A critical issue in industrial coordinate metrology is the measurement of a work piece to assure compliance with its dimensional requirements. When using a computerized Coordinate Measurement System (CMS), the usual practice is to correlate computer calculated outputs with the dimensional requirements of the work piece. This correlation is performed by various computer routines that process dimensional coordinate data sets consisting of measurement samples of the object being evaluated. The purpose of this document is to provide guidelines for evaluating the quality of solutions generated by CMS software and to define minimal documentation requirements for software providers. This Standard is concerned with testing the behavior of algorithm implementation, not the testing of algorithms themselves. It is not the intent of this document to endorse or rate any computational method or system. Software performance evaluation is useful because it: (a) Allows objective validation of software; (b) Reduces the possibility of error in software application; and (c) Defines a method of comparing CMS software. This document covers the following areas: input data, feature construction, software documentation, performance characterization, and test methodologies.<\/p>\n
| PDF Pages<\/th>\n | PDF Title<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4<\/td>\n | CONTENTS <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 5<\/td>\n | FOREWORD <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 6<\/td>\n | ASME B89 COMMITTEE ROSTER <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 7<\/td>\n | CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE B89 COMMITTEE <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 9<\/td>\n | ASME B89.4.10-2021 SUMMARY OF CHANGES <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 12<\/td>\n | 1 SCOPE 1.1 Assumptions 1.2 Application 1.3 References 2 DEFINITIONS <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 13<\/td>\n | 3 SOFTWARE FUNCTIONS 3.1 Input Data 3.2 Data Analysis 4 PERFORMANCE CHARACTERIZATION <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 14<\/td>\n | 4.1 Evaluation of Quality Figures Figure 4.1.1-1 Example of Fit Bounding Figure 4.1.2.1-1 Line Evaluation <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 15<\/td>\n | Figure 4.1.2.2-1 Circle Evaluation Tables Table 4.1.2.2-1 Circle Fit Types <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 16<\/td>\n | Figure 4.1.2.3-1 Plane Evaluation Figure 4.1.2.4-1 Sphere Evaluation <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 17<\/td>\n | 4.2 Characteristics of Robustness 4.3 Characteristics of Reliability Figure 4.1.2.5-1 Cylinder Evaluation Figure 4.1.2.6-1 Cone Bounding <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 18<\/td>\n | 4.4 Characteristics of Ease-of-Use 4.5 Related Issues Figure 4.1.2.6-2 Cone Evaluation Table 4.1.2.7-1 Evaluation Parameters <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 19<\/td>\n | 5 TEST METHODOLOGIES 5.1 Test Principles 5.2 Apparatus <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 20<\/td>\n | Figure 5.2-1 Major Components of a Software Testing System <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 21<\/td>\n | 5.3 Test Procedure 5.4 Input Parameters 5.5 Generation of Test Data <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 23<\/td>\n | 5.6 Test Set Table 5.5.6-1 Number of Required Form Errors <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 24<\/td>\n | 5.7 Process Data With Test Software 5.8 Calculation and Interpretation of Results 5.9 Reporting of Test Results 5.10 Periodic Reverification 6 SOFTWARE DOCUMENTATION <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 25<\/td>\n | 6.1 Purpose 6.2 Compliance 6.3 Required Information <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 27<\/td>\n | MANDATORY APPENDIX I MATHEMATICAL DESCRIPTIONS OF FORM ERRORS <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 28<\/td>\n | NONMANDATORY APPENDIX A FACTORS THAT INFLUENCE THE RESULTS A-1 FACTORS OF SOFTWARE AND COMPUTATIONAL ENVIRONMENT A-2 FACTORS OF IMPLEMENTATION A-3 FACTORS OF ALGORITHM SELECTION <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 29<\/td>\n | NONMANDATORY APPENDIX B EXAMPLE DOCUMENTATION B-1 GENERAL INFORMATION B-2 PROCEDURE NAME B-3 BRIEF DESCRIPTION B-4 STANDARDS COMPLIANCE B-5 EXPLANATION OF PROCEDURE <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 30<\/td>\n | Figure B-5.3-1 Flatness Example B-6 INPUT B-7 OUTPUT <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 31<\/td>\n | B-8 EXCEPTION CONDITIONS B-9 COMPUTATIONAL UNCERTAINTY B-10 ASSOCIATED DATUM FEATURES <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 32<\/td>\n | NONMANDATORY APPENDIX C SUBSTITUTE FEATURES C-1 GENERAL INFORMATION C-2 LP-norm OPTIMIZATION <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 34<\/td>\n | C-4 MINIMUM CIRCUMSCRIBING AND MAXIMUM INSCRIBING METHODS <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 35<\/td>\n | C-5 OTHER APPROXIMATIONS <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 36<\/td>\n | NONMANDATORY APPENDIX D FUNCTIONAL GAGE SIMULATION D-1 GENERAL INFORMATION D-2 METHODS OF PART REPRESENTATION D-3 GAGING PROCESS D-4 OUTPUT AND INTERPRETATION <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 37<\/td>\n | D-5 SUBSTITUTE FEATURES D-6 POINT SETS D-7 PRECAUTIONS <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 38<\/td>\n | NONMANDATORY APPENDIX E REFERENCES E-1 GENERAL INFORMATION E-2 INFORMATION RELATED TO CMS SOFTWARE <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" ASME B89.4.10 – 2021 Methods for Performance Evaluation of Coordinate Measuring System Software<\/b><\/p>\n |