Comparison of GUF and Monte Carlo methods to evaluate task-specific uncertainty in laser tracker measurement

Abstract

Measurement uncertainty plays an important role in laser tracking measurement analyses. In the present work, the guides to the expression of uncertainty in measurement (GUM) uncertainty framework (GUF) and its supplement, the Monte Carlo method, were used to estimate the uncertainty of task-specific laser tracker measurements. First, the sources of error in laser tracker measurement were analyzed in detail, including instruments, measuring network fusion, measurement strategies, measurement process factors (such as the operator), measurement environment, and task-specific data processing. Second, the GUM and Monte Carlo methods and their application to laser tracker measurement were presented. Finally, a case study involving the uncertainty estimation of a cylindricity measurement process using the GUF and Monte Carlo methods was illustrated. The expanded uncertainty results (at 95% confidence levels) obtained with the Monte Carlo method are 0.069 mm (least-squares criterion) and 0.062 mm (minimum zone criterion), respectively, while with the GUM uncertainty framework, none but the result of least-squares criterion can be got, which is 0.071 mm. Thus, the GUM uncertainty framework slightly underestimates the overall uncertainty by 10%. The results demonstrate that the two methods have different characteristics in task-specific uncertainty evaluations of laser tracker measurements. The results indicate that the Monte Carlo method is a practical tool for applying the principle of propagation of distributions and does not depend on the assumptions and limitations required by the law of propagation of uncertainties (GUF). These features of the Monte Carlo method reduce the risk of an unreliable measurement of uncertainty estimation, particularly in cases of complicated measurement models, without the need to evaluate partial derivatives. In addition, the impact of sampling strategy and evaluation method on the uncertainty of the measurement results can also be taken into account with Monte Carlo method, which plays a guiding role in measurement planning.

Keywords

task-specific uncertainty / laser tracker / measurement uncertainty evaluation / Monte Carlo method / uncertainy framework (GUF)

References

[1] JCGM 100.Evaluation of measurement data-Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement, 2008

[2] ISO/TS 15530-2. Geometrical product specification (GPS)-Coordinate measuring machines (CMM): Technique for determining the uncertainty of measurement-Part 2: Use of multiple measurement strategies [S].

[3] ISO/TS 15530-4. Geometrical product specification (GPS)-Coordinate measuring machines (CMM): Technique for determining the uncertainty of measurement-Part 3: Use of calibrated workpieces or standards [S].

[4] ISO/TS 15530-4. Geometrical product specification (GPS)-Coordinate measuring machines (CMM): Technique for determining the uncertainty of measurement-Part 4: Evaluating task-specific measurement uncertainty using simulation [S].

[5] ISO/TS 15530-4. Geometrical product specification (GPS)-Coordinate measuring machines (CMM): Technique for determining the uncertainty of measurement-Part 5: Use of expert judgment, sensitivity analysis and error budgeting [S].

[6] Solaguren-beascoaF M, AlegreC J M, BravoD P M. Implementation in MATLAB of the adaptive Monte Carlo method for the evaluation of measurement uncertainties [J]. Accred Qual Assur, 2009, 14: 95-106

[7] ZhangF-m, QuX-h, DaiJ-f, YeS-hua. A method of precision evaluation for field large-scale measurement [J]. ACTA Optica Sinica, 2008, 28(11): 2159-2163

[8] ZhangF-m, QuX-h, YeS-hua. Uncertainty analysis in large-scale measurement based on Monte Carlo simulation method [J]. Computer Integrated Manufacturing Systems, 2009, 15(1): 184-187

[9] NiX-huaShape Error Evaluation and measurement uncertainty estimation [M], 2008, Beijing, Chemical Industry Press: 32-76

[10] LiuW-l, WangZ-kui. Coordinate uncertainty analyses of coupled multiple measurement systems [J]. Meas Sci Technol, 2010, 21: 1-6

[11] JCGM 101.Evaluation of measurement data-supplement 1 to the “Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement”-propagation of distributions using a Monte Carlo method, 2006

[12] JosephM CQuantifying coordinate uncertainty fields in coupled spatial measurement systems [D], 2002, Virginia, Virginia Polytechnic Institute

[13] ArunK S, HuangT S, BlosteinS D. Least-squares fitting of two 3-D point sets [J]. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 1987, 9(5): 698-700

[14] FeiY-t, LiG-h, LuR-s, HuangQ-xianTheory and application of mechanical thermal deformation [M], 2009, Beijing, National Defense Industry Press: 25-68

[15] CuiC-c, FuS-w, HuangF-gui. Research on the uncertainties from different form error evaluation methods by CMM sampling [J]. Int J Adv Manuf Technol, 2009, 43: 136-145

[16] ISO/TS 12180-2. Geometrical product specification (GPS)-Cylindricity-Part 2: Specification operators [S].

[17] ISO/TS 12180-1. Geometrical product specification (GPS)-Cylindricity-Part 1: Vocabulary and parameters of cylindrical form [S].

[18] MaoJ, CaoY-l, YangJ-xin. Implementation uncertainty evaluation of cylindricity errors based on geometrical product specification (GPS) [J]. Measurement, 2009, 42: 742-747

[19] MatsumotoM, NishimuraT. Mersenne twister: A 623-dimensionally equidistributed uniform pseudo-random number generator [J]. ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation, 1998, 8(1): 3-30

[20] BoxG E P, MullerM E. A note on the generation of random normal deviates [J]. Annals Math Stat, 1958, 29: 610-611