Large Jig Verification Project

1. LVMC 06 Geraint W Jones Engineering Group Leader Metrology Airbus UK Large Jig VerificationProject Use menu "View - Header & Footer" for Presentation title - Siglum - Reference

2. Background Use menu "View - Header & Footer" for Presentation title - Siglum - Reference

3. Stage 01 Jig • The main geometrical features to be controlled during the periodic jig verification process are hinge lines for all the movables I.e. Spoilers and ailerons. • On an A380 periodical verification of the assembly tooling approximately 150 points are measured today Use menu "View - Header & Footer" for Presentation title - Siglum - Reference

4. Recertification JIG PERIODIC RECERTIFICATION PROCESS Prepare tool Measure tool JIG HEALTH CHECK Features In spec? Rework No Yes Return tool to production End Use menu "View - Header & Footer" for Presentation title - Siglum - Reference

5. Project PROJECT AIMS The project aims to understand and improve the process capability of the Jig Health Measurement process of a candidate Wing Assembly jig. BENEFITS Perceived benefits of the project include: • Less rework due to measurement variation • Improved accuracy and repeatability of the measurement process • Improved product performance • Data base of capability for future design of wings and tooling KEY FACTORS AFFECTING MEASUREMENT PERFORMANCE • The measurement instrument • The environment • The measured features • The measured object Use menu "View - Header & Footer" for Presentation title - Siglum - Reference

6. Instruments and Software Axyz Software Spatial Analyzer Φ=Horizontal angle θ=Vertical angle Laser Tracker r=Distance Measurement System & Software Use menu "View - Header & Footer" for Presentation title - Siglum - Reference

7. Health Check Process Existing Health Check Measurement Process Measurement Measure ERS points Measure jig geometry points (OTP) Data processing Execute the bundle adjustment Generate hidden points Least squares best fit and scale to nominal jig OTP’s Final report OTP point qualification Use menu "View - Header & Footer" for Presentation title - Siglum - Reference

8. Measurement Phase ERS- Enhanced Reference System • Network of points permanently attached to the tool • Attached in positions on substantial structure where they can be seen from convenient positions of the measurement system • Can be used to orient the network of instruments and/or allow local positioning with respect to some defined coordinate system Use menu "View - Header & Footer" for Presentation title - Siglum - Reference

9. Measurement phase Typical Optical Tooling Points (OTP) TYPICAL TRACK FLAG VIEW VIEW A VIEW A B A Use menu "View - Header & Footer" for Presentation title - Siglum - Reference

10. Measurement phase Measured OTP’s ERS points Instrument Positions and Measurements Position1 Position0 Position2 Use menu "View - Header & Footer" for Presentation title - Siglum - Reference

11. Data processing Bundle Adjustment • An algorithm which consists of an optimisation routine. • The transformation of each instrument is determined which minimises the observational errors of the system Minimized Pointing Error Use menu "View - Header & Footer" for Presentation title - Siglum - Reference

12. Data processing Generate hidden points Calculated Hidden Point Required OTP Use menu "View - Header & Footer" for Presentation title - Siglum - Reference

13. Data processing Jig Nom OTP’s Unused Jig Nom OTP’s Measured OTP’s Best fit and Scale to nominal Jig OTP’s Trackers bundled, not best-fit Trackers bundled and best-fit Use menu "View - Header & Footer" for Presentation title - Siglum - Reference

14. Data processing Best-Fit and scale to nominal jig OTP’s • Least squares routine that minimises the sum of the squares • Scale: account for temperature effects on jig Use menu "View - Header & Footer" for Presentation title - Siglum - Reference

15. Final report OTP Qualification = Jig Health Check Use menu "View - Header & Footer" for Presentation title - Siglum - Reference

16. What can be done better? Improvement opportunities • Scale Factor not included • Apply scale to the instruments during network adjustment, not points in the best-fit • Assess Measurement Uncertainty • “error footprint” not applied • Least squares treats all points with equal weight Laser Tracker “error footprint” Use menu "View - Header & Footer" for Presentation title - Siglum - Reference

17. What can be done better? Improvement opportunities • The effect on measurement performance due to laser tracker instrument placement and ERS proximity is unknown. • If we knew these effects we could optimise and standardise the measurement procedure • If we could express the measurement process capability it could result in:- - Better informed decisions regarding rework - Better designs for future tools - More appropriate specifications for setting and periodic checks - Save time and money!! Use menu "View - Header & Footer" for Presentation title - Siglum - Reference

18. What can be done better? Additional evidence to back up case for improvement Evidence of ERS and subsequent OTP point variation upon recertification • Excessive rework on seemingly stable tooling monuments • ERS best fit results degradation • No standard method for valuation of ERS involving how many instruments required, best practice for instrument placement and minimum points required for tie-in • Use of DVT (hidden point) tooling can have detrimental effect on measurement performance, need a case to back this up Use menu "View - Header & Footer" for Presentation title - Siglum - Reference

