Measurement 156 (2020) 107568

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Measurement
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/measurement

Measurement hysteresis of touch-trigger probes for CNC machine tools

Adam Woźniak ⇑, Katarzyna Me˛czyńska
Warsaw University of Technology, Institute of Metrology and Biomedical Engineering, ul. Św. A. Boboli 8, 02-525 Warsaw, Poland

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Touch-trigger probes for CNC machine tools are widely used for workpiece setup and, potentially, for
Received 10 October 2019 dimensional inspection. Up to now, the probe measurement hysteresis has not been considered. In this
Received in revised form 27 December 2019 paper, the hysteresis phenomenon is analysed using a specially designed set-up and parameters are pro-
Accepted 2 January 2020
posed for its description and quantification. The new apparatus is based on an actuated hollow master
Available online 3 February 2020
artefact which does not require the machine axes to move. Exemplary results for different probe tech-
nologies are presented.
Keywords:
Ó 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Machine tool
Touch-trigger probe
On-machine measurement

1. Introduction
Currently, the machining process using CNC machines takes
place quickly and almost without human intervention. This is pos-
sible thanks to having fully automated processing and the use of
measuring probes. These probes are already widely used to deter-
mine the position and alignment of the components to be cut
within the working space of the machine tool. The measuring
probes also serve to control the dimensions of the workpiece either
during processing or after its completion, which reduces the non-
productive time and scrap and increases productivity [1]. Also,
post-process measurements enable verification of component con-
formance prior to its removal from the machine tool. The measur-
ing probes can also be used to determine the volumetric errors
from the CNC machine tools [2–8].
These and other applications have caused the probes for geomet-
rical measurements to be the basic instrumentation for CNC
machine tools. Recently, there has been a growing interest in quick
checking systems of the general state of the machine tools [9–12].
These studies do not really deal with probes. However, it is clear that
the performance of the probe used in machine tooling affects the
accuracy of the measurements and, consequently, the machine tool
performance, which directly affects the precision of the produced
parts.
1.1. Transducers of touch-trigger probes
The simplest and most popular measurement probes are the
touch-trigger kinematic probes. A scheme of the transducer of such
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: wozniaka@mchtr.pw.edu.pl (A. Woźniak).
a probe is shown in Fig. 1a. For this type of probe, the stylus is
attached to a three-arm spring-loaded element where each arm
has a pair of balls. Each ball pair forms a break in the electrical
circuit. When the stylus is in the neutral (resting) position, the
three-armed element closes the electrical circuit. At the moment
the stylus is tilted together with the movable part of the trans-
ducer, the electric circuit is interrupted. The disadvantage of kine-
matic probes is the triangular characteristic of the errors (lobing)
associated with the three-point transducer. Lobing is caused by
variations in the bending of the stylus and movement of the probe
mechanism before the probe registers contact with a surface.
The second group of measurement probes used in CNC machine
tools are strain gauge probes that increase the accuracy. To elimi-
nate the lobing error, a strain gauge sensor (SGS) is used at a much
higher sensitivity than the classic kinematic transducer. In strain
gauges, the triggering force acting on the stylus tip during the mea-
surement is transferred by a three-arm kinematic mechanism with
supports that are embedded in the strain gauge transducer
(Fig. 1b). Three balls are also supported and embedded in the trans-
ducer, and the arms of the kinematic mechanism cooperate with
them, which form the shape of a prism. An unequally loaded strain
gauge then generates a measurement signal.
Measurement signals are generated when the resistances of the
strain gauges in the transducer system change under the influence
of stresses that appear when the probe tip contacts the surface to
be measured. Due to the high sensitivity of the strain gauge trans-
ducer, a trigger signal is generated at forces that are much lower
than those required to trigger kinematic probes. The strain gauges
are arranged to sense all the triggering forces and are thus charac-
terized with very small systematic errors. The error characteristics
of these probes are quasi-circular, which can be easily compen-
sated for.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2020.107568
0263-2241/Ó 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
2 A. Woźniak, K. Me˛czyńska / Measurement 156 (2020) 107568
a) b)
SGS
Fig. 1. (a) Scheme of 3-point kinematic transducer and (b) scheme of a strain gauge
