hexagon logo

Uncertainty of probing on a short cylinder

I just made a little calculation (on Excel) to see the effect of MPE p on the result of a cylinder.
I create a cylinder (Ø 60 H 10 ) with 2 levels of 8 hits, then I random each radius in a range ± 1 µm, create the cylinder axis and look at the defects on a point at (0,0,100) and (100,0,0).
I choose this range because it's tipically the MPE p of a good probe.
The centroid of the cylinder stay in a radius of 0.4 µm, the point at Z100 "moves" in a circle of 9 µm radius, and the point X100 "moves" along Z on 16 µm.
Those results come from a loop on 1000 constructions of LS cylinders.

Just a thought...
Parents
  • Maybe I have to be a little more explicit ?
    I construct the cylinder from 2 circles.
    On each hit, i add a randomized value between -1µm and +1µm to each radius, so the circle has some defects.
    I (Excel !) calculate the center of each circle, create the vector between centers and then calculate the defect to the theoritical axis (0,0,1).



    In the Excel sheet, it looks like this :


    At least, this matrix calculation allows finding the center of each circle with Z value of each :

    In Excel, with the syntax (red text) :



    Hope this helps understanding my way of thinking... ( , )
Reply
  • Maybe I have to be a little more explicit ?
    I construct the cylinder from 2 circles.
    On each hit, i add a randomized value between -1µm and +1µm to each radius, so the circle has some defects.
    I (Excel !) calculate the center of each circle, create the vector between centers and then calculate the defect to the theoritical axis (0,0,1).



    In the Excel sheet, it looks like this :


    At least, this matrix calculation allows finding the center of each circle with Z value of each :

    In Excel, with the syntax (red text) :



    Hope this helps understanding my way of thinking... ( , )
Children
No Data