CNC Inspection Methods Compared
Seventeen measurement and NDT methods compared by geometric capability, accuracy, cost tier, cycle time and qualification, with CMM and UT worked examples.
Inspection methods compared (17 methods; cost tier is editorial)
| Method | Measures (GD&T scope) | Accuracy / range | Cost tier | Cycle per part | Destructive? | Operator qualification | Detects | Standard | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CMM, bridge (touch-trigger / scanning) | size, position, flatness, roundness, perpendicularity, parallelism, concentricity, profile — full 3D GD&T | MPE ±(1.7–2.5 + L/250–300) µm; high-end ±(0.6 + L/1000) µm; to ~1 m class | 5 | 3–15 min | no | ISO 10360 calibration report + GD&T-literate measurer | any geometric deviation; probing cannot find internal voids | ISO 10360-2; ASME B89.4.1 | S1–S5 |
| Blue-light / laser 3D scanning | surface profile, 3D best-fit, full-field deviation map | point 0.017–0.05 mm; volumetric 0.02–0.1 mm | 4 | 1–4 min (scan + align) | no | moderate; mesh/alignment skill | form deviation over the whole surface; line-of-sight limits undercuts; internal cavities unreachable | VDI/VDE 2634 Part 3 | S9, S10 |
| Profile projector (optical comparator) | 2D profile, radius, angle, pitch, 2D true position, edges | ±(1.5–2.5 + L/100) µm; magnification ±0.1%; stage 203 × 102 mm typ. | 2 | 15 s–2 min | no | low; parallax/edge training | 2D contour deviation, burrs, thread profile; no depth or roughness | Mitutoyo PJ/PH specs | S6–S8 |
| Vision measuring machine (VMM) | 2D size, position, small features, high feature count | ±(0.8–1.5) µm | 3 | 10–60 s auto | no | low–moderate; program once, run operator | 2D geometry on small/flat parts; edge-defined features | Mitutoyo QV specs | S6 |
| Calipers | linear size (OD/ID/depth/step) quick check | ±0.02–0.04 mm | 1 | seconds | no | none (shop-floor universal) | coarse size error; not for GD&T | ISO 13385-1 class | S6 |
| Outside micrometer | diameter, thickness | ±0.001–0.003 mm | 1 | seconds | no | low | diameter/thickness deviation; lapped faces needed | ISO 3611 | S6 |
| Height gauge on surface plate | height steps, 1D comparative, scribing | ±0.003–0.008 mm | 1 | < 1 min | no | low | height/step error; runout with lever attachment | Mitutoyo indicator class | S6 |
| Surface roughness tester (Ra/Rz stylus) | Ra, Rz, Rt per ISO 4287 | ±0.5–2% of reading; resolution 0.001 µm; a 2 µm tip cannot resolve features below about 4 µm | 1 | 30 s per trace | contact but non-damaging | low; cutoff/filter training | surface texture deviation; not form | ISO 4287; JIS B 0601 | S6 |
| Hardness — Rockwell (HRB/HRC) | bulk hardness (strength / heat-treat proxy) | ±0.5 HRC bench class; loads 60/100/150 kgf | 1 | < 1 min per indent | small indent remains (semi-destructive to cosmetic surface) | low; ASTM E18 procedure training | wrong heat-treat condition; soft spots; missing case | ASTM E18 / ISO 6508 | S15, S16 |
| Hardness — Brinell (HB) | bulk hardness on rough/large parts | 10 mm WC ball, 500/3000 kgf, 15 s; best on castings/forgings | 1 | about 1 min | visible indent (larger than HRC) | low | grade mix-up vs expected HB; Q&T condition | ASTM E10 / ISO 6506 | S15, S16 |
| Hardness — Vickers/Knoop micro (HV/HK) | case depth (CHD), thin sections, coating cross-section | loads 10 gf–10 kgf; lab method | 2 | sample-prep dependent (minutes) | cut + polish section — destructive to the part | moderate (metallurgical prep) | case depth out of spec; decarburization | ASTM E92/E384; ISO 6507 | S15, S16 |
