Tolerance-Dependent Inspection Disagreement Between a Fixed CMM and a Portable Articulated-Arm CMM

arXiv:2608.21404v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Fixed coordinate measuring machines (CMMs) and portable articulated-arm CMMs are often assigned to the same inspection task, but their nominal accuracy specifications do not show whether a change of instrument will preserve the disposition of a part. The question is not simply how far the two results differ, but whether that difference crosses the tolerance boundary. We examined this issue with recorded measurements of cylindrical, cubic, and spherical features under nominal 20 {eg}C and 30 {eg}C conditions. Repeated records and two roughness profiles without sufficient acquisition information were removed, leaving six dimensional and four form profiles. For each dimensional feature, the distances of the two system means from nominal define the exact tolerance interval in which the systems receive opposite direct labels. The fixed-CMM stream was approximately 11.2 {mu}m higher than the articulated-arm stream at both conditions. All four form profiles fell on opposite sides of the recorded 10 {mu}m upper limit. The dimensional disagreement intervals also overlapped strongly; their mean widths were 6.573 {mu}m at 20 {eg}C and 4.995 {mu}m at 30 {eg}C. The results clarify why an average difference between instruments is not, by itself, a measure of substitution risk. The proposed tolerance map identifies the feature-tolerance combinations for which instrument choice can change the recorded inspection label and, therefore, where a controlled equivalence study and a task-specific uncertainty budget are needed before substitution.

Source: arXiv cs.RO | 2026-08-25