Oe 23 7 9052

Laser straightness interferometer system with
rotational error compensation and simultaneous

measurement of six degrees of freedom error
parameters
Benyong Chen, Bin Xu, Liping Yan,* Enzheng Zhang, and Yanna Liu
Nanometer Measurement Laboratory, Zhejiang Sci-Tech University, Hangzhou, 310018, China
*
yanliping@zstu.edu.cn
Abstract: A laser straightness interferometer system with rotational error

compensation and simultaneous measurement of six degrees of freedom
error parameters is proposed. The optical configuration of the proposed
system is designed and the mathematic model for simultaneously measuring
six degrees of freedom parameters of the measured object including three
rotational parameters of the yaw, pitch and roll errors and three linear
parameters of the horizontal straightness error, vertical straightness error and
straightness error’s position is established. To address the influence of the
rotational errors produced by the measuring reflector in laser straightness
interferometer, the compensation method of the straightness error and its
position is presented. An experimental setup was constructed and a series of
experiments including separate comparison measurement of every
parameter, compensation of straightness error and its position and
simultaneous measurement of six degrees of freedom parameters of a
precision linear stage were performed to demonstrate the feasibility of the
proposed system. Experimental results show that the measurement data of
the multiple degrees of freedom parameters obtained from the proposed
system are in accordance with those obtained from the compared instruments
and the presented compensation method can achieve good effect in
eliminating the influence of rotational errors on the measurement of
straightness error and its position.
© 2015 Optical Society of America
OCIS codes: (120.0120) Instrumentation, measurement, and metrology; (120.3180)
Interferometry; (120.4570) Optical design of instruments; (120.4820) Optical systems.
References and links

