1. 1 © 2005 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. CTMA 2005 Tools for Improving Machine Tool Volumetric Accuracy Robert (Buz) Callaghan Chief Engineer

2. © 2005 2 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. Why Improve Machine Tool Volumetric Accuracy? b Measuring machine performance  Allows process improvements before parts are made.  Allows predictive repairs of machines.

3. © 2005 3 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. Why Improve Machine Tool Volumetric Accuracy? b Measuring finished part dimensions  Can only be done after the part is completed.  Causes reject parts to be repaired or thrown way.

4. © 2005 4 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. What are the Tools? b Machine Error Budgets b Machine Parametric Measurement

5. © 2005 5 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. How did these tools evolve? b For over 90 years, the builders determined machine performance standards. b Dr. Georg Schlesinger recognized the need to do measurements on machine tools.

6. © 2005 6 Independent Quality Labs, Inc.  squareness  level How did these tools evolve? b Schlesinger’s book, Testing Machine Tools, contains parametric tests, such as limited to the characterization of machine spindles and moving components  roundness  straightness

7. © 2005 7 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. How did these tools evolve? b Engineers at Lawrence Livermore National Labs found these methods inadequate for specifying their machines.

8. © 2005 8 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. How did these tools evolve? b The ISO 230 Specifications were for the assembly of machine tool components not the capability of machines to make parts.

9. © 2005 9 Independent Quality Labs, Inc.  “parametric error budgeting”  “parametric error measurement” What were their solutions? b They developed techniques to aid in specification, design & production of the world’s most accurate machine tools.

10. © 2005 10 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. b Identify machine axis relation parameters b Identify machine thermal error parameters b Identify machine environmental error parameters b Sum error parameters Parametric Error Budgeting b Identify machine motion error parameters

11. © 2005 11 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. Motion Error Parameters

12. © 2005 12 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. Motion Error Parameters

13. © 2005 13 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. Relation Parameters

14. © 2005 14 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. Machine Error Budget

15. © 2005 15 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. Extending Budgeting Methods b Part Feature Assessment b Process Error Budget

16. © 2005 16 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. Part Feature Assessment b Part features and tolerances are well defined by ASME Y14.5M-1994 Dimensioning and Tolerancing. b The definitions of size, form, profile, location, orientation, and run-out are used to relate features with processes.

17. © 2005 17 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. Part Feature Assessment Length Width Height Size Diameter Straightness Flatness Circularity For Individual Features Form Cylindricity Of a Line For Individual or Related FeaturesProfile Of a Surface Position Concentricity Location Symmetry Angularity Perpendicularity Orientation Parallelism Circular For Related Features Runout Total

18. © 2005 18 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. Part Feature Assessment b Feature Tolerance Ratio (FTR)  determined by dividing the feature tolerance bandwidth by the distance over which it is applied

19. © 2005 19 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. Part Feature Assessment

20. © 2005 20 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. Process Error Budget b The development of a Process Model from the Full Volume Model involves four steps.

21. © 2005 21 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. Process Error Budget 2. determine which of the machine axes are moved and how far 1. use the FTR to identify the features and tolerances, which will govern capability

22. © 2005 22 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. Process Error Budget 3. determine the effect of squareness and angular errors 4. compare the sum of all errors to feature tolerance bandwidth = Part Tolerance Ratio (PTR)

23. © 2005 23 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. Process Error Budget b Part Tolerance Ratio (PTR) should be greater than 4

24. © 2005 24 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. Process Error Budget

25. © 2005 25 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. Parametric Error Measurement b Methods specified by ANSI Standards b Methods require full documentation to assure repeatability b Errors exceeding budgeted values must be corrected

26. © 2005 26 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. Parametric Error Measurement b Roll with Electronic Level

27. © 2005 27 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. Parametric Error Measurement b Accuracy with Laser

28. © 2005 28 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. Parametric Error Correction b Proper measurement and presentation of errors b Leads to rapid error correction

29. © 2005 29 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. Yaw Errors Loose Saddle

30. © 2005 30 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. Yaw Errors Before Gib Adjustment

31. © 2005 31 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. Yaw Errors After Gib Adjustment

32. © 2005 32 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. Tools Under Development b Computer Aided Process Specification (CAPS) b LOCUSw Machine Measurement and Correction Software

33. © 2005 33 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. CAPS b Objective: To integrate the existing budgeting methods with CAD/CAM to produce Machine Performance Specifications

34. © 2005 34 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. Current CAPS

35. © 2005 35 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. New CAPS

36. © 2005 36 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. CAPS How will it work? 2. Select or build Machine Error Budget. 3. Scan CAM files to establish axis paths and tool selection. 4. Create Process Error Budget. 5. Print Parameter Specification 1. Scan CAD files and establish FTRs.

37. © 2005 37 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. LOCUSw b Objectives; 1. Create data for CAPS. 2. Incorporate error correction. 3. Facilitate training

38. © 2005 38 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. LOCUSw Define Machine

39. © 2005 39 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. LOCUSw Select Sequence

40. © 2005 40 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. LOCUSw Setup Test

41. © 2005 41 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. LOCUSw Run Test

42. © 2005 42 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. LOCUSw Review Results

43. © 2005 43 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. How do these tools affect Weapon System Sustainment? b Many parts are produced on Computer Numerically Controlled (CNC) Machines.  Using digitally transferred programs to produce a single part.  One reject means 100% scrap. b Worn parts from existing Weapon Systems must be replaced by the Depots.

44. © 2005 44 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. How do these tools affect Weapon System Sustainment? b Parts for new Weapon Systems are often made at the lowest cost.  This has caused the large Defense Contractors to out-source.  Resulting in smaller companies attempting to produce increasingly complex parts.

45. © 2005 45 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. How do these tools affect Weapon System Sustainment? b Parts for new Weapon Systems are also produced on CNC Machines.  Smaller companies do not always have the resources to solve complex problems.  Resulting in scrap, delays and cost over-runs.

46. © 2005 46 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. How can these tools improve CNC Machines? b CAPS matches capability with part requirements.  For selecting new machine vendors.  For selecting out-source vendors.  For selecting existing machines for new parts.  For determining the repair schedule.  For selecting machines to be retired or rebuilt. b Each CNC machine has it’s own unique capability.

47. © 2005 47 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. How does LOCUSw Software help Weapon System Sustainment?  To reduce the time of machine performance measurement and correction.  To capture, analyze and diagnose CNC machine errors.

48. © 2005 48 Independent Quality Labs, Inc. How does LOCUSw Software help Weapon System Sustainment?  Adding knowledge based software for diagnostics.  Improving hands-on training at Weapons Depots.