System and method for determining whether an apparatus or an assembly process is acceptable

An apparatus is scanned to obtain a 3-dimensional image of the apparatus. A 2-dimensional cross-sectional image for a section of the 3-dimensional image is generated using a processor. The 2-dimensional cross-sectional image is compared with the processor to a preferred 2-dimensional cross-sectional image or to preferred dimensions for the 2-dimensional cross-sectional image. The processor determines if the apparatus or the process for making the apparatus is acceptable based on the comparison.

FIELD OF THE DISCLOSURE

This disclosure relates to a system and method for determining whether an apparatus or an assembly process is acceptable.

BACKGROUND

Many present systems and methods for inspection of apparatus or for evaluating an assembly process rely on manual inspection to determine whether the apparatus or the assembly process is acceptable. This can be time-consuming, can increase the potential for error, may be tiring, and may be costly. Other systems and methods for inspection of apparatus or for evaluating an assembly process may vary but may contain one or more additional issues.

A system and method is needed for the inspection of apparatus or for evaluating an assembly process to determine whether the apparatus or the assembly process is acceptable while overcoming one or more issues of one or more of the present systems or methods.

SUMMARY

In one embodiment, a method for determining whether an apparatus is acceptable is disclosed. In one step, an apparatus is scanned to obtain a 3-dimensional image of the apparatus. In another step, a 2-dimensional cross-sectional image for a section of the 3-dimensional image is generated using a processor. In yet another step, the 2-dimensional cross-sectional image is compared with the processor to a preferred 2-dimensional cross-sectional image or to preferred dimensions for the 2-dimensional cross-sectional image. In another step, the processor determines if the apparatus is acceptable based on the comparison.

In another embodiment, a method for determining whether an assembly process is acceptable is disclosed. In one step, an assembly is X-Ray scanned to obtain 2-dimensional image data of the assembly. In another step, a 3-dimensional image of the assembly is generated using a processor and a geometry processing tool. In yet another step, a 2-dimensional cross-sectional image for a section of the 3-dimensional image is generated using the processor. In still another step, the 2-dimensional cross-sectional image is compared using the processor to digital model assembly data which includes nominal dimensions and tolerances for one or more features of the assembly. In yet another step, the processor determines a process capability index based on the nominal dimensions and tolerances to determine if the assembly process is acceptable if the process capability index is above a predetermined threshold, or unacceptable if the process capability index is below the predetermined threshold.

In still another embodiment, a system for determining whether an assembly process is acceptable is disclosed. The system includes an X-Ray imaging device, a processor, and a memory. The X-Ray imaging device is configured to acquire 2-dimensional image data of an assembly. The processor is in electronic communication with the X-Ray imaging device. The memory is in electronic communication with the processor. The memory includes a computer tomography application executable by the processor to generate a 3-dimensional image of the assembly based on the 2-dimensional image data from the X-Ray imaging device. The memory further includes programming code executable by the processor to generate a 2-dimensional cross-sectional image for a section of the 3-dimensional image of the assembly. The programming code is configured to compare the 2-dimensional cross-sectional image to a preferred 2-dimensional cross-sectional image or to preferred dimensions for the 2-dimensional cross-sectional image; and to determine a process capability index based on nominal dimensions and tolerances to determine whether the assembly process is acceptable based on whether the process capability index is above a predetermined threshold.

The scope of the present disclosure is defined solely by the appended claims and is not affected by the statements within this summary.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

FIG. 1illustrates a box diagram for one embodiment of a system10for determining whether an apparatus12is acceptable. The system10includes an imaging device14, a processor16, a memory18, programming code20, an input device22, and an output device24. The apparatus12may comprise an apparatus which was manufactured or assembled. In other embodiments the apparatus12may vary. The imaging device14is configured to take a 3-dimensional image of the apparatus12. In one embodiment the imaging device14comprises an X-Ray device (or X-Ray scanning device) configured to acquire 2-dimensional image data of the apparatus12which is converted into the 3-dimensional image of the apparatus12using a computer tomography application stored in the memory18and executed by the processor16. In other embodiments the imaging device14may vary.