1. O. Borisov, S. Fletcher, A. Longstaff, and A. Myers, “Performance evaluation of a new taut wire system or
straightness measurement of machine tools,” Precis. Eng. 38(3), 492–498 (2014).
2. F. Qibo, Z. Bin, C. Cunxing, K. Cuifang, Z. Yusheng, and Y. Fenglin, “Development of a simple system for
simultaneously measuring 6DOF geometric motion errors of a linear guide,” Opt. Express 21(22), 25805–25819
(2013).
3. P. Yang, T. Takamura, S. Takahashi, K. Takamasu, O. Sato, S. Osawa, and T. Takatsuji, “Development of
high-precision micro-coordinate measuring machine: Multi-probe measurement system for measuring yaw and
straightness motion error of XY linear stage,” Precis. Eng. 35(3), 424–430 (2011).
4. J. M. Linares, J. Chaves-Jacob, H. Schwenke, A. Longstaff, S. Fletcher, J. Flore, E. Uhlmann, and J. Wintering,
“Impact of measurement procedure when error mapping and compensating a small CNC machine using a
multilateration laser interferometer,” Precis. Eng. 38(3), 578–588 (2014).
5. J. J. Kroll, “Six degree of freedom optical sensor for dynamic measurement of linear axes,” PhD thesis, University
of North Carolina, Charlotte (2003).
6. J. Ni, P. S. Huang, and S. M. Wu, “A multi-degree-of-freedom measuring system for CMM geometric errors,” J.
Eng. Ind. 114(3), 362–369 (1992).
#232815 - $15.00 USD Received 19 Jan 2015; revised 24 Mar 2015; accepted 25 Mar 2015; published 1 Apr 2015
© 2015 OSA 6 Apr 2015 | Vol. 23, No. 7 | DOI:10.1364/OE.23.009052 | OPTICS EXPRESS 9052
7. W. Y. Jywe, C. H. Liu, W. H. Shien, L. H. Shyu, T. H. Fang, Y. H. Sheu, T. H. Hsu, and C. C. Hsieh, “Developed
of a multi-degree of freedoms measuring system and an error compensation technique for machine tools,” J. Phys.
Conf. Ser. 48(1), 761–765 (2006).
8. I. Rahneberg, H.-J. Büchner, and G. Jäger, “Optical system for the simultaneous measurement of two-dimensional
straightness errors and the roll angle,” Proc. SPIE 7356, 73560S, 73560S-9 (2009).
9. K. C. Fan and Y. Zhao, “A laser straightness measurement system using optical fiber and modulation techniques,”
Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf. 40(14), 2073–2081 (2000).
10. C. H. Liu, J. H. Chen, and Y. F. Teng, “Development of a straightness measurement and compensation system with
multiple right-angle reflectors and a lead zirconate titanate-based compensation stage,” Rev. Sci. Instrum. 80(11),
115105 (2009).
11. A. Kimura, W. Gao, and L. J. Zeng, “Position and out-of-straightness measurement of a precision linear
air-bearing stage by using a two-degree-of-freedom linear encoder,” Meas. Sci. Technol. 21(5), 054005 (2010).
12. C. H. Liu and C. H. Cheng, “Development of a grating based multi-degree-of-freedom laser linear encoder using
diffracted light,” Sen. Actuators A. 181(7), 87–93 (2012).
13. L. J. Zhu, L. Li, J. H. Liu, and Z. H. Zhang, “A method for measuring the guideway straightness error based on
polarized interference principle,” Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf. 49(3–4), 285–290 (2009).
14. P. Yang, T. Takamura, S. Takahashi, K. Takamasu, O. Sato, S. Osawa, and T. Takatsuji, “Multi-probe scanning
system comprising three laser interferometers and one autocollimator for measuring flat bar mirror profile with
nanometer accuracy,” Precis. Eng. 35(4), 686–692 (2011).
15. K. C. Fan and M. J. Chen, “A 6-degree-of-freedom measurement system for the accuracy of X-Y stages,” Precis.
Eng. 24(1), 15–23 (2000).
16. R. R. Baldwin, “Interferometer system for measuring straightness and roll,” U.S. Patent, 3790284 (1974).
17. D. R. McMurtry and R. J. Chaney, “Straightness interferometer system,” U.S. Patent, 5026163 (1991).
18. S. T. Lin, “A laser interferometer for measuring straightness,” Opt. Laser Technol. 33(3), 195–199 (2001).
19. Q. H. Chen, D. J. Lin, J. Wu, J. Q. Yan, and C. Y. Yin, “Straightness/coaxiality measurement system with
transverse Zeeman dual-frequency laser,” Meas. Sci. Technol. 16(10), 2030–2037 (2005).
20. B. Chen, E. Zhang, L. Yan, C. Li, W. Tang, and Q. Feng, “A laser interferometer for measuring straightness and its
position based on heterodyne interferometry,” Rev. Sci. Instrum. 80(11), 115113 (2009).
21. S. T. Lin, S. L. Yeh, C. S. Chiu, and M. S. Huang, “A calibrator based on the use of low-coherent light source
straightness interferometer and compensation method,” Opt. Express 19(22), 21929–21937 (2011).
22. Y. S. Zhai, Q. B. Feng, and B. Zhang, “A simple roll measurement method based on a rectangular-prism,” Opt.
Laser Technol. 44(4), 839–843 (2012).
23. R. C. Quenelle, “Nonlinearity in interferometer measurements,” Hewlett Pachard J. 34, 10 (1983).
24. D. J. Loner, B. A. W. H. Knarren, S. J. A. G. Cosijns, H. Haitjema, and P. H. J. Schallakans, “Laser polarization
state measurement in heterodyne interferometry,” CIRP Annals-Manufac, Technol. 52(1), 439–442 (2003).
25. C. M. Wu and C. S. Su, “Nonlinearity in measurements of length by optical interferometry,” Meas. Sci. Technol.
7(1), 62–68 (1996).
26. W. M. Hou, “Optical parts and the nonlinearity in heterodyne interferometers,” Precis. Eng. 30(3), 337–346
(2006).
1. Introduction
In recent times, with the development of precision manufacturing and measuring equipments
such as machine tool and coordinate measuring machine, the demands of high accuracy for
straightness measurement instruments have increased [1–4]. Current straightness measurement
methods and techniques can be mainly divided into laser collimation and laser interference.
Among the laser collimation, position sensitive detector (PSD) or quadrant detector (QD) is
usually used as sensor to realize the measurement of straightness error. These methods have the
advantages of low cost, simple compact and fast optical adjustment. For example, Jeremy J.
Kroll et al designed a six degree of freedom optical sensor for dynamic measurement of linear
axes that uses a position sensitive photodiode to measure straightness error and heterodyne
interferometry to measure linear displacement accuracy [8]. J. Ni et al developed a
multi-degree-of-freedom measuring system for CMM geometric errors based on the principles
of laser alignment and autocollimator [9]. Wen-Yuh Jywe presented a multi-degree of
freedoms measuring system and an error compensation technique for machine tools integrating
a laser interferometer for measuring displacement and QD for detecting straightness error [10].
Compared with the laser collimation [2, 5–10] and other straightness measurement methods
such as diffracted beams interference method using grating [11, 12] and polarization angle
detecting method [13], laser interferometric straightness measurement has advantages of high
accuracy of nanometer level and long travel of meter range [14–20].
Among laser interferometric straightness measurement, one is using conventional laser
interferometer to realize the determination of straightness such as Ping Yang et al or
Kuang-Chao Fan et al used multiple laser interferometers to measure the straightness error of
linear stage [3, 14, 15], and the other is called as laser straightness interferometer that specially
designed for measuring straightness error. The typical representative of the straightness
interferometer, which was invented by Richard R. Baldwin in 1974, is the interferometer
system for measuring straightness that employs a Wollaston prism to produce two separate
measuring beams and a pair of V-shaped plane mirrors to reflect the two beams [16]. After that,
some related research works has been reported. For example, David R. McMurtry and
Raymond J. Chaney invented a straightness interferometer system that used a roof-top
reflector-prism combination as the retroreflector instead of the pair of plane mirrors in
Baldwin’s system [17], Shyh-Tsong Lin proposed a straightness interferometer that utilizes the
combination of a corner cube and two right-angle prisms to reflect the measuring beams so that
the resolution is doubled by comparing with conventional straightness interferometer [18],
Qianghua Chen et al presented a straightness/coaxiality measurement system that combines a
transverse Zeeman dual-frequency laser with a pair of Wollaston prisms [19], and Benyong
Chen et al proposed a straightness interferometer that uses a combination of a nonpolarizing
beam-splitter and a polarizing beam-splitter to obtain two separate measurement signals so as
to realize the simultaneous measurement of the magnitude and the position of straightness error
[20]. Shyh-Tsong Lin et al designed a calibrator utilizing a low-coherent light source
straightness interferometer that adopts an approach of driving the Wollaston prism back a
lateral displacement to compensate the influence of rotational error until the zero-order fringe
appears at the original location [21].
Each of these works mentioned above has its own advantages. But, there are still the
following problems to be studied in this straightness interferometer: (1) the influence of the
rotational error of measuring reflector on straightness error measurement: when measuring
reflector is rotated angular errors by the measured object, an erroneous optical path change will
be induced and then result in wrong measurement result. (2) the simultaneous measurement of
multiple degrees of freedom error parameters: most of these straightness interferometers only
give out a straightness error in one direction at once measurement. If the straightness error in
another perpendicular direction as well as the rotational errors (yaw, pitch and roll) can be
simultaneously determined in one straightness interferometer system, this will have important
significance in the field of performance testing and calibration of stages and guideways.
In this paper, a laser straightness interferometer system with simultaneous measurement of
multiple degrees of freedom error parameters is proposed and the straightness error
compensation is introduced. The optical layout of the laser straightness interferometer system
is described. The principle of the simultaneous measurement of six degrees of freedom
parameters including two straightness errors, position, yaw, pitch, and roll errors of a linear
stage is depicted and analyzed in detail. And the compensation method for straightness error
and its position due to the influence of the rotational errors of the measured object is presented.
Finally, an experimental setup is constructed to demonstrate the feasibility of the laser
straightness interferometer system.
2. Configuration
The laser straightness interferometer system with simultaneous measurement of six degrees of
freedom error parameters is shown in Fig. 1. It consists of a laser interferometric measurement
unit (LIMU) and a motion errors detecting unit (MEDU). LIMU, which is composed of a
stabilized dual-frequency He-Ne laser, a nonpolarizing beam-splitter (NPBS3), a Wollaston
prism (WP), a retroreflector (RR) made up of upper and down right-angle prisms, a polarizing
beam-splitter (PBS1), two polarizers (P1, P2) and two photodetectors (D1, D2) [20], carries out
the measurement of vertical straightness error along the x axis and the straightness error’s
position (moving displacement along the z axis) based on heterodyne interferometry with two
measurement signals from D1 and D2 and a reference signal from the laser. MEDU includes two
parts. One, which is composed of two nonpolarizing beam-splitters (NPBS1, NPBS2), a mirror
(MR) mounted on RR, a convex lens (CL) and a two-dimensional PSD, carries out the
determination of yaw error around the x axis and pitch error around the y axis. Another, which
is composed of a nonpolarizing beam-splitter (NPBS4), a polarizing beam-splitter (PBS2) and
two QDs (QD1, QD2), carries out the determination of horizontal straightness error along the y
axis and roll error around the z axis.
PSD CL NPBS2 MR
NPBS3
WP
NPBS4
ƒ1 ƒ2 ƒ2 ƒ1 '
NPBS1
PBS1 RR
D1 P1 ƒ1 PBS2
ƒ2' x
z
P2 QD1
QD2 y
D2 Moving stage
Fig. 1. Schematic of the laser straightness interferometer system with simultaneous

