1. AIAG MIPT and NIST: addressing the challenge of dimensional metrology system interoperability John Horst National Institute of Standards and Technology (USA) August 7, 2002 San Diego, CA

2. Over 1500 member companies internationally Connection to variety of international standards efforts (e.g., SASIG) Provides administrative support and executive direction to Metrology Interoperability Project Team (MIPT) Metrology Interoperability Project Team (MIPT) mission Through a collaboration of metrology system vendors, users, and standards organizations, provide “umbrella” support to metrology systems data interchange standards efforts…initiate/encourage standards development where there are gaps…resolve competing standards where there are overlaps The Automotive Industries Action Group (AIAG)

3. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) NIST mission: Support U.S. industry through standards research and standards facilitation. Seek to create and enable high risk and high payoff commercial technologies NIST support for AIAG MIPT: Project management support, technical consultation, test suite development, specifications development, standards gap and overlap analysis

4. A bit o’ history: dimensional metrology data interface standards landscape circa 1999 Dimensional Measuring Interface Standard (DMIS) Product and process data standards (IGES and STEP) Formation of the MAA, I++, and IA.CMM

5. A bit o’ background: the formation of the MIPT Open Architecture in Metrology Automation (OAMA) Workshop at NIST, May 2000, –~50 attendees (users, vendors, third party OEMs, systems integrators, government) –Workshop goal: to identify problems related to automated dimensional metrology system interoperability, and to identify specific actions towards solving these problems.

6. Key OAMA workshop action items Identify standards gaps and overlaps Create or identify an “umbrella” org to play leadership role in moving standards to completion and resolving conflicts Create National Metrology Testbed Bring dimensional metrology systems users and vendors together to work toward standardization

7. “Data exchange roadblocks must be eliminated…” Reduction of product development cycle time Elimination of redundant programs Elimination of proprietary interfaces Improved product launch/product quality Decreased training expense >> DaimlerChrysler White Paper: Need for a National Metrology Testbed

8. Action: identify standards gaps and overlaps NIST standards analysis document 15 Activities 39 Interfaces Hot Interfaces Identified Metrology data languages and APIs discussed General language and modularizing issues

9. Other Inspection Device Control High-level Inspection Instruction Execution Low-level Inspection Instruction Execution Inspection Programming Machining Programming Machining Planning CAD. Reporting and Analysis Solid Modeling Probe Instruction Execution Activity Coordination Modules and interfaces in a dimensional metrology system (active interfaces in black, data interfaces in yellow) Routing Planning Math Computing Inspection Planning Hand-held Device Measuring

10. AutoCAD Catia I-DEAS Pro/E Solid Edge etc. Origin QMC Valisys analyze etc. Camio Metrolog PC DMIS Quindos Umess Valisys programming etc. Control for B&S G&L LK Mitutoyo Starett Zeiss etc. ProgramMeas. DataDesign DME interface CADInspection programming software. Inspection program execution Reporting and analysis. Inspection planning data Action: identify key metrology subsystems and their interfaces

11. Further background on the formation of the MIPT Workshop group joins AIAG (2001) and forms three working groups on key interfaces –Dimensional metrology results reporting standards –Dimensional metrology system to CAD interface standards –DMIS conformance class definition and test development –[Application software to dimensional measurement equipment (DME) data interface]

12. MIPT CAD interface activity CAD data interface: Promote vendor support and conduct pilot testing of a standard design data representation that includes tolerances and features –STEP standards: AP203 (no tolerance info), AP224 (tolerance & features, but inadequate shape), AP214 (includes tolerance and features of AP 224, but not widely supported) –Economic benefit: save automotive suppliers up to $200 x 10 6 for data reworking. Delayed production adds approx $10 6 /day and interoperable data will shorten product development cycles by months.

13. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) NIST mission: Support U.S. industry through standards research and standards facilitation. Seek to create and enable high risk and high payoff commercial technologies NIST support for AIAG MIPT: Project management support, technical consultation, test suite development, specifications development, standards gap and overlap analysis

14. AutoCAD Catia I-DEAS Pro/E Solid Edge etc. Origin QMC Valisys analyze etc. Camio Metrolog PC DMIS Quindos Umess Valisys programming etc. ProgramMeas. DataDesign CADInspection programming software. Inspection program execution Reporting and analysis. Inspection planning data Program execution software CMM controller and equipment, e.g., LK, B&S, Zeiss DME NIST support for DME interface standards

15. A brief history of DME interface standards efforts Ford and CMMdriver spec I++ group and I++ DME spec Need for collective user support, involvement, and requirements

16. Key NIST involvement: the test suite Consists of –Conformance and interoperability tests –Test cases (inspection plans and artifacts) –Common test software –Analysis tools and metrics –Testing and validation procedure Iterative with specification

17. Why have a test suite? Specification alone insufficient for interoperability Reduces variability in each test Allows application of quantifiable metrics More cost to changes after publication of the specification Facilitates high quality, timely standard

18. Common test utility Conformance test configuration 1 Common Test Plans CMM type A CMM type B CMM type C Test Results A Test Results B Test Results C Analysis and Reporting NIST Common Test Artifacts Common Test Artifacts Common Test Artifacts At NIST At LK Metrology LK/NIST demo

19. Common test utility Trivial CMM Simulation Test Results 1 Test Results 2 Test Results 3 Analysis and Reporting NIST Common Test Plans Inspection software type 1 Inspection software type 2 Inspection software type 3 Common Test Plans Common Test Plans Conformance test configuration 2

20. Test Results A2 Analysis and Reporting NIST Common Test Plans CMM type A CMM type B CMM type C Common Test Artifacts Common Test Artifacts Inspection Software 1 Inspection Software 2 Inspection Software 3 Common Test Plans Common Test Plans Test Results A3 Test Results A1 Test Results B2 Test Results B3 Test Results B1 Test Results C2 Test Results C3 Test Results C1 Common Test Artifacts Interoperability test

21. Analysis/Metrics Reference log files Log file utilities for test automation Metrics used in automated analysis Some manual analysis unavoidable

22. Demo scenario (July 13, 2001) Initialize execution of a test plan on common utility at NIST LK’s CMM executes that test plan on the test artifact in the UK Results in log file are analyzed at NIST

23. Lessons learned Collective user support, involvement, and purchase requirements essential Hard to get user support –Current economic environment –U.S. management wants proof of the nature of the problem Vendor support usually follows Untimely and sub-functional standards are hard to avoid Testing is essential and must be hands-on NIST support to volunteer effort essential