An inspection advisor for form error in cylindrical features
Abstract Due to inherent variability in even the so-called “high-precision” machines, the need for accurate, quick and economical inspection of tolerances of machined features has become very important. Coordinate measuring machines (CMMs) are very popular in industry for inspection of components. I...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Gespeichert in:
| Autor*in: |
Ramaswami, Hemant [verfasserIn] |
|---|
| Format: |
Artikel |
|---|---|
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
| Erschienen: |
2008 |
|---|
| Schlagwörter: |
|---|
| Anmerkung: |
© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2007 |
|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: The international journal of advanced manufacturing technology - Springer-Verlag, 1985, 40(2008), 1-2 vom: 09. Jan., Seite 128-143 |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:40 ; year:2008 ; number:1-2 ; day:09 ; month:01 ; pages:128-143 |
| Links: |
|---|
| DOI / URN: |
10.1007/s00170-007-1321-4 |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
OLC2026020574 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | OLC2026020574 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20230323115452.0 | ||
| 007 | tu | ||
| 008 | 200820s2008 xx ||||| 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1007/s00170-007-1321-4 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)OLC2026020574 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-He213)s00170-007-1321-4-p | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 082 | 0 | 4 | |a 670 |q VZ |
| 100 | 1 | |a Ramaswami, Hemant |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a An inspection advisor for form error in cylindrical features |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2008 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen |b n |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Band |b nc |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a © Springer-Verlag London Limited 2007 | ||
| 520 | |a Abstract Due to inherent variability in even the so-called “high-precision” machines, the need for accurate, quick and economical inspection of tolerances of machined features has become very important. Coordinate measuring machines (CMMs) are very popular in industry for inspection of components. In addition to hardware capabilities, some of the critical factors that affect the accuracy and precision of inspection using CMMs have been identified as sample size, sampling technique and form evaluation method. Selecting an optimal inspection plan for the CMM is vital to improve the quality of measurements while simultaneously minimizing inspection costs and time. The motivation behind this paper is to provide the user flexibility and control in choosing an optimal inspection plan for evaluation of form error in cylindrical features according to his/her specific needs in a practical manufacturing scenario. In view of this objective, a two-way relationship between the inspection strategy used and inspection performance metrics achieved has been established using multiple regression. The forward model is a plan evaluator that computes numerical estimates of the expected accuracy and precision for different inspection plans. The reverse model is a strategy designer that recommends the most economical inspection plan that can meet the acceptable quality criteria considering the user’s constraints and available resources. Both the models have been incorporated into a user-friendly inspection advisor with a graphical interface. | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Form error | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Inspection advisor | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Multiple regression | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Inspection plan | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Cylindricity | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Kanagaraj, Sudhon |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Anand, Sam |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t The international journal of advanced manufacturing technology |d Springer-Verlag, 1985 |g 40(2008), 1-2 vom: 09. Jan., Seite 128-143 |w (DE-627)129185299 |w (DE-600)52651-4 |w (DE-576)014456192 |x 0268-3768 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:40 |g year:2008 |g number:1-2 |g day:09 |g month:01 |g pages:128-143 |
| 856 | 4 | 1 | |u https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-007-1321-4 |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a SYSFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_OLC | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-TEC | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_20 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_21 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_26 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_70 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_150 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2006 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2018 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2241 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2333 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4046 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4277 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4307 | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 40 |j 2008 |e 1-2 |b 09 |c 01 |h 128-143 | ||
| author_variant |
h r hr s k sk s a sa |
|---|---|
| matchkey_str |
article:02683768:2008----::nnpcindiofromroicln |
| hierarchy_sort_str |
2008 |
| publishDate |
2008 |
| allfields |