measurement of six degrees of freedom error parameters.
3. Principle
As shown in Fig. 2, when the moving stage slides along a linear guideway, there are six degrees
of freedom motion parameters including three linear parameters of the vertical straightness
error Δh, the horizontal straightness error w and the straightness error’s position s and three
rotational parameters of the yaw error α around the x axis, the pitch error β around the y axis and
the roll error γ around the z axis. Among them, the rotational errors will affect the measurement
accuracy of the straightness error and its position obtained from laser interferometry. Thus, in
order to improve the measurement accuracy of the straightness error and its position, the three
rotational errors must be detected to compensate the measurement result of the straightness
error and its position.
`
Vertical straightness: Δh
x
Yaw: α
x
z RR
Moving stage
y Roll: γ
z
Position: s
Linear guideway
Pitch: β
y
Horizontal straightness: w
Fig. 2. Schematic of six degrees of freedom motion errors of a moving stage.
In the proposed straightness interferometer system, two QDs and a PSD are employed to
achieve the separation and measurement of three rotational errors and horizontal straightness
error. The compensation of vertical straightness error and its position measured by using laser
interferometry will be given in section 4.
3.1 Determination of yaw and pitch errors
As shown in Fig. 1, the beam reflected by MR is sensitive to the yaw and pitch of the moving
stage but not sensitive to the roll of the moving stage. The beam passes through BS2 and is
focused on PSD which is situated at the focal plane of CL. According to the light spot
deviations on PSD, the yaw and pitch errors of the moving stage can be expressed by
 ΔxPSD
α = 2 f

 (1)
 β = ΔyPSD
 2f
where f is the focal length of CL, ΔxPSD and ΔyPSD are the light spot deviations on PSD along
the horizontal and vertical directions, respectively.
3.2 Determination of roll and horizontal straightness errors
In order to establish the mapping relationship between the light spot position changes on two
QDs and the rotational errors of RR, three-dimensional ray tracing and geometric analysis
methods are used. The coordinate definition of the analytical model of the proposed
straightness interferometer system is shown in Fig. 3. The coordinate frames {R} and {M} are
established respectively at the initial and moving positions of the moving stage. The origins o
and o′ of the two coordinates are both defined at the mounting point that RR’s bracket mounts
on the moving stage. It is assumed that the initial position has no motion errors and the
coordinate frame {R} is static as a reference while the coordinate frame {M} changes with the
movement of the moving stage. θ is a half of the divergent angle of WP. L1 and L2 represent the
traveling optical paths of the two emergent beams with frequencies of f1 and f2 from WP during
measurement, respectively. B is the distance between the axis of RR’s bracket and the join
point of the right-angle sides of the upper and down right-angle prisms. H is the distance
between the join point and the moving stage. s0 is the distance between WP and the axis of RR’s
bracket at the initial position. Δh is the vertical straightness error and s is the straightness error’s
position.
RR f1 beam
L1
WP
B Moving Position
θ Δh Measuring baseline
Initial Position
L2 H
H
x′
s0 o’
f2 beam
x y′ z′
s {M}
o
z
y
{R}
Fig. 3. The coordinate definition of the analytical model of the proposed system.
As shown in Fig. 4, the two emergent beams with a divergent angle from WP project onto
the upper and down right-angle prisms, respectively. When the moving stage moves to a
location of the linear guideway and does not produce any rotational error, it is assumed that the
incident points on the upper and down right-angle prisms are Pui and Pdi and the emergent
points are Puo and Pdo in the coordinate frame {M}, respectively. According to the geometric
relationship, the spatial coordinates of the two incident points are given by
 xui = H1 cos θ + H

 D
Pui :  yui = − − w (2)
 2
 zui = − H1 sin θ − B
 xdi = − H 2 cos θ + H

 D
Pdi :  ydi = − − w (3)
 2
 zdi = − H 2 sin θ − B
Where H1 and H 2 are the length of Pui J and Pdi J , respectively. D is the distance between
the incident and emergent beams in the right-angle prism. And w is the horizontal straightness
error at the moving position.
The spatial coordinates of the two emergent points Puo and Pdo on the upper and down
right-angle prisms are given by
 xuo = H1 cos θ + H

 D
Puo :  yuo = + w (4)
 2
 zuo = − H1 sin θ − B
 xdo = − H 2 cos θ + H

 D
Pdo :  ydo = + w (5)
 2
 zdo = − H 2 sin θ − B
RR Pui ( Puo )
WP
I0 H1 J
B
θ
H2
H
I4 Pdi x′
o′
( Pdo ) z′
s0 y′ {M}
s
Fig. 4. Schematic of the incident (emergent) points on the upper and down right-angle prisms
without rotational error.
When the moving stage moves to a location of the linear guideway and produces rotational
errors α, β and γ, the incident points on the upper and down right-angle prism interfaces and the
directions inside the prisms of the incident beams will change. In order to study the relationship
of the variations of the incident points and beams with the rotational errors, two sub-coordinate
frames {U} and {D} are established with respect to the coordinate frame {M} as shown in Fig.
5. Mi (i = 0-5) denotes the corresponding plane of the upper and down right-angle prisms.
z u′′
M1
RR P1 I 2 P
M2 2
I1 I3
M0 Upper
Pu′i P′ rectangular
I ui I uo uo prism
{U} o ′′
u
I0
WP
I3R x u′′ yu′′
o d′′
I4 ou′ (od′ ) {D}
x d′′
I7R
I do y d′′
M4 x′ I di
z′ Pd′i Pd′o Down
M3
M5
{M} y′
I5 I7 rectangular
P4 I P5 prism
6
z d′′
Fig. 5. The coordinate definition of the analytical model of the upper and down right-angle
prisms.
The sub-coordinate frames {U} and {D} are the analysis coordinate system of the upper and
down right-angle prisms, respectively. They share the same origin point which is the join point
of the right-angle sides of the upper and down right-angle prisms. The z axes of {U} and {D}
are the right-angle sides of the upper and down right-angle prisms. Consider the upper
right-angle prism, the transformation matrix U TM representing the transformation of {U} to
{M} can be expressed as
 2 2 
 (−θ + γ − β ) (−θ − γ − β ) 1 H − Bβ 
 2 2 
 2 2 
(−1 + α ) (1 + α ) γ H γ + Bα   RM PM 
U U
U 
TM =  2 =
2    (6)
0 1 
 2 2  
 (−1 − α ) (−1 + α ) −β − θ −H β − B
 2 2 
 0 0 0 1 
where U TM can be decomposed into a 3 × 3 rotational matrix U

