Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35208018›Full record

ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2022

Comparative Performance Evaluation of Multiconfiguration Touch-Trigger Probes for Closed-Loop Machining of Large Jet Engine Cases.

Grzegorz Szyszka, Jarosław Sęp

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 52% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Grzegorz SzyszkaDepartment of Manufacturing Processes and Production Engineering, Ignacy Łukasiewicz Rzeszów University of Technology, ul. Powstańców Warszawy 12, 35-959 Rzeszów, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-0041-7300
Jarosław SępDepartment of Manufacturing Processes and Production Engineering, Ignacy Łukasiewicz Rzeszów University of Technology, ul. Powstańców Warszawy 12, 35-959 Rzeszów, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-2544-2211
Rzeszów University of Technology · PL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This article presents advances in the methodology of rapid various probe configurations comparison for the five-axis, tilting-head machine tools in conjunction with master artifacts. The research was performed in a direct context of automated machining of large, complex jet engine cases made from 17-4PH and 321 stainless steel materials. The aim of the study was to investigate whether all probe configurations have comparable measurement capability for use in manufacturing environment conditions. Based on the preliminary stage of the study, the T1 main straight probe achieved acceptable results of repeatability and reproducibility, lower than 10%, except for the reference diameter measurement of MT#2, where 15.4% R&R was achieved, conditionally accepted. For the straight probe configuration, error lower than 10 μm was achieved for the true position measurement and error ±10 μm for the reference diameter measurement, in relation to the vertical and horizontal head position, with the exception of the T9 and T5 MT#2 probe configuration, where higher error was noticed. The obtained results of the T5 MT#2 and T9 probes were supplemented with additional tests, which are also included. For the custom styli probes, the T4 and T6 configurations, unacceptable error, higher than 0.30 mm, was observed for the

Indexed as

machine toolon-machine measurementpart probingstainless steelthin-wall machiningtouch-trigger probe

Identifiers

PMID35208018
PMCPMC8878176
OpenAlexW4213349997

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.