error assessment method for complex measurement systems. It detects the measurement accuracy of complex measurement systems customized for inspection positions in aero-engine manufacturing and assembly, thereby assessing the measurement error. By simulating the key dimensions of the complex mechanisms of a customized engine, the engine inspection features are simplified, and a standard sample is created. This sample is then calibrated using a metrology unit or a calibration device with a higher precision. Furthermore, the higher-precision calibration device requires accuracy verification by a third-party metrology unit to determine the accurate measurement precision.

[0052] Figure 2 A step diagram of an error evaluation method for a complex measurement system according to another embodiment of the present invention is disclosed, as follows: Figure 2 As shown, the present invention proposes an error evaluation method for complex measurement systems, in... Figure 1 In addition to the method and steps, it also includes:

[0053] Step S5: Use the complex measurement system to perform multiple repeatability tests on the actual part of the complex object to be tested, and obtain the repeatability error evaluation value;

[0054] Step S6: Based on the accuracy assessment value and repeatability error assessment value of the complex measurement system under test, obtain the final uncertainty assessment result of the complex measurement system under test.

[0055] The error assessment method for complex measurement systems proposed in this invention, in addition to testing and evaluating the measurement accuracy, also conducts repeatability testing using a real engine component as a medium before formal use. The test results are then comprehensively evaluated with the analysis results of the simulated component or each measurement step, thereby obtaining uncertainty analysis applicable to the actual object and further obtaining the accuracy of the complex measurement system.

[0056] Taking an engine disc center runout detection system as an example, this invention illustrates an error assessment method for a complex measurement system.

[0057] Figure 3 A schematic diagram showing the combined eccentric vector of a real engine component according to an embodiment of the present invention is disclosed, as follows: Figure 3 The complex measurement system shown is a disc center beat detection system.

[0058] The goal of the disc heart rate detection system is to detect, for example,... Figure 3 The core machine main unit shown is in the state of the toothed disk center, with respect to the runout and concentricity of the front and rear journals.

[0059] The core machine main unit status grating disk center is as follows Figure 3 At position P as shown, the front and rear journals are as follows Figure 3 The positions of reference A and reference B are shown.

[0060] Step S1: Based on the key dimensions of the engine, simplify and customize standard prototypes for the engine.

[0061] According to such Figure 3 The actual structural dimensions of the engine components, customized and such Figure 3 Standard samples with consistent dimensions at the key locations shown.

[0062] Figure 4 A schematic diagram of a standard sample of an engine according to an embodiment of the present invention is shown, such as... Figure 4 The standard sample shown, reference C and as Figure 3 The diameter of reference A shown is consistent;

[0063] Reference D and such Figure 3 The diameter of reference B shown is consistent;

[0064] The distance from datum A to datum B is the same as the distance from datum C to datum D;

[0065] The diameter of the position to be measured, P, is the same as the diameter of the position to be measured, Q.

[0066] The distance from the test position P to the test position A is the same as the distance from the test position Q to the test position C.

[0067] Step S2: Use the next-level testing equipment to calibrate and test the standard sample to obtain the calibration value of the standard sample.

[0068] The standard sample is calibrated and tested using equipment with a higher level of accuracy than the center of gravity detection system, such as a high-precision coordinate measuring machine. This process can be carried out by a third-party metrology institution.

[0069] The runout and concentricity of the test position Q of the standard sample relative to references C and D are obtained and denoted as T, respectively. `1 R1, where concentricity is a vector.

[0070] Step S3: Use the complex measurement system to be tested to test the standard sample and obtain the test value of the standard sample.

[0071] Using a non-standard disc runout detection system, the runout and concentricity of the test position Q of the standard sample relative to references C and D are detected, denoted as T respectively. `2 R2, where concentricity is a vector.

[0072] Step S4: Based on the calibration value and the detection value, obtain the accuracy evaluation value of the complex measurement system under test.

[0073] Based on the above test results, the accuracy evaluation value of the runout detection is obtained as follows:

[0074] ΔT=|T1-T2| (1)

[0075] In the formula, ΔT represents the system's runout accuracy assessment result;

[0076] Based on the above test results, the accuracy evaluation value of the concentricity test is obtained as follows:

[0077] ΔR=||R1-R2|| (2)

[0078] In the formula, ΔR represents the concentricity accuracy evaluation result of the system.

[0079] Step S5: Use the complex measurement system to perform multiple repeatability tests on the actual part of the complex object to be tested, and obtain the repeatability error evaluation value.

[0080] Figures 5a to 5c First, second, and third schematic diagrams of repeatability testing of a real engine component according to an embodiment of the present invention are shown respectively, as follows: Figures 5a to 5c As shown, a non-standard disc runout detection system was installed on a real part of the engine under test, and disc runout was measured under actual conditions. After the test, the disc runout detection system was disconnected from the real part of the engine, the assembly angle between the real part of the engine and the disc runout detection system was adjusted, and the disc runout detection system was reinstalled for runout testing. This process was repeated continuously to obtain n sets of measurement results, which are recorded as follows:

[0081] Ts1~Ts n (3)

[0082] In the formula, Ts i This represents the bounce result of the i-th measurement test;

[0083] Rs1~Rs n (4)

[0084] In the formula, Rs i This represents the concentricity result of the i-th measurement experiment.