RM and a 3 × 1 translational
U
vector PM .
Assuming the incident point after RR rotation is Pui′ ( xuiU , yuiU , zuiU ) in {U}, the spatial
coordinates Pui′′ ( xuiM , yuiM , zuiM ) of this point in {M} can be expressed as
[ xuiM , yuiM , zuiM ,1]T = U TM [ xuiU , yuiU , zuiU ,1]T (7)
In {M}, the incident beam I0 does not change whether there is rotation error or not. So the
incident point Pui ( xui , yui , zui ) before RR rotation and the incident point Pui′′ ( xuiM , yuiM , zuiM )
after RR rotation are both on the incident beam I 0 . And the point Pui′ ( xuiU , yuiU , zuiU ) is also on
the plane M 0 . According to the equations of the incident beam I 0 and the plane M 0 , the
coordinate value of the incident point Pui′ in {U} can be derived as
 U 2 D L
 xui = [( H + H1 cos θ )γ + Bα + ( + w) + (1 + α )]
 2 2 2
 U 2 D L
 yui = − [( H + H1 cos θ )γ + Bα + ( + w) + (−1 + α )] (8)
 2 2 2
 U D
 zui = H1 + B β − ( 2 + w)γ

where L is the hypotenuse length of the right-angle prism.

In {U}, the direction vector of the incident beam I ui after RR rotation is
2 2
I ui = M
RU I 0 = [ (−α − 1), (α − 1), − β ]T (9)
2 2
M
Where RU is the rotational matrix for the transformation of {M} to {U}, and it can be
obtained by inversing the matrix U RM .
According to the refraction law, the direction vector of the beam I1 , which the incident
beam I ui enters into the upper right-angle prism, can be gotten by
2 −α 2 α −β T
I1 = [ ( − 1), ( − 1), ] (10)
2 n 2 n n
where n is the refractive index of RR’s material and the refractive index of air is taken as 1.
The normal vectors to the right-angle reflection planes M 1 and M 2 of the upper
right-angle prism are N M 1 = [0 1 0]T and N M 2 = [1 0 0]T , respectively. The functionary
matrix of the reflection plane can be given by [22]
 1 − 2 N 2U −2 N xU N yU −2 N xU N zU 
 x

M =  −2 N xU N yU 1 − 2 N y2U −2 N yU N zU  (11)
 
 −2 N xU N zU −2 N yU N zU 1 − 2 N zU 
2

Assuming that the beam I1 incidents onto M 1 at the point P1 . After being reflected by
M 1 , the beam I1 becomes the beam I 2 . The beam I 2 incidents onto M 2 at the point P2 .
And then after being reflected by M 2 , the beam I 2 becomes the beam I 3 . The beam I 3
incidents onto M 0 at the point Puo′ ( xuo
U U
, yuo U
, zuo ). According to the refraction law, the
direction vector of the emergent beam I uo can be gotten by
2 2
I uo = [ (α + 1), (−α + 1), β ]T (12)
2 2
Using the transformation matrix U TM , the coordinate value of the emergent point Puo′′ ( xuoM ,
yuoM , zuoM ) in {M} can be gotten by
 M β
 xuo = H + H1 cos θ − ( D + 2w)γ − n L

 M D α
 yuo = 2( H + H1 cos θ )γ + 2 Bα + ( + w) + L(α − ) (13)
 2 n
 M α D
 zuo = −( H + H1 cos θ ) β − n L − H1θ − B + ( 2 + w)α

In {M}, the direction vector of the emergent beam I 3R is expressed as
I 3R = U RM I uo = [−θ − 2β , 0, − 1]T (14)

Using similar analysis method for the down right-angle prism, the coordinate value of the
emergent point Pdo′′ and the direction vector of the emergent beam I 7R with respect to the
incident beam I 4 in {M} can be gotten by
 M β
 xdo = H − H 2 cos θ − ( D + 2 w)γ − n L

 M D α
 ydo = 2( H − H 2 cos θ )γ + 2 Bα + ( + w) + L(α − ) (15)
 2 n
 M α D
 zdo = −( H − H 2 cos θ ) β − n L − H 2θ − B + ( 2 + w)α

I 7R = D RM I do = [θ − 2β , 0, − 1]T (16)
By comparing Eq. (4) with Eq. (13) and Eq. (5) with Eq. (15) before and after RR rotation,
respectively, the relationship between the coordinate changes of the emergent points on the
upper and down right-angle prisms (URP and DRP) and the rotational errors can be expressed
as
 M β
Δxuo = −( D + 2 w)γ − n L

 M α
URP : Δyuo = 2( H + H1 cos θ )γ + 2 Bα + L(α − ) (17)
 n
 M α D
Δzuo = −( H + H1 cos θ ) β − n L + ( 2 + w)α

 M β
Δxdo = −( D + 2 w)γ − L
n

 M α
DRP : Δydo = 2( H − H 2 cos θ )γ + 2 Bα + L(α − ) (18)
 n
 M α D
Δzdo = −( H − H 2 cos θ ) β − L+( + w)α
 n 2
From Eq. (14) and Eq. (16), by comparing to the direction vectors [θ , 0,1]T and
[−θ , 0,1]T of the emergent beams with respect to the incident beams I 0 and I 4 before RR
rotation, the emergent beams I 3R and I 7R only rotate the angle of 2 β around the y axis after
RR rotation. Thus, due to the angle changes of the emergent beams, when higher-order small
quantities are neglected, the spot deviations on the interface of WP can be gotten by
URP : Δxup = ( s0 + s + zuo
M
) tan(θ + 2 β ) − ( s0 + s + zuo ) tan θ ≈ 2( s0 + s − B ) β (19)
DRP : Δxdn = ( s0 + s + zdo ) tan θ − ( s0 + s + zdo