The processor16is in electronic communication with the imaging device14, the memory18, the input device22, and the output device24. The programming code20is stored in the memory18for execution by the processor16. The programming code20is configured to generate a 2-dimensional cross-sectional image for a section of the 3-dimensional image of the apparatus12and to store the 2-dimensional cross-sectional image in the memory18. In one embodiment the section of the 3-dimensional image of the apparatus12is selected to correspond to digital model assembly data stored in the memory18which includes nominal dimensions and tolerances for one or more features of the apparatus12. Nominal dimensions are defined herein to comprise a target for design specifications. Tolerances are defined herein to be an allowance above or below the nominal dimensions. The programming code20is configured to compare the 2-dimensional cross-sectional image to a preferred 2-dimensional cross-sectional image stored in the memory18or to preferred dimensions for the 2-dimensional cross-sectional image stored in the memory18. In one embodiment the programming code20is configured to compare the 2-dimensional cross-sectional image to digital model assembly data stored in the memory18which includes the nominal dimensions and the tolerances for the one or more features of the apparatus12. In one embodiment the programming code20is configured to overlay the 2-dimensional cross-sectional image with the preferred 2-dimensional cross-sectional image stored in the memory18which includes the nominal dimensions and the tolerances for the one or more features of the apparatus12.

The programming code20is configured to determine if the apparatus12is acceptable based on the comparison. In one embodiment the programming code20is configured to determine that the apparatus12is acceptable if the 2-dimensional cross-sectional image stored in the memory18falls within the tolerances stored in the memory18and to determine that the apparatus12is unacceptable if the 2-dimensional cross-sectional image stored in the memory18falls outside the tolerances stored in the memory18. In one embodiment the programming code20is configured to determine a process capability index based on the nominal dimensions and tolerances for the one or more features of the apparatus12to determine whether the assembly process is acceptable based on whether the process capability index is above a predetermined threshold. In one embodiment if the programming code20determines that the apparatus is unacceptable the programming code20may provide corrective action instructions to modify a method of manufacturing the apparatus12to produce an apparatus12and/or yield an assembly process which is determined to be acceptable by the programming code20.

The input device22is configured to allow a user, a bar code reader, or a radio frequency identification receiver to input information regarding the apparatus12to the processor16for storage into the memory18. The input device22may comprise a keyboard, a touchpad, a mouse, a bar code reader, a radio frequency identification receiver, or another type of input device. The programming code20may use the information inputted by the input device22. The output device24is configured to output an indication as to whether the apparatus12is acceptable as determined by the processor16. The output device24may comprise a display, an audio device, or another type of output device. In other embodiments one or more components of the system10may vary in type, number, or configuration, one or more components of the system10may not be used, or one or more additional components may be added to the system10to achieve varying functions.

FIG. 2is a flowchart of one embodiment of a method30for determining whether an apparatus is acceptable. The method30may utilize the system10ofFIG. 1. In other embodiments the method30may utilize systems having varying components. The apparatus may comprise an apparatus which was manufactured or assembled. In other embodiments the apparatus may vary. In step32, the apparatus is scanned to obtain a 3-dimensional image of the apparatus. In one embodiment step32may comprise X-Ray scanning the apparatus to obtain 2-dimensional image data of the apparatus and generating a 3-dimensional image of the apparatus using a processor and a geometry processing tool such as a computer tomography application to digitally geometry process the 3-dimensional image. In other embodiments step32may utilize varying scanning devices or methods. In other embodiments step32may further vary.

In step34, a 2-dimensional cross-sectional image is generated using the processor for a section of the 3-dimensional image. In one embodiment step34may comprise the section of the 3-dimensional image of the apparatus being selected to correspond to digital model assembly data stored in memory, in electronic communication with the processor, which includes nominal dimensions and tolerances for one or more features of the apparatus. Nominal dimensions are defined herein to comprise a target for design specifications. Tolerances are defined herein to be an allowance above or below the nominal dimensions. In other embodiments step34may vary. In step36, the processor and programming code compares the 2-dimensional cross-sectional image to a preferred 2-dimensional cross-sectional image or to preferred dimensions for the 2-dimensional cross-sectional image. In one embodiment step36may comprise overlaying the 2-dimensional cross-sectional image with the preferred 2-dimensional cross-sectional image. In one embodiment step36may comprise comparing the 2-dimensional cross-sectional image to digital model assembly data which includes nominal dimensions and tolerances for one or more features of the apparatus. In other embodiments step36may vary.