10.1007/s00170-007-1321-4 doi (DE-627)OLC2026020574 (DE-He213)s00170-007-1321-4-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 670 VZ Ramaswami, Hemant verfasserin aut An inspection advisor for form error in cylindrical features 2008 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Springer-Verlag London Limited 2007 Abstract Due to inherent variability in even the so-called “high-precision” machines, the need for accurate, quick and economical inspection of tolerances of machined features has become very important. Coordinate measuring machines (CMMs) are very popular in industry for inspection of components. In addition to hardware capabilities, some of the critical factors that affect the accuracy and precision of inspection using CMMs have been identified as sample size, sampling technique and form evaluation method. Selecting an optimal inspection plan for the CMM is vital to improve the quality of measurements while simultaneously minimizing inspection costs and time. The motivation behind this paper is to provide the user flexibility and control in choosing an optimal inspection plan for evaluation of form error in cylindrical features according to his/her specific needs in a practical manufacturing scenario. In view of this objective, a two-way relationship between the inspection strategy used and inspection performance metrics achieved has been established using multiple regression. The forward model is a plan evaluator that computes numerical estimates of the expected accuracy and precision for different inspection plans. The reverse model is a strategy designer that recommends the most economical inspection plan that can meet the acceptable quality criteria considering the user’s constraints and available resources. Both the models have been incorporated into a user-friendly inspection advisor with a graphical interface. Form error Inspection advisor Multiple regression Inspection plan Cylindricity Kanagaraj, Sudhon aut Anand, Sam aut Enthalten in The international journal of advanced manufacturing technology Springer-Verlag, 1985 40(2008), 1-2 vom: 09. Jan., Seite 128-143 (DE-627)129185299 (DE-600)52651-4 (DE-576)014456192 0268-3768 nnns volume:40 year:2008 number:1-2 day:09 month:01 pages:128-143 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-007-1321-4 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-TEC GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_21 GBV_ILN_26 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2018 GBV_ILN_2241 GBV_ILN_2333 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4277 GBV_ILN_4307 AR 40 2008 1-2 09 01 128-143 |
| spelling |
10.1007/s00170-007-1321-4 doi (DE-627)OLC2026020574 (DE-He213)s00170-007-1321-4-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 670 VZ Ramaswami, Hemant verfasserin aut An inspection advisor for form error in cylindrical features 2008 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Springer-Verlag London Limited 2007 Abstract Due to inherent variability in even the so-called “high-precision” machines, the need for accurate, quick and economical inspection of tolerances of machined features has become very important. Coordinate measuring machines (CMMs) are very popular in industry for inspection of components. In addition to hardware capabilities, some of the critical factors that affect the accuracy and precision of inspection using CMMs have been identified as sample size, sampling technique and form evaluation method. Selecting an optimal inspection plan for the CMM is vital to improve the quality of measurements while simultaneously minimizing inspection costs and time. The motivation behind this paper is to provide the user flexibility and control in choosing an optimal inspection plan for evaluation of form error in cylindrical features according to his/her specific needs in a practical manufacturing scenario. In view of this objective, a two-way relationship between the inspection strategy used and inspection performance metrics achieved has been established using multiple regression. The forward model is a plan evaluator that computes numerical estimates of the expected accuracy and precision for different inspection plans. The reverse model is a strategy designer that recommends the most economical inspection plan that can meet the acceptable quality criteria considering the user’s constraints and available resources. Both the models have been incorporated into a user-friendly inspection advisor with a graphical interface. Form error Inspection advisor Multiple regression Inspection plan Cylindricity Kanagaraj, Sudhon aut Anand, Sam aut Enthalten in The international journal of advanced manufacturing technology Springer-Verlag, 1985 40(2008), 1-2 vom: 09. Jan., Seite 128-143 (DE-627)129185299 (DE-600)52651-4 (DE-576)014456192 0268-3768 nnns volume:40 year:2008 number:1-2 day:09 month:01 pages:128-143 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-007-1321-4 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-TEC GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_21 GBV_ILN_26 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2018 GBV_ILN_2241 GBV_ILN_2333 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4277 GBV_ILN_4307 AR 40 2008 1-2 09 01 128-143 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
10.1007/s00170-007-1321-4 doi (DE-627)OLC2026020574 (DE-He213)s00170-007-1321-4-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 670 VZ Ramaswami, Hemant verfasserin aut An inspection advisor for form error in cylindrical features 2008 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Springer-Verlag London Limited 2007 Abstract Due to inherent variability in even the so-called “high-precision” machines, the need for accurate, quick and economical inspection of tolerances of machined features has become very important. Coordinate measuring machines (CMMs) are very popular in industry for inspection of components. In addition to hardware capabilities, some of the critical factors that affect the accuracy and precision of inspection using CMMs have been identified as sample size, sampling technique and form evaluation method. Selecting an optimal inspection plan for the CMM is vital to improve the quality of measurements while simultaneously minimizing inspection costs and time. The motivation behind this paper is to provide the user flexibility and control in choosing an optimal inspection plan for evaluation of form error in cylindrical features according to his/her specific needs in a practical manufacturing scenario. In view of this objective, a two-way relationship between the inspection strategy used and inspection performance metrics achieved has been established using multiple regression. The forward model is a plan evaluator that computes numerical estimates of the expected accuracy and precision for different inspection plans. The reverse model is a strategy designer that recommends the