M
) tan(θ − 2 β ) ≈ 2( s0 + s − B) β (20)
When RR produces translational displacements without rotational errors at the measured
position, the vertical straightness error and the straightness error’s position do not affect the
spot deviation on two QDs and the horizontal straightness error will generate 2w spot deviation
on two QDs. When RR produces translational displacements and rotational errors at the
measured position, the spot deviations on two QDs relative to the initial position can be
expressed as
 α
ΔxQD1 = −Δyuo − 2 w = −2( H + H1 cos θ )γ − 2 Bα − L(α − n ) − 2w
M
 (21)
Δy = Δx M − Δx − 2s β = −( D + 2w)γ − β L − 2( s + s − B + s ) β
 QD1 uo up QW 1
n
0 QW 1
 α
ΔxQD 2 = Δydo + 2w = 2( H − H 2 cos θ )γ + 2 Bα + L(α − n ) + 2 w
M
 (22)
Δy β
= Δx M
− Δx − 2 s β = − ( D + 2 w)γ − L − 2( s + s − B + s ) β
 QD 2 do dn QW 2
n
0 QW 2
where sQW 1 is the distance between QD1 and WP, sQW 2 is the distance between QD2 and WP,
and 2w is the spot deviation on the horizontal direction of two QDs caused by the horizontal
straightness error.
According to Eqs. (21) and (22), the roll error γ and the horizontal straightness error w can
be gotten by
ΔxQD1 + ΔxQD 2 ΔxQD1 + ΔxQD 2
γ= =− (23)
−2( H1 + H 2 ) cos θ 2( s0 + s − B ) sin 2θ
ΔxQD 2 − ΔxQD1 γ ( H 2 − H1 ) cos θ L α

w= + − H γ − Bα − (α − )
4 2 2 n
(24)
ΔxQD 2 − ΔxQD1 L α
≈ − H γ − Bα − (α − )
4 2 n
In summary, combining the measurement of the vertical straightness error Δh and the
straightness error’s position s by using LIMU, the expressions of six degrees of freedom error
parameters of the moving stage can be gotten by
 ΔxPSD
α = 2 f

 ΔyPSD
β =
 2f
 ΔxQD1 + ΔxQD 2
γ = −
 2( s0 + s − B ) sin 2θ
 (25)
 ΔxQD 2 − ΔxQD1 L α
w = − H γ − Bα − (α − )
 4 2 n
 L1 − L2
Δh = 2sin θ

 L1 + L2
 s = 2 cos θ
4. Error compensation
From the last two formulas in Eq. (25), it is known that the accurate measurement of the vertical
straightness error and its position depends on the accuracy of the measurement of L1 and L2
because the other four motion errors, especially the rotational errors, of the moving stage will
deteriorate the measurement value of L1 and L2. So it is important to find out the functional
relationship between the motion errors and the value of L1 and L2 in order to compensate the
measuring data and to improve the accuracy of the vertical straightness error and its position.
x
D L
w
z
2w
y
Fig. 6. The influence of the horizontal straightness error on L1 and L2.
The traveling optical paths L1 and L2 of the two emergent beams from WP during
measurement can be divided into two parts outside and inside RR. For influence of the
horizontal straightness error w, as shown in Fig. 6, the optical paths outside and inside RR do
not change when this error occurs. According to the geometrical relationship, the optical paths
inside RR can be derived as
Lin = nL (26)
For the three rotational errors, the changes of L1 and L2 inside RR are analyzed firstly. As
shown in the Fig. 5, for example, consider the upper right-angle prism, the angle formed
between each of the three direction vectors I1 , I 2 and I 3 and the plane ou′′xu′′ yu′′ can be
derived as
−β
β ' = β1′ = β 2′ = β3′ = arc sin( ) (27)
n
where β1′ , β 2′ and β 3′ are the angles between the three vectors I1 , I 2 and I 3 and the
plane ou′′xu′′ yu′′ , respectively.
The three vectors I1 , I 2 and I 3 are projected onto the plane ou′′xu′′ yu′′ shown in Fig. 7.
Assuming that the yaw of Lin1′ is α ′ . According to the geometrical relationship, the optical
path L1 inside URP can be derived as
Lin1′ + Lin 2′ + Lin3′ nL
L1′in = = (28)
cos β ' cos β ′ cos α ′
From the direction vector of I1 , cos α ′ is expressed by
α
cos α ′ = 1 − ( ) 2 (29)
n
So L1′in becomes
nL
L1′in = ≈ nL (30)
n −β2
2
n2 + α 2
ou′′
Lin2′
α′
Lin3′
Lin1′
xu′′ yu′′
Fig. 7. The projection of the three vectors onto the plane ou′′xu′′ yu′′ .
Similarly, the optical path L2 inside DRP can be gotten by

L 2′in ≈ nL (31)
Comparing Eqs. (30) and (31) with Eq. (26), the changes of the optical paths L1 and L2
inside RR can be neglected when the three rotational errors are small.
For the optical paths L1 and L2 outside RR, the emergent beams I 3R and I 7R only rotate the
angle of 2 β around the y axis after RR rotation relative to before RR rotation and have no
change in the x axis and the z axis. In other words, only the pitch error will deteriorate the
optical paths L1 and L2 outside RR. Figure 8 shows the influence of the pitch error on the optical
paths L1 and L2 outside RR.
RR
L1 f1 beam
D
WP D′
2β
C
H1
θ B Measuring baseline
P
H2
P1 2β
β
F′ F
E
L2 f2 beam
s0 s
Fig. 8. Schematic of the influence of the pitch error on the optical paths L1 and L2 outside RR.
When the moving stage produce pitch error, the variations of the optical paths L1 and L2
outside RR can be derived as
α
ΔL1′out = ( PD′ + CP1 ) − 2 PD = −2( H + H1 ) β − L (32)
n
α
ΔL 2′out = ( PF ′ + EP1 ) − 2 PF = −2( H − H 2 ) β −
L (33)
n
In the actual measurement, the displacements acquired by processing the interference
signals on the photodetectors (D1 and D2) are the displacement deviations of URP and DRP at
the moving position relative to the initial position, namely L1′ and L2′ . Because of the
rotational errors, the measuring data of L1′ and L2′ are deteriorated. According to the analysis
above, they should be compensated as follows
2 L1′ − (ΔL1in′ + ΔL1′out ) α
L1 = = L1′ − ( H + H1 ) β − L (34)
2 2n
2 L'2 − (ΔL 2in' + ΔL 2out