In step38, the processor and/or programming code determines if the apparatus is acceptable or unacceptable based on the comparison. In one embodiment step38may comprise the processor and/or programming code determining that the apparatus is acceptable if the 2-dimensional cross-sectional image falls within the tolerances and the processor determining that the apparatus is unacceptable if the 2-dimensional cross-sectional image falls outside the tolerances. In one embodiment step38may comprise the processor and/or programming code determining a process capability index based on feature dimensions derived from the 2-dimensional image and the nominal dimensions and the tolerances for the one or more features of one or more assemblies, to determine that the assembly process is acceptable if the process capability index falls above a predetermined threshold or to determine that the assembly process is unacceptable if the process capability index falls below the predetermined threshold. In one embodiment step38may comprise the processor and/or programming code accepting the assembly process if the processor determines that the process capability index is acceptable and the processor rejecting the assembly process if the processor determines that the process capability index is unacceptable. In one embodiment step38may comprise the processor modifying a method of manufacturing the apparatus if the processor determines that the apparatus is unacceptable so that the modified method of manufacturing the apparatus produces an apparatus which the processor determines to be acceptable. In other embodiments step38may vary. In still other embodiments one or more steps of the method30may be modified in substance or in order, one or more steps of the method may not be followed, or one or more additional steps may be added.

FIG. 3illustrates a box diagram for one embodiment of a system40for determining whether an assembly process for assembling an assembly42is acceptable. The system40includes an imaging device44, a processor46, a memory48, programming code50, an input device52, and an output device54. The imaging device44is configured to take a 3-dimensional image of the assembly42. In one embodiment the imaging device44comprises an X-Ray scanning device configured to acquire 2-dimensional image data of the assembly42which is converted into the 3-dimensional image of the assembly42using a computer tomography application stored in the memory48and executed by the processor46. In other embodiments the imaging device44may vary.

The processor46is in electronic communication with the imaging device44, the memory48, the input device52, and the output device54. The programming code50is stored in the memory48for execution by the processor46. The programming code50is configured to generate a 2-dimensional cross-sectional image for a section of the 3-dimensional image of the assembly42and to store the 2-dimensional cross-sectional image in the memory48. In one embodiment the section of the 3-dimensional image of the assembly42is selected to correspond to digital model assembly data stored in the memory48which includes nominal dimensions and tolerances for one or more features of the assembly42. Nominal dimensions are defined herein to comprise a target for design specifications. Tolerances are defined herein to be an allowance above or below the nominal dimensions. The programming code50is configured to compare the 2-dimensional cross-sectional image to a preferred 2-dimensional cross-sectional image stored in the memory48or to preferred dimensions for the 2-dimensional cross-sectional image stored in the memory48. In one embodiment the programming code50is configured to compare the 2-dimensional cross-sectional image to digital model assembly data stored in the memory48which includes the nominal dimensions and the tolerances for the one or more features of the assembly42. In one embodiment the programming code50is configured to overlay the 2-dimensional cross-sectional image with the preferred 2-dimensional cross-sectional image stored in the memory48which includes the nominal dimensions and the tolerances for the one or more features of the assembly42.FIG. 11is an illustration of another embodiment of a comparison or overlay of the 2-dimensional cross-sectional image ofFIG. 9relative to the preferred 2-dimensional cross-sectional image ofFIG. 10that includes nominal dimensions and tolerances, in order to determine whether the assembly process is acceptable or unacceptable.

The programming code50is configured to determine if the assembly42and hence the assembly process is acceptable based on the comparison. In one embodiment the programming code50is configured to determine that the assembly42and hence the assembly process is acceptable if the 2-dimensional cross-sectional image stored in the memory48falls within the tolerances stored in the memory48and to determine that the assembly42and hence the assembly process is unacceptable if the 2-dimensional cross-sectional image stored in the memory48falls outside the tolerances stored in the memory48. In one embodiment the programming code50is configured to determine a process capability index based on the nominal dimensions and tolerances for the one or more features of the assembly42to determine whether the assembly process is acceptable based on whether the process capability index is above a predetermined threshold. The process capability index is defined herein as an index which denotes the ability of the process to meet the design specifications for a service or product.