most economical inspection plan that can meet the acceptable quality criteria considering the user’s constraints and available resources. Both the models have been incorporated into a user-friendly inspection advisor with a graphical interface. Form error Inspection advisor Multiple regression Inspection plan Cylindricity Kanagaraj, Sudhon aut Anand, Sam aut Enthalten in The international journal of advanced manufacturing technology Springer-Verlag, 1985 40(2008), 1-2 vom: 09. Jan., Seite 128-143 (DE-627)129185299 (DE-600)52651-4 (DE-576)014456192 0268-3768 nnns volume:40 year:2008 number:1-2 day:09 month:01 pages:128-143 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-007-1321-4 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-TEC GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_21 GBV_ILN_26 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2018 GBV_ILN_2241 GBV_ILN_2333 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4277 GBV_ILN_4307 AR 40 2008 1-2 09 01 128-143 |
| allfieldsGer |
10.1007/s00170-007-1321-4 doi (DE-627)OLC2026020574 (DE-He213)s00170-007-1321-4-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 670 VZ Ramaswami, Hemant verfasserin aut An inspection advisor for form error in cylindrical features 2008 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Springer-Verlag London Limited 2007 Abstract Due to inherent variability in even the so-called “high-precision” machines, the need for accurate, quick and economical inspection of tolerances of machined features has become very important. Coordinate measuring machines (CMMs) are very popular in industry for inspection of components. In addition to hardware capabilities, some of the critical factors that affect the accuracy and precision of inspection using CMMs have been identified as sample size, sampling technique and form evaluation method. Selecting an optimal inspection plan for the CMM is vital to improve the quality of measurements while simultaneously minimizing inspection costs and time. The motivation behind this paper is to provide the user flexibility and control in choosing an optimal inspection plan for evaluation of form error in cylindrical features according to his/her specific needs in a practical manufacturing scenario. In view of this objective, a two-way relationship between the inspection strategy used and inspection performance metrics achieved has been established using multiple regression. The forward model is a plan evaluator that computes numerical estimates of the expected accuracy and precision for different inspection plans. The reverse model is a strategy designer that recommends the most economical inspection plan that can meet the acceptable quality criteria considering the user’s constraints and available resources. Both the models have been incorporated into a user-friendly inspection advisor with a graphical interface. Form error Inspection advisor Multiple regression Inspection plan Cylindricity Kanagaraj, Sudhon aut Anand, Sam aut Enthalten in The international journal of advanced manufacturing technology Springer-Verlag, 1985 40(2008), 1-2 vom: 09. Jan., Seite 128-143 (DE-627)129185299 (DE-600)52651-4 (DE-576)014456192 0268-3768 nnns volume:40 year:2008 number:1-2 day:09 month:01 pages:128-143 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-007-1321-4 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-TEC GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_21 GBV_ILN_26 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2018 GBV_ILN_2241 GBV_ILN_2333 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4277 GBV_ILN_4307 AR 40 2008 1-2 09 01 128-143 |
| allfieldsSound |
10.1007/s00170-007-1321-4 doi (DE-627)OLC2026020574 (DE-He213)s00170-007-1321-4-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 670 VZ Ramaswami, Hemant verfasserin aut An inspection advisor for form error in cylindrical features 2008 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Springer-Verlag London Limited 2007 Abstract Due to inherent variability in even the so-called “high-precision” machines, the need for accurate, quick and economical inspection of tolerances of machined features has become very important. Coordinate measuring machines (CMMs) are very popular in industry for inspection of components. In addition to hardware capabilities, some of the critical factors that affect the accuracy and precision of inspection using CMMs have been identified as sample size, sampling technique and form evaluation method. Selecting an optimal inspection plan for the CMM is vital to improve the quality of measurements while simultaneously minimizing inspection costs and time. The motivation behind this paper is to provide the user flexibility and control in choosing an optimal inspection plan for evaluation of form error in cylindrical features according to his/her specific needs in a practical manufacturing scenario. In view of this objective, a two-way relationship between the inspection strategy used and inspection performance metrics achieved has been established using multiple regression. The forward model is a plan evaluator that computes numerical estimates of the expected accuracy and precision for different inspection plans. The reverse model is a strategy designer that recommends the most economical inspection plan that can meet the acceptable quality criteria considering the user’s constraints and available resources. Both the models have been incorporated into a user-friendly inspection advisor with a graphical interface. Form error Inspection advisor Multiple regression Inspection plan Cylindricity Kanagaraj, Sudhon aut Anand, Sam aut Enthalten in The international journal of advanced manufacturing technology Springer-Verlag, 1985 40(2008), 1-2 vom: 09. Jan., Seite 128-143 (DE-627)129185299 (DE-600)52651-4 (DE-576)014456192 0268-3768 nnns volume:40 year:2008 number:1-2 day:09 month:01 pages:128-143 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-007-1321-4 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-TEC GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_21 GBV_ILN_26 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2018 GBV_ILN_2241 GBV_ILN_2333 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4277 GBV_ILN_4307 AR 40 2008 1-2 09 01 128-143 |
| language |
English |
| source |