'
) α
L2 = = L'2 − ( H − H 2 ) β − L (35)
2 2n
Substituting Eqs. (34) and (35) into the last two formulas in Eq. (25), the compensated
expressions of the vertical straightness error and its position are given by
L1 − L2 L1′ − L2′
Δh = = − ( s0 + s − B ) β
2sin θ 2sin θ (36)
= Δh′ − ( s0 + s − B ) β
L1 + L2 L1′ + L2′ α
s= = + Δhβ − H β − L
2 cos θ 2 cos θ 2n
α
= s ′ + Δhβ − H β − L (37)
2n
α
≈ s' − H β − L
2n
where Δh′ and s ′ are the measuring data of the vertical straightness error and its position
before compensation.
5. Experiments and results
In order to verify the feasibility of the proposed straightness interferometer system for
simultaneous measurement of six degrees of freedom parameters and the proposed
compensation of the vertical straightness error and its position, an experimental setup was
constructed as shown in Fig. 9. The laser source is a dual-frequency stabilized He-Ne laser
(5517A, Agilent Co., USA) which emits a pair of beams with the frequency difference of 1.7
MHz and the wavelength of λ = 632.99137 nm. RR and WP with a divergent angle of 1.5° are a
short range straightness measurement kit (A-8003-0443, Renishaw Co., UK). The
two-dimensional PSD is a position sensitive detector (PDP90A, Thorlabs Co., USA) with the
resolution of 0.675 μm. And the two QDs are two quadrant detectors (Spoton u-type, Duma
Optronics Ltd., Israel) with the resolution of 0.75 μm and the accuracy of ± 1 μm. The measured
stage is a precision linear stage (M-531.DD, Physik Instrumente Co., Germany) with the travel
range of 300 mm, the straightness per 100 mm of 1 µm, the displacement resolution of 0.1 µm
and the pitch/yaw of ± 50 µrad ( ± 10.31arcsec). And a laser interferometer system (XL80,
Renishaw Co., UK) was used to test the same stage for comparison. The straightness resolution
is 0.01μm while the accuracy is ± 0.005A ± 0.5 ± 0.15M2μm, the angular measurement
resolution is 0.1μm/m while the accuracy is ± 0.002A ± 0.5 ± 0.1M μm/m and the linear
measurement resolution is 0.001μm while the accuracy is ± 0.5 ppm of the Renishaw
interferometer where A is the straightness measuring data and M is the measuring distance.
Fig. 9. The experimental setup.
5.1 Measurement experiment of yaw and pitch errors

In this experiment, a CL with the focal length of 190 mm was used, the laser beam with
diameter of 3 mm was adjusted to project on the center of PSD at one end of the M-531.DD
stage as the initial position, RR and the measuring angle reflector of Renishaw interferometer
were mounted on the moving element of the stage. During the experiments, the element moved
to the other end of the stage with a step displacement of 5mm and a velocity of 1 mm/sec, the
yaw of the stage and the pitch of the stage were measured simultaneously with the proposed
system and the Renishaw interferometer, respectively. The experimental results are shown in
Fig. 10. It shows that the results with the proposed system are consistent with those obtained
from the Renishaw interferometer. The deviations are the differences between the measurement
results with the proposed system and the Renishaw interferometer. For the yaw errors, the
maximum deviation is 0.842 arcsec while the standard deviation is 0.352 arcsec. For the pitch
errors, the maximum deviation is 1.586 arcsec and the standard deviation is 0.568 arcsec.
Fig. 10. Experimental results of measuring yaw and pitch errors.
5.2 Measurement experiment of roll error

In this experiment, an electronic level (WL11, AVIC Qianshao Precision Machinery Co.,
China) with the resolution of 0.2 arcsec was used for comparison. At the beginning of the
experiment, the laser beam was adjusted to project on the centers of two QDs at one end of the
M-531.DD stage, RR and the WL11 level were mounted on the moving element of the stage.
During the measurement, the element moved to the other end of the stage with a step
displacement of 5 mm, the roll of the stage were determined simultaneously by the proposed
system and the WL11 level. The experimental results are shown in Fig. 11. It shows that the
results with the proposed system and the WL11 level are in basic agreement. The deviations are
the differences between the measurement results with the proposed system and the WL11 level.
The maximum deviation of roll error between the proposed system and the WL11 level is 2.692
arcsec while the standard deviation is −0.846 arcsec.
Fig. 11. Experimental result of measuring roll error.
5.3 Measurement experiment of horizontal straightness error

In this experiment, the laser beam was adjusted to project on the centers of PSD and QDs at one
end of the M-531.DD stage, RR and the measuring straightness reflector of Renishaw
interferometer were mounted on the moving element of the stage. The element moved to the
other end of the stage with a step displacement of 5 mm, the yaw, pitch and roll of the stage
were measured simultaneously with the proposed system, and then substituting the
measurement results of the rotational errors into the fourth formula in Eq. (25) can obtain the
horizontal straightness errors. At same time, the Renishaw straightness interferometer also
measured the horizontal straightness errors of the stage. Using the least square method, the
experimental results are shown in Fig. 12. It shows that the results with the proposed system are
consistent with those obtained from the Renishaw interferometer. The horizontal straightness
obtained with the proposed system is 8.55 µm while that obtained with the Renishaw
interferometer is 8.26 µm. The deviations are the differences between the measurement results
with the proposed system and the Renishaw interferometer. The maximum deviation of the
horizontal straightness error is 1.869 µm while the standard deviation is 0.735 µm.
Fig. 12. Experimental result of measuring horizontal straightness error.
5.4 Measurement and compensation experiments of vertical straightness error

In order to verify the effectiveness of the compensation of the vertical straightness error
proposed in section 4, the comparison and compensation experiments were performed.
Firstly, the comparison experiment of measuring vertical straightness error was conducted
as follows: RR and the straightness reflector of Renishaw interferometer were mounted on the
moving element of the stage; the vertical straightness error was measured simultaneously with
the proposed system and the Renishaw interferometer when the stage was moving with a step
displacement of 5 mm. The experimental results are shown in Fig. 13. The deviations are the
differences between the measurement results with the proposed system and the Renishaw
interferometer. The maximum deviation of the vertical straightness error is 5.56 µm while the
standard deviation is 2.51 µm. The vertical straightness obtained with the proposed system is
41.85 µm while that obtained with the Renishaw interferometer is 44.57 µm. This indicates that
the results with the proposed system and the Renishaw interferometer are in basic agreement.
However, these results seriously deviate from the parameter of straightness given in the
datasheet of the stage because RR and the straightness reflector of Renishaw interferometer
were both affected by the rotational errors of the stage. Therefore, in order to eliminate the
influence of the rotational errors when the measuring reflector is mounted on the moving
element, it is necessary to compensate the measurement result to reveal the true value of
straightness of the measured stage (guideway).
Fig. 13. Experimental result of measuring vertical straightness error without compensation.
Secondly, the compensation experiment of measuring vertical straightness error was