In one embodiment a six sigma process capability index may be utilized. Dimensions of one or more features derived from the 2-dimensional cross-sectional images of one or more assemblies may be evaluated relative to the nominal dimensions and tolerances, and may be used to compute a standard of deviation for dimensions derived from one or more assemblies to determine a process capability index for evaluating the process capability of the assembly process. In one embodiment, the processor46may be configured to determine whether the assembly process is acceptable based on whether the process capability index, or Cpk value, is above a predetermined threshold. An assembly process may be acceptable where the process capability index or Cpk is greater than a predetermined threshold value of 1.0 or 1.333. The Cpk value of 1.333 or greater is considered to be an industry benchmark. This means that the process is contained within four standard deviations of the process specifications, and 64 non-conforming parts per million (ppm) are defected. The process capability index is a measurable property of a process to specification, expressed as a process capability index (Cpk). The output of this measurement is usually illustrated by a histogram along with calculations that predict how many parts will be produced from customer specifications based on the particular process implemented in order to determine whether the process will meet customer requirements, specifications, and product tolerances. The process capability index determines the extent to which the process will meet these requirements, specifications, and product tolerances. To determine the process capability index, the programming code is configured to compute for a given feature a mean value and standard of deviation for the feature dimensions derived from one or more assemblies. The programming code is further configured to calculate a Cpk value based on upper and lower tolerance limits, the mean and standard deviation values, according to standard equations for Cpk.

In other exemplary embodiments, the process capability index may measure the potential for the process to generate defective outputs relative to either upper or lower specifications for the process. In one embodiment the process capability index may measure the worst-case scenario for the process. In one embodiment a six sigma process capability index may be utilized.

In one embodiment if the programming code50determines that the assembly42and hence the assembly process is unacceptable the programming code50may communicate corrective action instructions to the output device54to modify the assembly process of manufacturing the assembly42to produce an assembly42which is determined to be acceptable by the programming code50.

The input device52is configured to allow a user, a bar code reader, or a radio frequency identification receiver to input information regarding the assembly42or the assembly process to the processor46for storage into the memory48. The input device52may comprise a keyboard, a touchpad, a mouse, a bar code reader, a radio frequency identification receiver, or another type of input device. The programming code50may use the information inputted by the input device52. The output device54is configured to output an indication as to whether the assembly42or the assembly process is acceptable as determined by the processor46. The output device54may comprise a display, an audio device, or another type of output device. In other embodiments one or more components of the system40may vary in type, number, or configuration, one or more components of the system40may not be used, or one or more additional components may be added to the system40to achieve varying functions.

FIG. 4is a flowchart of one embodiment of a method60for determining whether an assembly process for manufacturing an assembly is acceptable. The method60may utilize the system40ofFIG. 3. In other embodiments the method60may utilize systems having varying components. In step62, the assembly manufactured by the assembly process is scanned to obtain a 3-dimensional image of the assembly. In one embodiment step62may comprise X-Ray scanning the assembly to obtain 2-dimensional image data of the assembly and generating a 3-dimensional image of the assembly using a processor and a geometry processing tool such as a computer tomography application to digitally geometry process the 3-dimensional image. In other embodiments step62may utilize varying scanning devices or methods. In other embodiments step62may further vary.

In step64, a 2-dimensional cross-sectional image is generated using the processor for a section of the 3-dimensional image. In one embodiment step64may comprise the section of the 3-dimensional image of the assembly being selected to correspond to digital model assembly data stored in memory, in electronic communication with the processor, which includes nominal dimensions and tolerances for one or more features of the assembly. Nominal dimensions are defined herein to comprise a target for design specifications. Tolerances are defined herein to be an allowance above or below the nominal dimensions. In other embodiments step64may vary. In step66, the processor compares the 2-dimensional cross-sectional image to a preferred 2-dimensional cross-sectional image or to preferred dimensions for the 2-dimensional cross-sectional image. In one embodiment step66may comprise overlaying the 2-dimensional cross-sectional image with the preferred 2-dimensional cross-sectional image. In one embodiment step66may comprise comparing dimensions of one or more features derived or obtained from the 2-dimensional cross-sectional image to digital model assembly data which includes nominal dimensions and tolerances for one or more features of the assembly. In other embodiments step66may vary.