Enthalten in The international journal of advanced manufacturing technology 40(2008), 1-2 vom: 09. Jan., Seite 128-143 volume:40 year:2008 number:1-2 day:09 month:01 pages:128-143 |
| sourceStr |
Enthalten in The international journal of advanced manufacturing technology 40(2008), 1-2 vom: 09. Jan., Seite 128-143 volume:40 year:2008 number:1-2 day:09 month:01 pages:128-143 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| topic_facet |
Form error Inspection advisor Multiple regression Inspection plan Cylindricity |
| dewey-raw |
670 |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
| container_title |
The international journal of advanced manufacturing technology |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Ramaswami, Hemant @@aut@@ Kanagaraj, Sudhon @@aut@@ Anand, Sam @@aut@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
2008-01-09T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
129185299 |
| dewey-sort |
3670 |
| id |
OLC2026020574 |
| language_de |
englisch |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">OLC2026020574</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230323115452.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">tu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">200820s2008 xx ||||| 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s00170-007-1321-4</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)OLC2026020574</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-He213)s00170-007-1321-4-p</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">670</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ramaswami, Hemant</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">An inspection advisor for form error in cylindrical features</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2008</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen</subfield><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Band</subfield><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2007</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract Due to inherent variability in even the so-called “high-precision” machines, the need for accurate, quick and economical inspection of tolerances of machined features has become very important. Coordinate measuring machines (CMMs) are very popular in industry for inspection of components. In addition to hardware capabilities, some of the critical factors that affect the accuracy and precision of inspection using CMMs have been identified as sample size, sampling technique and form evaluation method. Selecting an optimal inspection plan for the CMM is vital to improve the quality of measurements while simultaneously minimizing inspection costs and time. The motivation behind this paper is to provide the user flexibility and control in choosing an optimal inspection plan for evaluation of form error in cylindrical features according to his/her specific needs in a practical manufacturing scenario. In view of this objective, a two-way relationship between the inspection strategy used and inspection performance metrics achieved has been established using multiple regression. The forward model is a plan evaluator that computes numerical estimates of the expected accuracy and precision for different inspection plans. The reverse model is a strategy designer that recommends the most economical inspection plan that can meet the acceptable quality criteria considering the user’s constraints and available resources. Both the models have been incorporated into a user-friendly inspection advisor with a graphical interface.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Form error</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Inspection advisor</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Multiple regression</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Inspection plan</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Cylindricity</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Kanagaraj, Sudhon</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Anand, Sam</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">The international journal of advanced manufacturing technology</subfield><subfield code="d">Springer-Verlag, 1985</subfield><subfield code="g">40(2008), 1-2 vom: 09. Jan., Seite 128-143</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)129185299</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)52651-4</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)014456192</subfield><subfield code="x">0268-3768</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:40</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2008</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1-2</subfield><subfield code="g">day:09</subfield><subfield code="g">month:01</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:128-143</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="1"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-007-1321-4</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_OLC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-TEC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_21</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_26</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_150</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2018</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2241</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2333</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4046</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4277</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">40</subfield><subfield code="j">2008</subfield><subfield code="e">1-2</subfield><subfield code="b">09</subfield><subfield code="c">01</subfield><subfield code="h">128-143</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| author |
Ramaswami, Hemant |
| spellingShingle |
Ramaswami, Hemant ddc 670 misc Form error misc Inspection advisor misc Multiple regression misc Inspection plan misc Cylindricity An inspection advisor for form error in cylindrical features |
| authorStr |
Ramaswami, Hemant |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)129185299 |
| format |
Article |
| dewey-ones |
670 - Manufacturing |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| author_role |
aut aut aut |
| collection |
OLC |
