Research Papers

Computer-Aided Inspection Planning: A Multisensor High-Level Inspection Planning Strategy

[+] Author and Article Information
Sif Eddine Sadaoui

Université Paris-Sud,
Université Paris-Saclay,
61 Avenue du président Wilson,
Cachan 94230, France
e-mail: sif-eddine.sadaoui@ens-paris-saclay.fr

Charyar Mehdi-Souzani

Université Paris-Sud,
Université Paris 13,
Sorbonne Paris Cité,
Université Paris-Saclay,
61 Avenue du président,
Wilson Cachan 94230, France
e-mail: charyar.souzani@ens-paris-saclay.fr

Claire Lartigue

Université Paris-Sud,
Université Paris-Saclay,
61 Avenue du président,
Wilson Cachan 94230, France
e-mail: claire.lartigue@ens-paris-saclay.fr

1Corresponding author.

Manuscript received June 20, 2018; final manuscript received November 3, 2018; published online February 4, 2019. Assoc. Editor: Kristina Wärmefjord.

J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng 19(2), 021005 (Feb 04, 2019) (13 pages) Paper No: JCISE-18-1143; doi: 10.1115/1.4041970 History: Received June 20, 2018; Revised November 03, 2018

Computer-aided inspection planning (CAIP) has gained significant research attention in the last years. So far, most CAIP systems have focused on the use of a touch probe mounted on a coordinate measuring machine (CMM). This article investigates multisensor measurement aiming to perform automatic and efficient inspection plans. High-level inspection planning, which deals with sequencing of measuring operations, is the main concern of inspection planning. This paper presents an automatic approach to generate inspection sequences by combining laser sensor and touch probe, and by giving preference to the measurement using the laser sensor if quality requirements are satisfied. The proposed approach consists of three steps. In the first step, recognition of inspection data from the computer-aided design (CAD) part model is carried out based on the concept of inspection feature (IF), and the extracted information is stored in a database. In the second step, a list of privileged scanner orientations is proposed by analyzing the accessibility of both sensors. In the third step, a sequence of operations is generated iteratively. For a given scanner orientation, the ability of the laser sensor is assessed according to an original process based on fuzzy logic model. If the laser sensor does not meet the ability requirements, touch probe ability is assessed. The proposed approach is implemented and tested on a part defined by its CAD model and specifications.