| Ultrasonic testing (UT, incl. PAUT/TOFD) | internal flaws, wall thickness, lack of fusion | 1–5 MHz; penetration 100–300 mm; TOFD depth ±0.5 mm on 25 mm wall; finds tight cracks < 0.1 mm | 3 | minutes per weld/joint | no | ASNT Level II per SNT-TC-1A / CP-189 / ISO 9712 | internal cracks, voids, LOF, inclusions, thickness loss | ASTM E428/E317; EN 1714; ASME Sec V; AMS 2632 | S11, S12 |
| Magnetic particle testing (MT) | surface and near-surface cracks in ferromagnetic parts | cracks below the 1.6 mm class band (A903 MT column); dry/wet, visible/fluorescent | 1 | minutes | no (may need demagnetize/clean) | ASNT Level I/II; NAS 410 for aerospace | grinding, fatigue and quench cracks; seams | ASTM E709; E1444 (aero); ISO 9934 | S13, S14, S24 |
| Liquid penetrant testing (PT) | surface-opening cracks, any material incl. non-ferrous | pairs with MT on castings (MT below 1.6 mm, PT complementary); fluorescent more sensitive than visible | 1 | 15–60 min (dwell incl.) | no (residue cleanable) | ASNT Level I/II | surface cracks, porosity openings, laps — incl. aluminium and austenitic stainless | ASTM E165/E1417 | S14 |
| Radiographic testing (RT / X-ray) | internal voids, porosity, inclusions, weld penetration | volume defects by density contrast; thickness limit set by energy (typ. ≤ 100 mm steel; Co-60/linac beyond) | 4 | 10–30 min per exposure | no (radiation hazard to operator, not part) | ASNT Level II; radiation-safety license (site dependent) | porosity, shrinkage, slag, LOF (planar defects angle-sensitive) | ASTM E94; EN 17635; ASME Sec V | S11 |
| Salt-spray cabinet (NSS) | corrosion resistance of coatings | 5% NaCl, 35 °C per ASTM B117 / ISO 9227; screening only | 2 | 24–1000+ h cabinet (parallel batch) | yes for the tested coupon (exposure degrades the finish) | low; chamber operation | coating failures: white/red rust onset, blister, creep | ASTM B117; ISO 9227 | batch1 T3 table (caliber cross-reference) |
| PMI — OES spark / XRF / helium leak test | chemical composition (OES all elements incl. C; XRF no C); hermeticity | OES 0.01% class (carbon weak — LECO combustion better); XRF portable non-destructive; helium MSD 5×10⁻¹²–5×10⁻¹³ Pa·m³/s, response < 1 s | OES/XRF 2; helium 3 | OES/XRF seconds; helium minutes | OES leaves a spark mark (slight); XRF and helium non-destructive | OES/XRF instrument training + PMI procedure; helium vacuum training | grade mix-up, off-spec incoming chemistry, leak rate over limit | ASTM E415/E1086/E572; API RP 578; helium: vendor nameplate | S20–S23 |
How to read this table. Cost tier 1 (lowest) to 5 (highest) is an editorial rating compiled from published equipment cost anchors (CMM around $215K class, scanner $142K class, projector $48.5K class) — not a standard value. GD&T column lists the ASME Y14.5 / ISO 1101 characteristics the method can evaluate. Salt-spray hours are a screening comparison, not outdoor life (same caliber as the coating-thickness table). Helium leak rates are instrument nameplate values with a conservative method-level caliber logged in the conflicts.
What CMM accuracy do I need to verify a ±0.02 mm position callout?
A bridge CMM at ±(1.7–1.9 + L/300) µm resolves it with roughly a 7:1 margin — at 300 mm the MPE is about ±2.7–2.9 µm against a 20 µm tolerance zone, inside the 4–10:1 rule-of-thumb band. Route each purpose with the matrix below before booking machine time.