| remote_str |
false |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| issn |
0268-3768 |
| topic_title |
670 VZ An inspection advisor for form error in cylindrical features Form error Inspection advisor Multiple regression Inspection plan Cylindricity |
| topic |
ddc 670 misc Form error misc Inspection advisor misc Multiple regression misc Inspection plan misc Cylindricity |
| topic_unstemmed |
ddc 670 misc Form error misc Inspection advisor misc Multiple regression misc Inspection plan misc Cylindricity |
| topic_browse |
ddc 670 misc Form error misc Inspection advisor misc Multiple regression misc Inspection plan misc Cylindricity |
| format_facet |
Aufsätze Gedruckte Aufsätze |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
nc |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
The international journal of advanced manufacturing technology |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
129185299 |
| dewey-tens |
670 - Manufacturing |
| hierarchy_top_title |
The international journal of advanced manufacturing technology |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)129185299 (DE-600)52651-4 (DE-576)014456192 |
| title |
An inspection advisor for form error in cylindrical features |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)OLC2026020574 (DE-He213)s00170-007-1321-4-p |
| title_full |
An inspection advisor for form error in cylindrical features |
| author_sort |
Ramaswami, Hemant |
| journal |
The international journal of advanced manufacturing technology |
| journalStr |
The international journal of advanced manufacturing technology |
| lang_code |
eng |
| isOA_bool |
false |
| dewey-hundreds |
600 - Technology |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
2008 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
txt |
| container_start_page |
128 |
| author_browse |
Ramaswami, Hemant Kanagaraj, Sudhon Anand, Sam |
| container_volume |
40 |
| class |
670 VZ |
| format_se |
Aufsätze |
| author-letter |
Ramaswami, Hemant |
| doi_str_mv |
10.1007/s00170-007-1321-4 |
| dewey-full |
670 |
| title_sort |
an inspection advisor for form error in cylindrical features |
| title_auth |
An inspection advisor for form error in cylindrical features |
| abstract |
Abstract Due to inherent variability in even the so-called “high-precision” machines, the need for accurate, quick and economical inspection of tolerances of machined features has become very important. Coordinate measuring machines (CMMs) are very popular in industry for inspection of components. In addition to hardware capabilities, some of the critical factors that affect the accuracy and precision of inspection using CMMs have been identified as sample size, sampling technique and form evaluation method. Selecting an optimal inspection plan for the CMM is vital to improve the quality of measurements while simultaneously minimizing inspection costs and time. The motivation behind this paper is to provide the user flexibility and control in choosing an optimal inspection plan for evaluation of form error in cylindrical features according to his/her specific needs in a practical manufacturing scenario. In view of this objective, a two-way relationship between the inspection strategy used and inspection performance metrics achieved has been established using multiple regression. The forward model is a plan evaluator that computes numerical estimates of the expected accuracy and precision for different inspection plans. The reverse model is a strategy designer that recommends the most economical inspection plan that can meet the acceptable quality criteria considering the user’s constraints and available resources. Both the models have been incorporated into a user-friendly inspection advisor with a graphical interface. © Springer-Verlag London Limited 2007 |
| abstractGer |
Abstract Due to inherent variability in even the so-called “high-precision” machines, the need for accurate, quick and economical inspection of tolerances of machined features has become very important. Coordinate measuring machines (CMMs) are very popular in industry for inspection of components. In addition to hardware capabilities, some of the critical factors that affect the accuracy and precision of inspection using CMMs have been identified as sample size, sampling technique and form evaluation method. Selecting an optimal inspection plan for the CMM is vital to improve the quality of measurements while simultaneously minimizing inspection costs and time. The motivation behind this paper is to provide the user flexibility and control in choosing an optimal inspection plan for evaluation of form error in cylindrical features according to his/her specific needs in a practical manufacturing scenario. In view of this objective, a two-way relationship between the inspection strategy used and inspection performance metrics achieved has been established using multiple regression. The forward model is a plan evaluator that computes numerical estimates of the expected accuracy and precision for different inspection plans. The reverse model is a strategy designer that recommends the most economical inspection plan that can meet the acceptable quality criteria considering the user’s constraints and available resources. Both the models have been incorporated into a user-friendly inspection advisor with a graphical interface. © Springer-Verlag London Limited 2007 |
| abstract_unstemmed |
Abstract Due to inherent variability in even the so-called “high-precision” machines, the need for accurate, quick and economical inspection of tolerances of machined features has become very important. Coordinate measuring machines (CMMs) are very popular in industry for inspection of components. In addition to hardware capabilities, some of the critical factors that affect the accuracy and precision of inspection using CMMs have been identified as sample size, sampling technique and form evaluation method. Selecting an optimal inspection plan for the CMM is vital to improve the quality of measurements while simultaneously minimizing inspection costs and time. The motivation behind this paper is to provide the user flexibility and control in choosing an optimal inspection plan for evaluation of form error in cylindrical features according to his/her specific needs in a practical manufacturing scenario. In view of this objective, a two-way relationship between the inspection strategy used and inspection performance metrics achieved has been established using multiple regression. The forward model is a plan evaluator that computes numerical estimates of the expected accuracy and precision for different inspection plans. The reverse model is a strategy designer that recommends the most economical inspection plan that can meet the acceptable quality criteria considering the user’s constraints and available resources. Both the models have been incorporated into a user-friendly inspection advisor with a graphical interface. © Springer-Verlag London Limited 2007 |
| collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC SSG-OLC-TEC GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_21 GBV_ILN_26 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2018 GBV_ILN_2241 GBV_ILN_2333 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4277 GBV_ILN_4307 |
| container_issue |
1-2 |
| title_short |
An inspection advisor for form error in cylindrical features |
| url |
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-007-1321-4 |
| remote_bool |
false |
| author2 |
Kanagaraj, Sudhon Anand, Sam |
| author2Str |
Kanagaraj, Sudhon Anand, Sam |
| ppnlink |
129185299 |
| mediatype_str_mv |
n |
| isOA_txt |
false |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| doi_str |
10.1007/s00170-007-1321-4 |
| up_date |
2024-07-04T02:54:58.479Z |
| _version_ |
1803615415546413056 |
| fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">OLC2026020574</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230323115452.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">tu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">200820s2008 xx ||||| 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s00170-007-1321-4</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)OLC2026020574</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-He213)s00170-007-1321-4-p</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">670</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ramaswami, Hemant</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">An inspection advisor for form error in cylindrical features</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2008</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen</subfield><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Band</subfield><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2007</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract Due to inherent variability in even the so-called “high-precision” machines, the need for accurate, quick and economical inspection of tolerances of machined features has become very important. Coordinate measuring machines (CMMs) are very popular in industry for inspection of components. In addition to hardware capabilities, some of the critical factors that affect the accuracy and precision of inspection using CMMs have been identified as sample size, sampling technique and form evaluation method. Selecting an optimal inspection plan for the CMM is vital to improve the quality of measurements while simultaneously minimizing inspection costs and time. The motivation behind this paper is to provide the user flexibility and control in choosing an optimal inspection plan for evaluation of form error in cylindrical features according to his/her specific needs in a practical manufacturing scenario. In view of this objective, a two-way relationship between the inspection strategy used and inspection performance metrics achieved has been established using multiple regression. The forward model is a plan evaluator that computes numerical estimates of the expected accuracy and precision for different inspection plans. The reverse model is a strategy designer that recommends the most economical inspection plan that can meet the acceptable quality criteria considering the user’s constraints and available resources. Both the models have been incorporated into a user-friendly inspection advisor with a graphical interface.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Form error</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Inspection advisor</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Multiple regression</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Inspection plan</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Cylindricity</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Kanagaraj, Sudhon</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Anand, Sam</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">The international journal of advanced manufacturing technology</subfield><subfield code="d">Springer-Verlag, 1985</subfield><subfield code="g">40(2008), 1-2 vom: 09. Jan., Seite 128-143</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)129185299</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)52651-4</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)014456192</subfield><subfield code="x">0268-3768</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:40</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2008</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1-2</subfield><subfield code="g">day:09</subfield><subfield code="g">month:01</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:128-143</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="1"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-007-1321-4</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_OLC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-TEC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_21</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_26</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_150</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2018</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2241</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2333</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4046</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4277</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">40</subfield><subfield code="j">2008</subfield><subfield code="e">1-2</subfield><subfield code="b">09</subfield><subfield code="c">01</subfield><subfield code="h">128-143</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.401457 |