19. Measurement Uncertainty - U • A parameter that is associated with the result of a measurement, that characterises the dispersion of values that could reasonably be attributed to the measurand (VIM 1993, 3.9) • An uncertainty is not an error, which is defined as the difference between the result of a measurement and the true value • If a measurement error is known, a correction can be applied to achieve a more accurate result. The remaining uncertainty (from that component) is the uncertainty in the correction Arriving at a measurement uncertainty for a typically Large Scale measurement process such as this Airbus example involving multiple instrument locations was hitherto very difficult and Impractical.This is now possible! D Use menu "View - Header & Footer" for Presentation title - Siglum - Reference

20. Measurement uncertainty How can we understand the effects of instrument uncertainty, placement and the measurement procedure for Large Jig Verification? • New River Kinematics Unified Spatial Metrology Network (USMN) - Element of the Spatial Analyser software • Combines measurement systems • Allows for scaling at the bundle adjustment stage • Effectively uses the instrument “error footprint” to assess measurement performance • Simulation tools to optimize job layout Use menu "View - Header & Footer" for Presentation title - Siglum - Reference

21. Uncertainty Analysis Example Common Targets Pos0 Pos1 • Combining measurement systems • 2 Laser Trackers Use menu "View - Header & Footer" for Presentation title - Siglum - Reference

22. Uncertainty Analysis Example Network Solution: USMN • Combining measurement systems • 2 Laser Trackers • Optimize the instrument locations • Apply scale and instrument “error footprint” • Generate a weighted composite coordinate group • Generate a valid Uncertainty statement and Uncertainty fields for each composite point. Use menu "View - Header & Footer" for Presentation title - Siglum - Reference

23. Uncertainty Analysis Example Network Solution: USMN • 2 Laser Trackers After Combination Composite pt r3, and uncertainty field Pos1 Pos0 Use menu "View - Header & Footer" for Presentation title - Siglum - Reference

24. Uncertainty Analysis Example Network Solution: USMN • Add a 3rd tracker to the measurement chain Pos2 Common Targets Pos1 Pos0 Use menu "View - Header & Footer" for Presentation title - Siglum - Reference

25. Uncertainty Analysis Example Pos2 Pos1 Pos0 Network Solution: USMN • Uncertainty propagation: open loop survey Fixed Reference Use menu "View - Header & Footer" for Presentation title - Siglum - Reference

26. Uncertainty Analysis Example Network Solution: USMN • Application: A330/340 Stage 01 Assy Jig Use menu "View - Header & Footer" for Presentation title - Siglum - Reference

27. Uncertainty Analysis Example OTP’s ERS points Network Solution: USMN • Application: A330/340 Stage 01 Assy Jig Use menu "View - Header & Footer" for Presentation title - Siglum - Reference

28. Uncertainty Analysis Example OTP’s ERS points Network Solution: USMN • Application: A330/340 Stage 01 Assy Jig • Add a 4th laser tracker to the network! Down 39% Down 50% Down 64% Down 66% Down 54% Down 56% Down 66% Use menu "View - Header & Footer" for Presentation title - Siglum - Reference

29. Additional USMN and SA benefits • Pre and post tool design simulations to optimise the network • Produce uncertainty statements which effectively define the jig build and verification process capability index (CPK) • Effective use of the uncertainty statements to challenge legacy tolerances or define the new standard for new programs • Instrument angular measurement capability can be assessed and monitored • Standardise and automate data gathering and reporting through use of SA measurement plans (MP) Use menu "View - Header & Footer" for Presentation title - Siglum - Reference

30. Best practice statements Process so far has yielded: • Pre plan/optimise job using simulation tools • Consider U for measurement tolerances • Minimise hidden point projection length • Minimise target distance from the laser tracker • Measure multiple observations on each point • Try to employ good intersection geometry • Always try to close the survey loop • Overlap targets between positions by 80% - 100% Use menu "View - Header & Footer" for Presentation title - Siglum - Reference

31. Questions?? Use menu "View - Header & Footer" for Presentation title - Siglum - Reference

32. © AIRBUS UK LTD. All rights reserved. Confidential and proprietary document. This document and all information contained herein is the sole property of AIRBUS UK LTD. No intellectual property rights are granted by the delivery of this document or the disclosure of its content. This document shall not be reproduced or disclosed to a third party without the express written consent of AIRBUS UK LTD. This document and its content shall not be used for any purpose other than that for which it is supplied. The statements made herein do not constitute an offer. They are based on the mentioned assumptions and are expressed in good faith. Where the supporting grounds for these statements are not shown, AIRBUS UK LTD will be pleased to explain the basis thereof. AIRBUS, its logo, A300, A310, A318, A319, A320, A321, A330, A340, A350, A380, A400M are registered trademarks. Use menu "View - Header & Footer" for Presentation title - Siglum - Reference