| Inspection purpose | Primary method | Quick screen | Disabled / ineffective | Accuracy anchor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Size + full GD&T (position/profile/flatness) | CMM | blue-light scan (full profile fields) | calipers cannot evaluate GD&T | MPE ±(1.7 + L/300) µm |
| Small 2D profile / thin deformable parts | projector / VMM | — | contact probes deform thin walls | ±(1.5 + L/100) µm |
| Surface roughness Ra/Rz | stylus roughness tester | — | CMM and projector cannot measure roughness | ±0.5–2% of reading |
| Heat-treat condition check | Rockwell HRC (batch sampling) | Brinell (rough large parts) | hardness alone cannot identify the grade | ±0.5 HRC |
| Case depth (carburized/nitrided) | Vickers micro section | — | macro hardness (HRC/HB) cannot see the layer | CHD per ISO 2639 |
| Internal flaws (cracks/voids/LOF) | UT incl. PAUT/TOFD | RT (best on volume defects) | MT/PT only see surface openings | TOFD depth ±0.5 mm per 25 mm |
| Surface cracks (ferromagnetic) | MT | PT (only option for non-ferromagnetic) | UT near-field masks the surface | MT below the 1.6 mm class |
| Coating corrosion comparison | NSS salt spray | — | cabinet hours ≠ outdoor life (ISO 10683) | endpoint must state white vs red rust |
| Grade / mix-up verification (incoming) | OES (carbon matters) or XRF (no carbon) | spark test (shop qualitative) | XRF cannot see carbon — cannot separate 304 from 304L | OES 0.01% class |
| Hermeticity | helium mass spectrometry | pressure decay (coarse leaks) | bubble method only locates gross leaks | 5×10⁻¹² Pa·m³/s class |
Can a caliper check GD&T true position?
No — a caliper's ±0.02–0.04 mm accuracy only supports linear size; position needs a CMM (±(1.7 + L/300) µm class). Hand tools stay valuable for what they actually resolve:
| Hand tool | Accuracy | What it honestly resolves |
|---|---|---|
| Calipers | ±0.02–0.04 mm | linear OD/ID/depth/step quick check — no GD&T |
| Outside micrometer | ±0.001–0.003 mm | diameter and thickness |
| Height gauge | ±0.003–0.008 mm | height steps; runout with a lever attachment |
| Stylus roughness tester | ±0.5–2% of reading | Ra/Rz only — not form, not size |
How long does a full-FAI CMM inspection take per part?
Plan 3–15 min per part on a bridge CMM — 14 min is typical for a part with 7 radii R0.15 ± 0.02 and a stepped bore. A profile projector pre-screen (under 90 s per part) shortens the CMM queue; how much shorter depends on your scheduling — treat that as a shop editorial estimate, not a source figure.
| Timing / cost anchor | Value | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Bridge CMM cycle | 3–15 min per part | published range |
| Landing-gear bushing case: 7 radii R0.15 ± 0.02 + stepped bore | 14 min per part | source case |
| Projector pre-screen | under 90 s per part | published |
| CMM queue-time reduction from pre-screening | scheduling-dependent (editorial estimate) | no source figure — deliberate replacement of an unsourced claim |
| CMM equipment anchor | $215K class | TCO table |
| Scanner equipment anchor | $142K class | TCO table |
| Projector equipment anchor | $48.5K class | TCO table |
Can blue-light scanning replace my CMM for GD&T sign-off?
Not for position of internal features — scanners reach 0.017–0.05 mm point accuracy and give a full-field profile map, but line-of-sight limits blind holes. Use them for profile of surface; keep the CMM for datums and true position.
| Scanner class | Stated accuracy | Note |
|---|---|---|
| GOM Scan 1 | 0.017 mm single point | VDI/VDE 2634 Part 3 metering standard |
| ATOS Q | 0.02 mm class | current-generation rated value |
| Handheld laser | 0.02 mm class | imported industrial tier |
| ATOS (2010 lab data) | 0.002–0.02 mm, single frame 1 s | older wide band kept for reference |
How accurate is a shop-floor Rockwell test?
±0.5 HRC on a bench tester at 60/100/150 kgf — enough to verify a 28–34 HRC pre-hard 4140 band, but hardness cannot identify the grade itself. The three methods divide the work:
| Method | Division of work | Standard |
|---|---|---|
| Rockwell (HRB/HRC) | batch hardness verification of heat-treated parts | ASTM E18 / ISO 6508 |
| Brinell (HB) | rough, large parts: castings and forgings | ASTM E10 / ISO 6506 |
| Vickers/Knoop micro (HV/HK) | case depth (CHD), thin sections, coatings — destructive section | ASTM E92/E384 / ISO 6507 |
How deep can ultrasonic testing find a crack?