conducted as follows: RR and the Wollaston prism of Renishaw interferometer were mounted
on the moving element of the stage, this arrangement of Renishaw straightness interferometer is
that considering Wollaston prism as measuring mirror can minimize the influence of the
rotational errors; the vertical straightness error was measured simultaneously with the proposed
system and the Renishaw interferometer. The experimental results are shown in Fig. 14(a). The
vertical straightness obtained with the proposed system is 43.62 µm before compensation while
that obtained with the Renishaw interferometer is 7.26 µm. To eliminate the influence of the
rotational errors, substituting the measurement data of the pitch of the stage determined
simultaneously by the proposed system into Eq. (36), the compensated result is shown in Fig.
14(b). The vertical straightness obtained with the proposed system is 9.85 µm after
compensation. The maximum deviation of the vertical straightness error is 2.075 µm while the
standard deviation is 0.934 µm. This demonstrated the effectiveness of the proposed
compensation method of straightness error.
Fig. 14. Experimental result of measuring vertical straightness error with compensation.
5.5 Measurement and compensation experiments of straightness error’s position
In order to verify the effectiveness of the compensation of straightness error’s position
proposed in section 4, the comparison and compensation experiments were performed.
In this experiment, RR and the measuring displacement reflector of Renishaw
interferometer were mounted on the moving element of the stage; the displacement
(straightness error’s position) of the stage was measured simultaneously with the proposed
system and the Renishaw interferometer when the stage was moving. The experimental results
are shown in Fig. 15(a). It shows that the results with the proposed system and the Renishaw
interferometer are in agreement. The maximum error between the displacements obtained by
the proposed system and those of the stage is 10.23 µm and the standard deviation is 3.67 µm.
Meanwhile, the maximum error between the displacements obtained by the Renishaw
interferometer and those of the stage is 10.09 µm and the standard deviation is 3.97 µm.
However, these results seriously deviate from the unidirectional repeatability of ± 0.1µm given
in the datasheet of the stage. This is because of the influence of the rotational errors of the stage.
Using the compensation method mentioned in Eq. (37), the compensated result is shown in Fig.
15(b). After compensation, the maximum error is 0.71 µm while the standard deviation is 0.33
µm obtained with the proposed system. This demonstrated the effectiveness of the proposed
compensation method of straightness error’s position.
Fig. 15. Experimental result of measuring straightness error’s position.
5.6 Simultaneous measurement and repeatability experiments

In order to verify the effectiveness of the proposed system for simultaneous measurement of six
degrees of freedom error parameters, three measurements were performed by testing the stage.
The experimental results are shown in Fig. 16 and Table 1. Figures 16(a)–16(f) and Table 1
show a good repeatability in simultaneously measuring yaw, pitch, roll, horizontal straightness,
vertical straightness and position with the proposed system.
Fig. 16. Simultaneous measurement and repeatability experimental results.
Table 1. Repeatability results of simultaneously measuring six degrees of freedom error
parameters
Horizontal Vertical
Yaw Pitch Roll Displacement
Parameters straightness straightness
(arcsec) (arcsec) (arcsec) (µm)
(µm) (µm)
Std. dev. of 1st 2.50 9.00 3.39 2.02 2.52 0.33
Std. dev. of 2nd 2.23 9.33 3.44 2.27 2.43 0.29
Std. dev. of 3rd 2.34 9.16 3.29 1.77 2.64 0.31
6. Discussion
6.1 Analysis of the measurement resolution and the stability of the proposed system
According to the measurement principle and optical setup of the proposed system, the
resolution and stability are mainly affected by the factors such as the stability of laser source,
the quality of spots on PSD and QDs, the interference signals on photodetectors, the nonlinear
error of polarization state, the fluctuation of refractive index of air and so on.
From Eqs. (25), (36) and (37), the uncertainty of the pitch, yaw, roll, horizontal straightness,
vertical straightness and straightness error’s position can be derived as follows:
 δΔxPSD
δα = 2 f

 δΔyPSD
δβ =
 2f
 δΔxQD1 δΔxQD 2 (ΔxQD 2 + ΔxQD 2 )δΔs 2
δγ = ( )2 + ( )2 + [ ]
 2( s0 + s − B ) sin 2θ 2( s0 + s − B ) sin 2θ 2( s0 + s − B) 2 sin 2θ
 (38)
 δΔxQD1 2 δΔxQD1 2 L 1
δ w = ( ) +( ) + ( H δγ ) + [(B− + )δα ]
2 2
 4 4 2 n
 δ L1 2 δ L2 2
δΔh = ( ) +( ) + [( s0 + s − B)δβ ]2 + ( βδ s) 2
 2sin θ 2sin θ
 δ L1 2 δ L2 2 L
δ s = ( ) +( ) + ( H δβ ) 2 + ( δα ) 2
 2 cos θ 2 cos θ 2n
where δΔxPSD and δΔyPSD are the uncertainties of ΔxPSD and ΔyPSD of the PSD,
respectively. δΔxQD1 and δΔxQD 2 are the uncertainties of ΔxQD1 and ΔxQD 2 of two QDs,
respectively. δΔs is the uncertainty of s. δ L1 and δ L2 are the uncertainties of L1 and L2 ,
respectively.
When δΔxPSD = 0.675 μm, δΔyPSD = 0.675 μm, f = 190 mm, δΔxQD1 = 0.75 μm,
δΔxQD 2 = 0.75μm, s0 = 1000mm, B = 50mm, θ = 0.75°, H = 100mm, L = 30mm, n =
1.516, s = 150mm, δ L1 = 30nm, δ L2 = 30nm, the results of the uncertainty of the proposed
system is shown in Table 2. Compared with Table 1, it is consistent with the measurement
results obtained in the above experiments.
Table 2. Uncertainty results of six degrees of freedom error parameters
Yaw Pitch Roll Horizontal straightness Vertical straightness Displacement

Parameter
(arcsec) (arcsec) (arcsec) (µm) (µm) (µm)
uncertainty 0.366 0.366 3.79 1.86 2.62 0.165
6.2 Discussion of influence of the polarization state change caused by right-angle prism
The measurement of the vertical straightness error and its position in the proposed system is
based on heterodyne interferometry which involves nonlinear periodic error problems. Because
the nonlinear periodic errors about heterodyne interferometer have been discussed in many
other research works [23–26], the same problems about these nonlinear errors are not discussed
here. The nonlinear error induced by the polarization state change caused by right-angle prism
is analyzed as follows.
When a linearly polarized beam incidents on to a right-angle prism, the emergent beam
changes to a elliptically polarized beam. In the proposed system, the polarization state changes
of the emergent beams f1′ and f 2′ from RR are shown in Fig. 17. The y components of the
emergent beams will transmit PBS1 to generate the first measurement signal with the beam f 2
on D1 and the x components of the emergent beams will be reflected by PBS1 to generate the
second measurement signal with the beam f1 on D2 shown in Fig. 1.
Fig. 17. Schematic of the polarization state of the emergent beams from RR.
As an example, the nonlinear error of the first measurement signal is analyzed as follows.
The electric fields of the beam f 2 and the y components of the emergent beams f1′ and f 2′
from RR can be expressed as
Ex = E f2 cos (2π f 2 t + φ0f2 ) (39)
E y = sin ε1 ⋅ Exf′1′ cos (2π f1 t + φ1 ) + cos ε1 ⋅ E yf1′′ cos (2π f1 t + φ1 + δ1 )