Copyright © 2019 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Sadaoui, S. E. , Mehdi-Souzani, C. , and Lartigue, C. , 2018, “ Combining a Touch Probe and a Laser Sensor for 3D Part Inspection on CMM,” Procedia CIRP, 67, pp. 398–403. [CrossRef]
Al-Ahmari, A. , Nasr, E. A. , and Abdulhameed, O. , 2016, Computer-Aided Inspection Planning: Theory and Practice, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
Martins, F. A. R. , Garcia-Bermejo, J. G. , Casanova, E. Z. , and Gonzalez, J. R. P. , 2005, “ Automated 3D Surface Scanning Based on CAD Model,” Mechatronics, 15(7), pp. 837–857. [CrossRef]
Kiraci, E. , Turley, G. A. , Attridge, A. , Olifent, A. , and Williams, M. A. , 2016, “ Evaluating the Capability of Laser Scanning to Measure an Automotive Artefact: A Comparison Study of Touch Trigger Probe and Laser-Scanning,” Int. J. Prod. Qual. Manage., 18(4), pp. 440–455.
Nasr, E. A. , and Kamrani, A. K. , 2007, Computer Based Design and Manufacturing, Springer Science & Business Media, Berlin.
Cho, M.-W. , Lee, H. , Yoon, G.-S. , and Choi, J. , 2005, “ A Feature-Based Inspection Planning System for Coordinate Measuring Machines,” Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., 26(9–10), pp. 1078–1087. [CrossRef]
Kamrani, A. , Abouel Nasr, E. , Al-Ahmari, A. , Abdulhameed, O. , and Mian, S. H. , 2015, “ Feature-Based Design Approach for Integrated CAD and Computer-Aided Inspection Planning,” Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., 76(9–12), pp. 2159–2183. [CrossRef]
Zhao, Y. F. , Xu, X. W. , Xie, S. Q. , Kramer, T. R. , Proctor, F. M. , and Michaloski, J. L. , 2008, “ An Integrated Process Planning System Architecture for Machining and On-Machine Inspection,” ASME Paper No. DETC2008-49725.
Stojadinovic, S. M. , Majstorovic, V. D. , Durakbasa, N. M. , and Sibalija, T. V. , 2016, “ Towards an Intelligent Approach for CMM Inspection Planning of Prismatic Parts,” Measurement, 92, pp. 326–339. [CrossRef]
Colosimo, B. M. , Pacella, M. , and Senin, N. , 2015, “ Multisensor Data Fusion Via Gaussian Process Models for Dimensional and Geometric Verification,” Precis. Eng., 40, pp. 199–213. [CrossRef]
Weckenmann, A. , Jiang, X. , Sommer, K.-D. , Neuschaefer-Rube, U. , Seewig, J. , Shaw, L. , and Estler, T. , 2009, “ Multisensor Data Fusion in Dimensional Metrology,” CIRP Ann. Manuf. Technol., 58(2), pp. 701–721. [CrossRef]
Zhao, H. , Kruth, J.-P. , Gestel, N. V. , Boeckmans, B. , and Bleys, P. , 2012, “ Automated Dimensional Inspection Planning Using the Combination of Laser Scanner and Tactile Probe,” Measurement, 45(5), pp. 1057–1066. [CrossRef]
Mohib, A. , Azab, A. , and ElMaraghy, H. , 2009, “ Feature-Based Hybrid Inspection Planning: A Mathematical Programming Approach,” Int. J. Comput. Integr. Manuf., 22(1), pp. 13–29. [CrossRef]
Martinez, S. , Cuesta, E. , Barreiro, J. , and Alvarez, B. , 2010, “ Methodology for Comparison of Laser Digitizing Versus Contact Systems in Dimensional Control,” Opt. Lasers Eng., 48(12), pp. 1238–1246. [CrossRef]
Boeckmans, B. , Welkenhuyzen, F. , Zhang, M. , and Kruth, J.-P. , 2015, “ Determination of Aspect Ratio Limitations, Accuracy and Repeatability of a Laser Line Scanning CMM Probe,” Int. J. Autom. Technol., 9(5), pp. 466–472. [CrossRef]
Martinez, S. , Cuesta, E. , Barreiro, J. , and Álvarez, B. , 2010, “ Analysis of Laser Scanning and Strategies for Dimensional and Geometrical Control,” Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., 46(5), pp. 621–629. [CrossRef]
Lartigue, C. , Contri, A. , and Bourdet, P. , 2002, “ Digitised Point Quality in Relation With Point Exploitation,” Measurement, 32(3), pp. 193–203. [CrossRef]
Mehdi-Souzani, C. , Thiébaut, F. , and Lartigue, C. , 2006, “ Scan Planning Strategy for a General Digitized Surface,” ASME J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng., 6(4), pp. 331–339. [CrossRef]
Audfray, N. , 2012, “ Une Approche Globale Pour la Metrologie 3D Automatique Multi-Systemes,” Ph.D. thesis, Ecole Normale Superieure Paris Saclay, Cachan, France.
Zhao, H. , 2010, “ Multisensor Integration and Discrete Geometry Processing for Coordinate Metrology,” Ph.D. thesis, École normale supérieure de Cachan-ENS, Cachan, France. https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-00451244
Mehdi-Souzani, C. , Quinsat, Y. , Lartigue, C. , and Bourdet, P. , 2016, “ A Knowledge Database of Qualified Digitizing Systems for the Selection of the Best System according to the Application,” CIRP J. Manuf. Sci. Technol., 13, pp. 15–23. [CrossRef]
Boeckmans, B. , Zhang, M. , Welkenhuyzen, F. , Dewulf, W. , and Kruth, J.-P. , 2014, “ Comparison of Aspect Ratio, Accuracy and Repeatability of a Laser Line Scanning Probe and a Tactile Probe,” 10th IMEKO Symposium: Laser Metrology for Precision Measurement and Inspection in Industry (LMPMI) 2014, VDI-Verlag, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Boeckmans, B. , and Tan, Y. , 2015, “ Roughness Offset Differences Between Contact and Non-Contact Measurements,” 15th International Conference of the European Society for Precision Engineering and Nanotechnology, Leuven, Belgium, June 1–5, pp. 189–190.
Li, F. , Longstaff, A. P. , Fletcher, S. , and Myers, A. , 2012, “ Integrated Tactile and Optical Measuring Systems in Three Dimensional Metrology,” Queen's Diamond Jubilee Computing and Engineering Annual Researchers' Conference (CEARC'12), Huddersfield, UK, pp. 1–6.
Audfray, N. , Mehdi-Souzani, C. , and Lartigue, C. , 2012, “ Assistance to Automatic Digitizing System Selection for 3D Part Inspection,” ASME Paper No. ESDA2012-82319.
Bhandarkar, M. P. , and Nagi, R. , 2000, “ Step-Based Feature Extraction From Step Geometry for Agile Manufacturing,” Comput. Ind., 41(1), pp. 3–24. [CrossRef]
Nasr, E. S. A. , and Kamrani, A. K. , 2006, “ A New Methodology for Extracting Manufacturing Features From CAD System,” Comput. Ind. Eng., 51(3), pp. 389–415. [CrossRef]
Lartigue, C. , Quinsat, Y. , Mehdi-Souzani, C. , Zuquete Guarato, A. , and Tabibian, S. , 2014, “ Voxel-Based Path Planning for 3D Scanning of Mechanical Parts,” Comput.-Aided Des. Appl., 11(2), pp. 220–227. [CrossRef]
Mahmud, M. , Joannic, D. , Roy, M. , Isheil, A. , and Fontaine, J.-F. , 2011, “ 3D Part Inspection Path Planning of a Laser Scanner With Control on the Uncertainty,” Comput.-Aided Des., 43(4), pp. 345–355. [CrossRef]
Zadeh, L. , 1975, “ The Concept of a Linguistic Variable and Its Application to Approximate Reasoning—I,” Inf. Sci., 8(3), pp. 199–249. [CrossRef]
Kovac, P. , Rodic, D. , Pucovsky, V. , Savkovic, B. , and Gostimirovic, M. , 2013, “ Application of Fuzzy Logic and Regression Analysis for Modeling Surface Roughness in Face Milliing,” J. Intell. Manuf., 24(4), pp. 755–762. [CrossRef]
Sugeno, M. , and Kang, G. , 1988, “ Structure Identification of Fuzzy Model,” Fuzzy Sets Syst., 28(1), pp. 15–33. [CrossRef]
Cho, M.-W. , Lee, H. , Yoon, G.-S. , and Choi, J.-H. , 2004, “ A Computer-Aided Inspection Planning System for On-Machine Measurement—Part II: Local Inspection Planning,” KSME Int. J., 18(8), pp. 1358–1367. [CrossRef]