Conventional UT penetrates 100–300 mm of steel at 1–5 MHz, and TOFD sizes crack depth to ±0.5 mm on a 25 mm wall — MT and PT stay surface-only. Wall-thickness check: a 3.4 µs back-wall echo at 5,850 m/s reads 9.94 mm.
| Parameter | Value | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Frequency band | 1–5 MHz conventional | S11 |
| Penetration in steel | 100–300 mm | S11 |
| TOFD depth sizing | ±0.5 mm on a 25 mm wall | S11 |
| Tight crack detection | below 0.1 mm | S11 |
| Thin-material spec | 0.5–12.7 mm at 2.0–10.0 MHz | S12 |
| Wall-thickness formula | 5,850 m/s × 3.4 µs ÷ 2 = 9.94 mm | S11 |
| Qualification | ASNT Level II (SNT-TC-1A / CP-189 / ISO 9712) | S24 |
Why did my buyer reject magnetic particle on the aluminum bracket?
MT only works on ferromagnetic material (ASTM E709 scope) — for aluminium and austenitic stainless the surface-crack method is penetrant testing (ASTM E165). The casting acceptance split that confuses buyers:
| Method | Covers | Source |
|---|---|---|
| MT | ferromagnetic parts; detects cracks below the 1.6 mm class band | S13, S14 |
| PT | any material; complementary above 1.6 mm on castings — a division of labor, not a conflict | S14 |
What can XRF verify on incoming material?
Full alloy chemistry except carbon — so XRF cannot separate 304 from 304L. Add spark OES (0.01% class carbon) or require a mill cert when carbon matters; helium leak sits in the same incoming-verification toolbox:
| PMI tool | Strength | Limit |
|---|---|---|
| XRF | portable, non-destructive, seconds per reading | cannot detect carbon |
| Spark OES | all elements incl. carbon at 0.01% class | leaves a small spark mark; bench instrument |
| LIBS | handheld; fast screening | lower precision than OES for certification |
| Carbon (LEEC combustion) | accurate carbon when OES is marginal | sample destruction |
| Helium MSD leak test | 5×10⁻¹²–5×10⁻¹³ Pa·m³/s, response under 1 s | nameplate sensitivity, not a method guarantee |
How sensitive is a helium leak test?
A mass-spectrometer helium leak detector resolves 5×10⁻¹²–5×10⁻¹³ Pa·m³/s within seconds — pressure-decay test floors are orders of magnitude coarser. The 10⁻⁹ caliber seen elsewhere is a conservative method-level figure; this page quotes instrument nameplate and logs the difference.
| Caliber | Sensitivity | How to read it |
|---|---|---|
| Instrument nameplate (MSD) | 5×10⁻¹²–5×10⁻¹³ Pa·m³/s, response < 1 s | vendor high-end class (S22, UGC-sourced; logged as nameplate value) |
| Conservative method-level | 10⁻⁹ Pa·m³/s order | S23; may describe the whole rig rather than the detector |
| Pressure decay / bubble | orders of magnitude coarser | volume- and temperature-dependent; no fixed floor (declared gap) |
Do salt-spray hours prove outdoor life?
No — ASTM B117 hours are a screening comparison; ISO 10683 states accelerated results cannot be directly related to service. Same caliber as the coating-thickness table, cross-referenced:
| Parameter | Value |
|---|---|
| Electrolyte | 5% NaCl solution |
| Cabinet temperature | 35 °C |
| Solution pH | 6.5–7.2 |
| Collection rate | 1–2 mL per 80 cm² per hour |
| Meaning | screening comparison — not outdoor service life |
What reports prove my supplier's inspection capability?
An annual ISO 10360 CMM calibration certificate, a gauge list with ISO/IEC 17025-traceable certificates, and NDT operator ASNT Level II certificates cover most buyer audits. Assemble them per scenario:
| Scenario | Dimensional evidence | Material / process evidence | Deliverable |
|---|---|---|---|
| AS9102 full FAI (new part number) | CMM report on all characteristics + ballooned drawing (Form 3) | MTR/CoC + HT/plating/NDT certificates (Form 2) | Form 1 + 2 + 3 + ballooned drawing |
| AS9102 delta FAI (revision / machine / supplier change) | re-test affected characteristics only | certificates for the changed processes only | delta Form 3 referencing the original FAIR |
| PPAP Level 3 (automotive) | dimensional report + MSA / gauge R&R | material / performance test reports | PSW + 18-element package, Cpk ≥ 1.67 on key characteristics |
| Buyer capability audit | annual ISO 10360 CMM calibration certificate + 17025-traceable gauge list | ASNT Level II certificates + approved special-process vendors | one package covers most audits |
When does a part need a full FAI again?