(40)
+ cos ε 2 ⋅ Exf′2′ cos (2π f 2 t + φ2 ) + sin ε 2 ⋅ E yf′2′ cos (2π f 2 t + φ2 + δ 2 )
where E f2 is the amplitude of electric field of the beam f 2 , Exf′1′ , E yf1′′ , Exf′2′ , E yf′2′ are the
amplitudes of electric fields of the beams f1′ and f 2′ in coordinate frame of x′ -o- y ′ , ε1
and ε 2 are the angles between the y axis and the major axis of each ellipse, δ1 and δ 2 are
the phase delays between the major and minor axes of each ellipse.
Then the measurement signal is expressed as
1
I= cos ε1 E f2 E yf1′′ cos (Δω t + φ1 -φ0f2 + δ1 ) + sin ε1 E f2 Exf′1′ cos (Δω t + φ1 -φ0f2 )
2
+ sin ε1 cos ε 2 Exf′1′ Exf′2′ cos (Δω t + φ1 − φ2 )
+ sin ε1 sin ε 2 Exf′1′ E yf′2′ cos (Δω t + φ1 − φ2 − δ 2 ) (41)
+ cos ε1 cos ε 2 E yf1′′ Exf′2′ cos (Δω t + φ1 − φ2 + δ1 )
+ cos ε1 sin ε 2 E yf1′′ E yf′2′ cos (Δω t + φ1 − φ2 + δ1 -δ 2 ) 
where Δω = 2π ( f1 - f 2 ) . the first term represents the nominal beat signal and the remaining
five terms are error sources, which are all influenced by the polarization state change caused by
right-angle prism.
Firstly, using the Zemax to simulate the influence of the transitional errors of RR on the
change of the polarization state, the simulation result shows that the main error source results
from the roll error of RR. Then, according to Eq. (41), a simulation to determine the influence
of the polarization state change on the measurement signal is shown in Fig. 18. The curve with
γ = 0° represents the case without roll error. When RR has roll errors of 0.5° and 1°, the phase
errors compared with the measurement signal without roll error are 0.0148° and 0.0302°,
respectively. That is, the corresponding displacement errors are 0.03nm and 0.05nm,
respectively. Thus, the influence of the polarization state change caused by right-angle prism
can be neglected because the rotational error of precision stage or guideway is below several
hundreds arcsec.
Fig. 18. Simulation of the influence of the polarization state change on the measurement signal.
7. Conclusion
In this paper, a laser straightness interferometer system with rotational error compensation and
simultaneous measurement of six degrees of freedom error parameters is proposed. The optical
layout of this system is described. The principle of the simultaneous measurement of six
degrees of freedom parameters of a linear stage including three rotational parameters of the
yaw, pitch and roll errors and three linear parameters of the horizontal straightness error, the
vertical straightness error and the straightness error’s position is depicted and analyzed in
detail. Meanwhile, to solve the influence of the rotational errors of measuring reflector on the
measurement of straightness error and its position in laser straightness interferometer, the
compensation methods for straightness error and its position are presented. In order to verify
the feasibility of the proposed system, a serious of measurement and compensation experiments
were done. Firstly, the separate measurement experiments of the yaw, the pitch, the roll, the
horizontal straightness error, the vertical straightness error and the straightness error’s position
of a precision linear stage were performed simultaneously with the proposed system and a
commercial interferometer for comparison (the roll comparison with an electric level). These
experiments show that the results with the proposed system are consistent with those obtained
from the comparison interferometer (or the electric level). Secondly, the compensation
experiments of the influence of rotational errors of the measured object on vertical straightness
error and its position show the effectiveness of the presented compensation method. Finally, the
simultaneous measurement and repeatability experiments indicate a good repeatability in
simultaneously measuring six degrees of freedom parameters of the yaw, pitch, roll, horizontal
straightness, vertical straightness and position with the proposed system. All these demonstrate
that the proposed system could be applied in the field of performance testing and calibration of
precision stages and guideways.
Acknowledgment
This work was supported in part by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC)
under grants No.51375461, No.51475435 and No.51205365, the Program for Changjiang
Scholars and Innovative Research Team in University (PCSIRT) under grant No. IRT13097
and the 521 talents training program of Zhejiang Sci-Tech University.

Oe 23 7 9052

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Oe 23 7 9052

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Laser straightness interferometer system with

rotational error compensation and simultaneous

Abstract: A laser straightness interferometer system with rotational error

References and links

Fig. 1. Schematic of the laser straightness interferometer system with simultaneous

Fig. 2. Schematic of six degrees of freedom motion errors of a moving stage.

where U TM can be decomposed into a 3 × 3 rotational matrix U

[ xuiM , yuiM , zuiM ,1]T = U TM [ xuiU , yuiU , zuiU ,1]T (7)

where L is the hypotenuse length of the right-angle prism.

I 3R = U RM I uo = [−θ − 2β , 0, − 1]T (14)

DRP : Δxdn = ( s0 + s + zdo ) tan θ − ( s0 + s + zdo

ΔxQD 2 − ΔxQD1 γ ( H 2 − H1 ) cos θ L α

Fig. 6. The influence of the horizontal straightness error on L1 and L2.

Similarly, the optical path L2 inside DRP can be gotten by

2 L'2 − (ΔL 2in' + ΔL 2out

Fig. 9. The experimental setup.

5.1 Measurement experiment of yaw and pitch errors

Fig. 10. Experimental results of measuring yaw and pitch errors.

5.2 Measurement experiment of roll error

Fig. 11. Experimental result of measuring roll error.

5.3 Measurement experiment of horizontal straightness error

Fig. 12. Experimental result of measuring horizontal straightness error.

5.4 Measurement and compensation experiments of vertical straightness error

Secondly, the compensation experiment of measuring vertical straightness error was

Fig. 15. Experimental result of measuring straightness error’s position.

5.6 Simultaneous measurement and repeatability experiments

Yaw Pitch Roll Horizontal straightness Vertical straightness Displacement

E y = sin ε1 ⋅ Exf′1′ cos (2π f1 t + φ1 ) + cos ε1 ⋅ E yf1′′ cos (2π f1 t + φ1 + δ1 )

You might also like