PRODUCTION SYSTEM GEOMETRY ASSURANCE USING 3D-IMAGING

Background: Production systems continuously evolve to accommodate new and redesigned products. These changes are planned offline in virtual tools, to reduce disturbances on ongoing production. Offline planning requires virtual models that correctly represent reality. Most models are “as-designed” and suffer from geometrical errors stemming from deployment alterations. Having geometry assured production systems and models eliminate one source of error during the production system change process. This research applies 3D imaging technology to industrial production systems in order to verify the correctness of existing virtual production system models. Methods: This research applies 3D laser scanning technology to capture geometrical properties of two existing production systems. The captured data is then aligned and matched with production system models of the same industrial system. Then a comparison is conducted using the C2M (cloud-to-mesh) algorithm for assessing the validity of the virtual production system model. Results: The two tested production system models were found to deviate significantly from the measured data. Of all the captured measurement points, only 10% and 50% respectively were found to match the virtual models within 20mm or closer. The source of the deviations could be connected to errors in form, location, and configuration of the measured equipment. Conclusions: The found deviations imply that there is a risk of error stemming from the virtual model quality, if it were to be used as input data when planning changes to the system. For a manufacturing company there is also a need for a course of action to deal with the results stemming from the presented technologies. Two possible outcomes are given by a geometric comparison of the as–designed (CAD) models and the real system (measurements). I: the real system (measurements) sufficiently corresponds to the modelled system (CAD). II: The real system (measurements) deviates from the modelled system (CAD). If, as in case II, there exists a difference it has to be characterized and assessed to determine which if any course of action to take.