摘要
为了评价仪器的软件和整体性能,根据ISO软件测量标准(SoftGauge)5436-2,应用过程仿真、以及实测电加工表面和实测珩磨表面得到的标准数据,研究了采用不同方法获得的表面形貌即粗糙度轮廓的评定基准,分别为高斯滤波基准、最小二乘中线基准和最小二乘曲线基准。给出了不同基准下ISO 4287定义的表面粗糙度轮廓典型参数的评定结果,包括Ra、Rq、Rp、Rv、Rsk、Rku等,分析了几种基准下各参数相对于标准结果的计算偏差。计算结果表明:对于仿真数据,3种方法的计算精度都比较好,仅仅参数Rsk在两个最小二乘基准下偏差较大,达50%左右;对于电加工表面数据,高斯基准下的各个参数偏差最小,其它两种基准下偏差稍大,而相对偏差较大的是Rsk和Rp,其中Rsk分别为3.55%和-7.45%,Rp分别为-3.45%和3.95%;对于含有跳跃点的珩磨表面,3种基准下的评定结果都有较大偏差,其中求均值运算的Ra、Rq的偏差稍小,其它较大,经过剔除处理后,Ra、Rq偏差仍然相对稍小,Rsk和Rp由较大偏差明显减小为稍小偏差,而Rku、Rp偏差没有明显改进,仍约为40%。总之,3种方法对奇异点较敏感,对无奇异点的粗糙度轮廓的常用参数评定结果基本一致。在评定一般精度、表面无明显周期波纹度成分和较大奇异特征时,对于常用表面功能评定参数,如Ra、Rq,选用原理简单、实现方便的最小二乘拟合基准即可满足要求。
In order to evaluate the performance of Software and instruments, the assessment mean lines of roughness profiles are researched by means of Gaussian filtration, least square mean lines and the least square conic fitting on the basis of the software standard ISO 5436-2. And by simulating manufacturing process data, measuring EDM surface data and honing surface data, the typical roughness profile parameters Ra .Rq .Rp .Rv .Rsk .Rk. defined in ISO 4287 are assessed and their deviation values from standard results are analyzed. Experimental results indicate that for the simulated process data, the results given by three kinds of mean lines are all better than those of the original ones, except the deviation value of Rsk is relatively bigger by 50 % or so than that given by the least square method. For the EDM surface data, the deviation values given by the Gaussian filtration are smaller and those given by other two least square mean lines are a little bigger. The relatively bigger ones are Rsk with relative errors of 3.55% and --7.45% and Rp with relative errors of --3.45% and 3.95% respectively. For the honing surface data, the parameter deviation values are all bigger computed under three mean lines because of the jumping bump, and the deviation values of parameters Ra、Rq are relatively smaller, but the others are bigger. After excluding the jumping bump, the deviation values of Ra、Rq are still relatively smaller, those of Rsk and Rp are minishied from big to small, but those of Rku.Rp are still 40% or so. It can be concluded that the roughness parameters almost have no distinct difference based on the three mean lines for the profiles without jumping bump. Therefore, for the common precision profile without distinct periodical waveness components and bigger jumping bumps, the typical roughness parameters Ra、Rq can be assessed by the least square method which is simple and easy to be realized.
出处
《光学精密工程》
EI
CAS
CSCD
北大核心
2009年第5期1063-1071,共9页
Optics and Precision Engineering
基金
中国博士后科学基金资助项目(No.20060400247)
华中科技大学博士后科学基金资助项目