[0085] The repeatability error assessment is obtained based on the repeatability test. The expression corresponding to the repeatability error assessment value is as follows:

[0086]

[0087] In the formula, ΔTs represents the evaluation of the repeatability error.

[0088]

[0089] In the formula, ΔRs represents the concentricity repeatability error assessment.

[0090] Step S6: Based on the accuracy assessment value and repeatability error assessment value of the complex measurement system under test, obtain the final uncertainty assessment result of the complex measurement system under test.

[0091] Based on the accuracy assessment and repeatability assessment results, the final measurement uncertainty assessment result is obtained, calculated as follows:

[0092]

[0093] In the formula, ΔTf represents the result of the runout uncertainty assessment.

[0094]

[0095] In the formula, ΔRf is the result of the concentricity uncertainty assessment.

[0096] The error assessment method for complex measurement systems proposed in this invention evaluates the measurement accuracy of the complex measurement system using a standard sample. It obtains the approximate true value of the standard sample through a higher-level testing device, and then calculates the uncertainty by comprehensively evaluating the measurement results of the complex measurement system on an actual engine component and the measurement results of the standard sample. This significantly improves the engine testing accuracy. Furthermore, through equipment evaluation and application evaluation, the accuracy of equipment precision assessment is further improved, thereby enhancing the effectiveness and traceability of equipment application. This enables the detection of critical assembly dimensions, reduces the difficulty of assembly inspection, and improves assembly efficiency and quality.

[0097] Although the methods described above are illustrated and depicted as a series of actions for the sake of simplicity, it should be understood and appreciated that these methods are not limited by the order of the actions, as some actions may occur in a different order and / or concurrently with other actions from the illustrations and descriptions herein or not illustrated and described herein but which may be understood by those skilled in the art, according to one or more embodiments.

[0098] As indicated in this application and claims, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise, the words "a," "an," "an," and / or "the" are not specifically singular and may include plural forms. Generally speaking, the terms "comprising" and "including" only indicate the inclusion of explicitly identified steps and elements, which do not constitute an exclusive list, and the method or apparatus may also include other steps or elements.

[0099] The above embodiments are provided for those skilled in the art to implement or use the present invention. Those skilled in the art can make various modifications or changes to the above embodiments without departing from the inventive concept of the present invention. Therefore, the protection scope of the present invention is not limited to the above embodiments, but should be the maximum scope that conforms to the innovative features mentioned in the claims.

Claims

1. An error assessment method for a complex measurement system, characterized in that, Includes the following steps: Step S1: Based on the key dimensions of the complex object to be tested, simplify and customize a standard sample of the complex object to be tested; Step S2: Use calibration equipment to calibrate and test the standard sample to obtain the calibration value of the standard sample; Step S3: Use the complex measurement system to be inspected to test the standard sample and obtain the test value of the standard sample; Step S4: Based on the calibration value and the detection value, obtain the accuracy evaluation value of the complex measurement system under test.

2. The error assessment method for complex measurement systems according to claim 1, characterized in that, Step S1 further includes: Based on the detection location of the key structure of the complex object to be tested, select the key dimensions of the complex object to be tested.

3. The error evaluation method for complex measurement systems according to claim 1, characterized in that, Step S1 further includes: The standard sample has the same key dimensions as the real part of the complex object to be tested.

4. The error assessment method for complex measurement systems according to claim 1, characterized in that, The calibration equipment in step S2 is the next-level testing equipment: The preceding level detection equipment has at least one key structural accuracy of the complex object under test that is better than that of the complex measurement system under test, while the accuracy of the remaining key structures is greater than or equal to that of the complex measurement system under test.

5. The error assessment method for complex measurement systems according to claim 1, characterized in that, Following step S4, the following further steps are included: The complex measurement system under test is used to perform multiple repeatability tests on a real part of the complex object under test to obtain the repeatability error assessment value.

6. The error evaluation method for a complex measurement system according to claim 5, characterized in that, Following step S4, the following further steps are included: Based on the accuracy assessment value and repeatability error assessment value of the complex measurement system under test, the final uncertainty assessment result of the complex measurement system under test is obtained.

7. The error assessment method for complex measurement systems according to claim 1, characterized in that, The complex object to be tested is an aircraft engine.

8. The error evaluation method for a complex measurement system according to claim 4, characterized in that, The next-level testing equipment is a coordinate measuring machine.

9. The error evaluation method for a complex measurement system according to claim 1, characterized in that, The calibration values ​​in step S2 include concentricity and / or runout calibration values; The detection values ​​in step S3 include concentricity and / or bounce detection values; The accuracy evaluation value in step S4 includes the accuracy evaluation value of concentricity and / or bounce.

10. The error evaluation method for a complex measurement system according to claim 5, characterized in that, The repeatability error assessment values ​​include repeatability error assessment values ​​for concentricity and / or bounce.

Images