AS9102 Rev C triggers a full FAI on a new part number, a fit/form/function design change, a process or supplier change, or a production lapse of more than two years — and after a two-year lapse the standard allows a full or a delta FAI, so pin down which one your customer requires.
| Trigger | FAI scope |
|---|---|
| New part number | full FAI |
| Design change affecting fit, form or function | full FAI (or delta per agreement) |
| Process or supplier change | delta FAI on affected characteristics |
| Production lapse over two years | full or delta FAI per AS9102 Rev C — confirm which with the customer |
| Revision | AS9102 Rev C, published 2023-06 |
Is a 0.092 mm bore-position reading really out of tolerance at Ø0.05?
Yes — and the budget math is what settles the argument. The combined standard uncertainty is √(6² + 4² + 5² + 3²) = √86 ≈ 9.3 µm (k = 1); at the source's expanded caliber U(k=2) ≈ ±0.018 mm. Either way 0.092 − 0.018 = 0.074 mm still exceeds the 0.025 mm radial boundary — the deviation stands, it is not measurement error.
| Step | Item | Value | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | CMM MPE at L = 200 mm | ±(1.9 + 200/300) ≈ ±2.57 µm | Zeiss Contura-class specification (S4/S5) |
| 2 | Combined standard uncertainty u_c (k=1) | √(6² + 4² + 5² + 3²) = √86 ≈ 9.3 µm | probe 6 + scale 4 + thermal 5 + setup 3, root-sum-of-squares (S3 budget, values in µm) |
| 3 | Expanded uncertainty U (k=2) | ≈ ±0.018 mm | 2 × u_c, per the source's own U(k=2) = ±0.018 mm caliber |
| 4 | Verdict | 0.092 − 0.018 = 0.074 mm > 0.025 mm | out of tolerance stands under both calibers — argument only matters near the boundary (ISO 14253-1) |
| 5 | Fitting requirement | ≥ 16 points, least-squares cylinder; 3-point method amplifies 4.3× | S3 verification practice |
How do I prove a Ø120 mm 4140 Q&T shaft has no internal cracks?
UT, not RT or MT: MT/PT see only the surface, and a solid bar needs high-energy RT that misses planar flaws anyway. Run straight-beam longitudinal plus angle-beam shear at 2–5 MHz, evaluate to ASME Sec V with ASNT Level II operators.
| Step | Item | Value |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Method elimination | MT/PT surface-only; RT needs high energy, insensitive to planar flaws |
| 2 | Frequency selection | 2–5 MHz (fine-grained forging); 0.5–12.7 mm thin stock per AMS 2632 at 2.0–10.0 MHz |
| 3 | Wall-thickness check | 5,850 m/s × 3.4 µs ÷ 2 = 9.94 mm |
| 4 | Acceptance caliber | crack-like (planar) indications evaluated per ASME Sec V; pressure-boundary forgings typically zero tolerance |
| 5 | Personnel | ASNT Level II; report bound to the day's calibration status |
How to Use These Numbers
- Cost tier 1–5 is an editorial rating from the published TCO anchors (CMM $215K class, scanner $142K class, projector $48.5K class) — not a standard value and not a quote.
- The CMM-queue-time reduction from projector pre-screening is deliberately stated as a scheduling-dependent editorial estimate: no source figure exists for it, and an unsourced percentage claim was removed from this page on verification.
- Uncertainty arithmetic: combine component budgets as a root-sum-of-squares at k = 1, then multiply by 2 for the ~95% expanded U(k=2) — quoting a k=1 result as U is a classic report error.
- GD&T evaluation: only the CMM covers all 3D characteristics; projectors and VMMs are 2D instruments, calipers and micrometers cannot evaluate GD&T, and roughness testers cannot see form.
- NDT division of labor: MT ferromagnetic surfaces only (aluminium and austenitic grades go to PT), UT for internal and depth sizing, RT for volume defects but angle-sensitive on planar flaws, XRF blind to carbon.
