Test of conformance or non-conformance with geometrical specifications

T. Hausotte, L. Butzhammer, Tamara Reuter, Matthias Braun, Ulrich Grömme
{"title":"Test of conformance or non-conformance with geometrical specifications","authors":"T. Hausotte, L. Butzhammer, Tamara Reuter, Matthias Braun, Ulrich Grömme","doi":"10.1515/teme-2024-0022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Systematic and random measurement errors are the cause of uncertain conformance and non-conformance statements. A wrong conformance statement occurs if the workpiece is accepted and is a reject part (type II error or false-negative) and a wrong non-conformance statement if the workpiece is rejected and is an in-spec part (type I error or false-positive). In order to avoid type I and type II errors, measurement uncertainty must be taken into account in the conformance and non-conformance testing. In practice, some procedures are used to consider measurement errors or the uncertainty that deviate from the state-of-the-art in research and technology. As these methods have become established over many years, they are still widely used despite better theoretical knowledge. The standard ISO 14253-1:2017 specifies a procedure based on probability and measurement uncertainty that is in accordance to the internationally accepted “Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement” and its supplements but is often not used due to the complexity of the evaluation of measurement uncertainty. In this contribution we give an overview and comparison of the different existing methods and provide an suggestion for supplementing the standard ISO 14253-1:2017, as Monte Carlo simulations enable a direct probability-based conformance and non-conformance testing even for complex measurement processes.","PeriodicalId":509687,"journal":{"name":"tm - Technisches Messen","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"tm - Technisches Messen","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/teme-2024-0022","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Systematic and random measurement errors are the cause of uncertain conformance and non-conformance statements. A wrong conformance statement occurs if the workpiece is accepted and is a reject part (type II error or false-negative) and a wrong non-conformance statement if the workpiece is rejected and is an in-spec part (type I error or false-positive). In order to avoid type I and type II errors, measurement uncertainty must be taken into account in the conformance and non-conformance testing. In practice, some procedures are used to consider measurement errors or the uncertainty that deviate from the state-of-the-art in research and technology. As these methods have become established over many years, they are still widely used despite better theoretical knowledge. The standard ISO 14253-1:2017 specifies a procedure based on probability and measurement uncertainty that is in accordance to the internationally accepted “Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement” and its supplements but is often not used due to the complexity of the evaluation of measurement uncertainty. In this contribution we give an overview and comparison of the different existing methods and provide an suggestion for supplementing the standard ISO 14253-1:2017, as Monte Carlo simulations enable a direct probability-based conformance and non-conformance testing even for complex measurement processes.
测试是否符合几何规格
系统和随机测量误差是造成不确定的合格和不合格声明的原因。如果工件被验收,但属于剔除部件(II 类错误或假阴性),则会出现错误的一致性声明;如果工件被剔除,但属于合规部件(I 类错误或假阳性),则会出现错误的不符合声明。为了避免 I 类和 II 类错误,必须在一致性和非一致性测试中考虑测量不确定性。在实践中,一些程序被用来考虑偏离最先进研究和技术的测量误差或不确定性。由于这些方法已确立多年,尽管有了更好的理论知识,但仍被广泛使用。ISO 14253-1:2017 标准规定了一种基于概率和测量不确定度的程序,该程序与国际公认的 "测量不确定度表达指南 "及其补充协议一致,但由于测量不确定度评估的复杂性,该程序通常不被使用。在本文中,我们对现有的不同方法进行了概述和比较,并提出了对 ISO 14253-1:2017 标准进行补充的建议,因为蒙特卡罗模拟可以直接进行基于概率的符合性和不符合性测试,即使是复杂的测量过程也不例外。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信