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Overview of the proposed approach

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Case study, part model with specifications

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

(a) View of the CMM and (b) 3D scanner KA50 (composed of a touch probe and a laser-sensor) mounted on Renishaw PH10 head

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

(a) Example of IFs with their MFs and (b) IF and MF types

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Relational schema of the database

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

MFs and their attributes: (a) point, (b) line, (c) circle, (d) plane, (e) cone, (f) cylinder, (g) sphere, and (h) curves

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

List of scanner orientations identification on the case study: (a) inspection features, (b) voxelization of data, (c) directions of view, (d) list 1, (e) list 2, and (f) list of scanner orientation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Algorithm of feature group generation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Laser ability evaluation principle

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Fuzzy sets and membership functions of the input variables

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Laser ability in function of laser uncertainty and admissible uncertainty

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

(a) Configuration of laser beam orientation and cameras orientations, (b) laser beam interruption, and (c) collision issue modeling

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Laser ability modeling

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Results of laser ability evaluation to measure a free-form feature (specification type: form, IT = 0.15 mm), and semisphere (specification type: position, IT = 0.1 mm): (a) laser ability for each facet and (b) partitioning of partially measured feature

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Accessibility of the touch probe to measure a free-form feature

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Results of operation sequence generation: green, measured surfaces with laser sensor; blue, measured surfaces with touch probe; and red, nonmeasured surfaces: (a) laser ability evaluation at Ornt1, (b) after one iteration (Ornt1), (c) after two iterations (Ornt2), and (d) after three iterations (Ornt3)



Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In