- Salt-spray hours are screening numbers, not outdoor life — the endpoint (white vs red rust) must be stated, same caliber as the coating-thickness table.
- The GB/T 16857.2-2017 acceptance protocol is cited by standard number only (ISO 10360-2 equivalent); the ISO 10360-2 acceptance test itself is 5 lengths × 7 directions × 3 repetitions = 105 points.
- Pressure-decay and bubble-method leak sensitivities have no citable fixed floor (volume/temperature dependent) — declared gap, ranked qualitatively only.
Frequently Asked Questions
What CMM accuracy do I need to verify a ±0.02 mm position callout?
A bridge CMM at ±(1.7–1.9 + L/300) µm resolves it with roughly a 7:1 margin — MPE about ±2.7–2.9 µm at 300 mm against a 20 µm zone.
A bridge CMM at ±(1.7–1.9 + L/300) µm resolves it with roughly a 7:1 margin — MPE about ±2.7–2.9 µm at 300 mm against a 20 µm zone.
Can a caliper check GD&T true position?
No — a caliper's ±0.02–0.04 mm accuracy only supports linear size; position needs a CMM.
No — a caliper's ±0.02–0.04 mm accuracy only supports linear size; position needs a CMM.
How long does a full-FAI CMM inspection take per part?
Plan 3–15 min per part on a bridge CMM — 14 min is typical for a 7-radius, stepped-bore part; a sub-90 s projector pre-screen shortens the queue by a scheduling-dependent amount (editorial estimate).
Plan 3–15 min per part on a bridge CMM — 14 min is typical for a 7-radius, stepped-bore part; a sub-90 s projector pre-screen shortens the queue by a scheduling-dependent amount (editorial estimate).
Can blue-light scanning replace my CMM for GD&T sign-off?
Not for internal-feature position — scanners reach 0.017–0.05 mm but are line-of-sight; keep the CMM for datums and true position.
Not for internal-feature position — scanners reach 0.017–0.05 mm but are line-of-sight; keep the CMM for datums and true position.
How accurate is a shop-floor Rockwell test?
±0.5 HRC on a bench tester at 60/100/150 kgf — fine for a 28–34 HRC band, but hardness cannot identify the grade.
±0.5 HRC on a bench tester at 60/100/150 kgf — fine for a 28–34 HRC band, but hardness cannot identify the grade.
How deep can ultrasonic testing find a crack?
Conventional UT penetrates 100–300 mm at 1–5 MHz; TOFD sizes depth to ±0.5 mm on a 25 mm wall.
Conventional UT penetrates 100–300 mm at 1–5 MHz; TOFD sizes depth to ±0.5 mm on a 25 mm wall.
Why did my buyer reject magnetic particle on the aluminum bracket?
MT only works on ferromagnetic material (ASTM E709) — aluminium needs penetrant testing (ASTM E165).
MT only works on ferromagnetic material (ASTM E709) — aluminium needs penetrant testing (ASTM E165).
What can XRF verify on incoming material?
Full alloy chemistry except carbon — it cannot separate 304 from 304L; add spark OES (0.01% class) or a mill cert when carbon matters.
Full alloy chemistry except carbon — it cannot separate 304 from 304L; add spark OES (0.01% class) or a mill cert when carbon matters.
How sensitive is a helium leak test?
A helium MSD resolves 5×10⁻¹²–5×10⁻¹³ Pa·m³/s within seconds; pressure-decay floors are orders of magnitude coarser.
A helium MSD resolves 5×10⁻¹²–5×10⁻¹³ Pa·m³/s within seconds; pressure-decay floors are orders of magnitude coarser.
Do salt-spray hours prove outdoor life?
No — ASTM B117 hours are a screening comparison; ISO 10683 states accelerated results cannot be directly related to service.
No — ASTM B117 hours are a screening comparison; ISO 10683 states accelerated results cannot be directly related to service.
What reports prove my supplier's inspection capability?
An annual ISO 10360 CMM calibration certificate, a 17025-traceable gauge list, and ASNT Level II operator certificates cover most buyer audits.
An annual ISO 10360 CMM calibration certificate, a 17025-traceable gauge list, and ASNT Level II operator certificates cover most buyer audits.
When does a part need a full FAI again?
