Coordinate Measuring Quality Control With Adaptive Feature Sampling

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current quality control methods for workpieces with diverse features and feature parameters are inefficient, leading to high testing efforts and costs, as they do not adapt testing frequencies based on the accuracy requirements of individual characteristics, resulting in unnecessary increased testing frequencies for all features when deviations are detected in some.

Innovation Solution

The method groups features and feature parameters, adjusting testing frequencies and modes based on the results of previous measurements, using multiple sensors to measure characteristics and parameters, and dynamically changing test specifications to reduce testing effort by focusing on unstable features and maintaining lower frequencies for stable ones.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If testing frequency is increased for all features when deviations are detected in some features, then measurement reliability is improved, but testing effort and costs increase unnecessarily for stable features

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemeasurement reliabilityVSAvoidtesting effort
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments features into different groups (first group and second group) with different testing frequencies. When a deviation is detected in a feature from the first group, only features in that specific group undergo increased testing frequency, while features in the second group maintain lower testing frequencies. This segmentation prevents unnecessary increased testing of all features, resolving the contradiction between maintaining measurement reliability and reducing overall testing effort.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent applies local quality by assigning different testing frequencies to different feature groups based on their stability characteristics. Unstable features (first group) are tested more frequently while stable features (second group) are tested less frequently. This localized differentiation of testing intensity ensures reliable detection of deviations in unstable features while minimizing unnecessary testing of stable features, thus resolving the contradiction between reliability and testing effort.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

2Measurement precision

If testing frequency is increased to detect deviations in features, then measurement precision is improved, but productivity decreases due to increased testing effort

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedetection precisionVSAvoidproduction throughput
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent divides features into segments with different testing frequencies. Only features in the first group (unstable features) undergo increased testing frequency when deviations are detected, while features in the second group (stable features) maintain reduced testing frequencies. This segmentation enables precise detection of deviations in critical features without proportionally increasing testing effort across all features, thus maintaining productivity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent applies partial action by increasing testing frequency only for specific feature groups that require higher detection precision, rather than uniformly increasing testing for all features. This partial intensification of testing where needed maintains measurement precision for critical features while avoiding excessive testing of stable features, thereby preserving overall productivity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

3Device complexity

If uniform testing frequency is applied to all features, then device complexity is reduced, but adaptability to different feature stability requirements deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecontrol system complexityVSAvoidadaptability to feature stability
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The patent introduces dynamics by making testing frequencies adaptable rather than fixed. The system dynamically adjusts testing frequencies for different feature groups based on their stability characteristics and detected deviations. This dynamic adaptation enables the system to respond to different feature stability requirements without requiring complex individual control for each feature, as the grouping approach provides a balanced level of adaptability with manageable complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The patent applies universality by creating a multi-functional testing system that handles both unstable and stable features through a unified grouping mechanism. The same coordinate measuring device and control system can adaptively adjust testing frequencies for different feature groups, providing universal adaptability to various feature stability requirements without requiring separate specialized systems, thus maintaining reasonable complexity while achieving versatility.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Data Source

PatentEP3848767B1Method for quality control of workpieces and coordinate measuring device and computer program
Publication Date: 2023.11.01 HEXAGON TECH CENT GMBH
  • EP3848767B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP3848767B1 patent drawingFigure 2~3
  • EP3848767B1 patent drawingFigure 4

AI summary

The invention relates to a method for quality control of workpieces with different features and/or different feature parameters, in which a sampling inspection of the features and/or feature parameters is carried out, in which groups of features and/or feature parameters are defined, and in which the test procedure is defined for all features and/or feature parameters of a group depending on the result of the measurement of the previous lot.