In step68, the processor may determine if the assembly and hence the assembly process is acceptable or unacceptable based on the comparison. In one embodiment step68may comprise the processor determining that the assembly and hence the assembly process is acceptable if the 2-dimensional cross-sectional image falls within the tolerances and the processor determining that the assembly and hence the assembly process is unacceptable if the 2-dimensional cross-sectional image falls outside the tolerances. In one embodiment step68may comprise the processor determining a process capability index based on dimensions of one or more features derived from 2-dimensional images from one or more assemblies and the nominal dimensions and the tolerances for the one or more features of one or more assemblies to determine that the assembly process is acceptable if the process capability index falls above a predetermined threshold or to determine that the assembly process is unacceptable if the process capability index falls below the predetermined threshold. The process capability index is defined herein as an index which denotes the ability of the process to meet the design specifications for a service or product. In one embodiment a six sigma process capability index may be utilized. Dimensions of one or more features derived from the 2-dimensional cross-sectional images of one or more assemblies may be evaluated relative to the nominal dimensions and tolerances, and may be used to compute a standard of deviation for dimensions derived from one or more assemblies to determine a process capability index for evaluating the process capability of the assembly process. In one embodiment, the processor may be configured to determine whether the assembly process is acceptable based on whether the process capability index, or Cpk value, is above a predetermined threshold. In other exemplary embodiments, the process capability index may measure the potential for the process to generate defective outputs relative to either upper or lower specifications for the process. In one embodiment the process capability index may measure the worst-case scenario for the process.

In one embodiment step68may comprise the processor accepting the assembly or the assembly process if the processor determines that the assembly or the assembly process is acceptable and the processor rejecting the assembly or the assembly process if the processor determines that the assembly or the assembly process is unacceptable. In one embodiment step68may comprise the processor or programming code communicating corrective action instructions to an output device for modifying the assembly process and/or one or more features of the assembly if the processor determines that the assembly or assembly process is unacceptable so that the modified assembly process produces an assembly which the processor determines to be acceptable. In other embodiments step68may vary. In still other embodiments one or more steps of the method60may be modified in substance or in order, one or more steps of the method may not be followed, or one or more additional steps may be added.

FIG. 5is an illustration of one embodiment of an assembly70in which one or more components of the assembly70were scanned by an X-Ray imaging device to acquire 2-dimensional X-Ray image data of the assembly70. A computer tomography application was utilized to generate a 3-dimensional image72of the assembly70using the 2-dimensional X-Ray image data of the assembly70.FIG. 5may utilize any of the systems or methods disclosed herein. In other embodiments varying systems or methods may be used.

FIG. 6is an illustration of one embodiment of a 2-dimensional cross-sectional image74which was generated for a section of the 3-dimensional image72of the assembly70ofFIG. 5.FIG. 6may utilize any of the systems or methods disclosed herein. In other embodiments varying systems or methods may be used.

FIG. 7is an illustration of one embodiment of a preferred 2-dimensional cross-sectional image76for the 2-dimensional cross-sectional image74ofFIG. 6which was obtained using digital assembly data. This preferred 2-dimensional cross-sectional image76may comprise nominal dimensions and tolerances for one or more features of the 2-dimensional cross-sectional image74of the assembly70. Nominal dimensions are defined herein to comprise a target for design specifications. Tolerances are defined herein to be an allowance above or below the nominal dimensions.FIG. 7may utilize any of the systems or methods disclosed herein. In other embodiments varying systems or methods may be used.

FIG. 8is an illustration of one embodiment of a comparison or overlay78of the 2-dimensional cross-sectional image74ofFIG. 6relative to the preferred 2-dimensional cross-sectional image76ofFIG. 7in order to determine whether the assembly70ofFIG. 5or the assembly process of assembling the assembly70ofFIG. 5is acceptable or unacceptable.FIG. 8may utilize any of the systems or methods disclosed herein. In other embodiments varying systems or methods may be used.

One or more embodiments of the disclosure may be more time-efficient, less costly, more accurate, less physically taxing, or may have one or more additional benefits over one or more of the present systems and methods for the inspection of apparatus.