AS9102 Rev C: new part number, fit/form/function change, process or supplier change, or a production lapse over two years — lapse cases may be full or delta FAI per customer requirement.
AS9102 Rev C: new part number, fit/form/function change, process or supplier change, or a production lapse over two years — lapse cases may be full or delta FAI per customer requirement.
Standards & Sources
- S1 — CNC57, ISO 10360 / JIS B7440 CMM acceptance indicators (7 directions × 5 lengths × 3 repetitions = 105 points)
- S2 — GB/T 16857.2-2017 / ISO 10360-2 (equivalent acceptance-test standards, cited by number only — the original listing's URL was truncated, downgraded per verification)
- S3 — TestGageInsight, How does a coordinate measuring machine work (bridge ±(1.7+L/300), gantry ±(2.5+L/250), Leitz ±(0.6+L/1000); uncertainty budget 6/4/5/3; U(k=2) ±0.018 mm; TCO anchors; 16 points / 4.3×)
- S4 — JPT Online, Zeiss CMM specifications (MPE 1.9 + L/300 µm)
- S5 — Zeiss Contura-class MPE-E ±(1.9 + L/300) µm listings (UGC reprints, corroborated by the official specification sheets)
- S6 — Japan Monozukuri Lab, Mitutoyo instrument accuracy tables (micrometers, calipers, SJ roughness, CRYSTA-Apex, projectors, QUICK VISION)
- S7 — Mitutoyo PH-A14 profile projector official specifications (0.001 mm resolution, ±0.1%/±0.15%, 203 × 102 mm stage)
- S8 — TestGageInsight, profile projector applications and limits (±(1.5 + L/100) class, 2D-only, 22–48 s per part)
- S9 — Industrial scanner accuracy tiers (GOM Scan 1 0.017 mm, ATOS Q 0.02 mm; VDI/VDE 2634 Part 3) — industry Q&A reprint
- S10 — CAS Institute of Advanced Manufacturing, ATOS scanner parameters (0.002–0.02 mm, 1 s per frame, 2010 unit)
- S11 — Atlantis NDT, Ultrasonic Testing ultimate guide (1–5 MHz, 100–300 mm, TOFD ±0.5 mm/25 mm, tight cracks < 0.1 mm, ASNT Level II)
- S12 — SAE AMS2632C, ultrasonic inspection of thin materials 0.5–12.7 mm at 2.0–10.0 MHz
- S13 — ASTM E709-21 official page, magnetic particle testing guide
- S14 — ASTM A903/A903M-99(2024), steel castings surface acceptance (MT below 1.6 mm, PT complementary, 5 acceptance levels)
- S15 — ZwickRoell, hardness testing standards map (E18/6508, E10/6506, E92-384/6507, E140)
- S16 — TestMetals, hardness testing practice (E18 loads, E10 3000/500 kgf, micro 10 gf–10 kgf)
- S17 — SteelCalculator, steel hardness chart (220↔19 to 660↔62; Fu ≈ 3.45 × HB)
- S18 — BalloonPlot, AS9102 Rev C FAI complete guide (Form 1/2/3, ballooning, triggers)
- S19 — New Tech Metals, AS9102 Rev C (effective 2023-06-28), FAI vs PPAP
- S20 — UTEC, unknown-material identification (hardness → spark → OES; OES 0.01% class)
- S21 — LGC Standards, PMI guide (XRF/OES/LIBS; ASTM E415/E572/E1086/E1999/E2465, API RP 578)
- S22 — Helium mass-spectrometer leak detector nameplate values (5×10⁻¹²–5×10⁻¹³ Pa·m³/s, response < 1 s) — encyclopedia entry, logged as nameplate
- S23 — Shangling, gas leak test methods (bubble / pressure decay / helium MSD, 10⁻⁹ conservative caliber)
- S24 — Atlantis NDT, ASTM E709 application page (ASNT Level I/II/III, E1444 aerospace)
- S25 — TestGageInsight, optical comparator vs CMM vs laser scanning comparison
Related Pages
- /wiki/quality/measurement/ — Long-form measurement capability guide behind this quick table
- /wiki/quality/parts-rejected-by-cmm/ — Why CMM reports reject parts — and how to argue with the evidence
- /wiki/reference/hardness-conversion/ — Sibling quick table: hardness scale conversion for the Rockwell/Brinell rows