transducer. SGS – strain gauge sensor.
Noting the essential differences in the construction of the trans-
ducers of kinematic and strain gauge probes, it is also clearly noted
that their common feature is the three-arm kinematic mechanism.
It is important for strain gauge probes to protect the transducer
against damage. Operation of a strain gauge transducer consists
of slight elastic deformations. Due to the presence of the kinematic
unit, the tip moves safely (overtravel), which is necessary to stop
the CNC machine after initially touching the probe tip with the sur-
face to be measured.
1.2. Errors of touch-trigger probes
A parameter called pre-travel w can be used to describe the
errors of the touch-trigger probes. This parameter is very useful
when modelling probe errors [13]. Its disadvantage, however, is
that it references the neutral position of the probe tip (at rest -
when the tip of the probe is not in contact with the surface to be
measured). The problem is that this position is not fixed or cali-
brated beforehand. However, for each working direction of the
probe, it is possible to determine an average triggering point. The
best-fit element may be calculated based on the triggering points
of all the working directions of the probe using the least squares
sum method. The distance between the centre of an element and
the triggering point is defined as the triggering radius r. The trig-
gering radius variation VR is defined as the difference between
the maximum and the minimum average triggering radius values
for all the investigated directions. Variations in the triggering
radius correspond to deviations of the shape, which would be mea-
sured on the reference sphere with the given probe if the probe
errors were the only source of measurement error. The parameter
values of similar meaning are also given by the probe manufactur-
ers in the specifications under the name ‘‘3D lobing in X, Y, Z” for
three-axis measurements or ‘‘2D lobing in X, Y” for planar measure-
ments. The parameters listed are of a systematic nature. Random
errors can be determined using the unidirectional repeatability
parameter UDR defined as the double standard deviation of the
triggering radius for a given measurement direction.
Some hysteresis tests were conducted by [14] for typical probes
of concern used in coordinate measuring machines. However,
opposite to probes for coordinate measuring machines (which per-
formance are well-known [15–17]) and which usually work in a
laboratory environment, probes for CNC machine tools work in a
harsh, production environment, which means that both the con-
struction and parameters can be completely different.
Users of machine tooling equipped with measuring probes are
not familiar with the occurrence of the hysteresis phenomenon
during measurements and, consequently, do not consider this to
be a source of errors when planning the measurement strategy of
a given component.
This article presents a theoretical analysis of the hysteresis phe-
nomenon and describes the results of experimental investigations
for the occurrence of the hysteresis and its share in the total errors
of touch-trigger probes used in CNC machine tools.
2. Phenomenon of hysteresis of touch-trigger probes
Hysteresis of touch-trigger probes occurs when there is a
change in the measurement direction. This hysteresis is mainly
of a mechanical nature and is the result of frictional forces in the
kinematic pairs in the form of sockets and mating arms from the
movable parts of the electromechanical transducer in the measur-
ing probe. This type of transducer appears as a basic model in clas-
sic kinematic probes. However, in the present case, the moment of
frictional in the kinematic pairs is overcome during the measure-
ment and the measurement hysteresis is practically negligible.
On the other hand, the operation of strain gauge probes is based
on elastic deformations. Therefore, there should be no resistance
to movement due to friction. However, the presence of a kinematic
transducer is the main reason for the occurrence of hysteresis as
the basic component of errors of this type of probes.
Therefore, the hysteresis phenomenon is considered theoreti-
cally. In Fig. 2, a section of the kinematic mechanism for the probe
is presented in the plane that contains the stylus. There are two
considered cases: when the probe is triggered from the left side
(Fig. 2a) and from the right side (Fig. 2b).
In this type of transducer, the PN neutral (resting) position of the
centre of the stylus tip is related to the repeatability of the position
of the support arms of the movable part of the kinematic
mechanism.
In this type of transducer, the neutral (resting) PN position of
the center of the needle tip is associated with the repeatability of
the position of the support arms of the movable part of the kine-
matic mechanism.
The arms have the shape of an inverted letter ‘‘V” and rest on
the supports through the embedded balls. The movement of the
probe tip during the measurement first causes a change in the load
balance of the supports, which results in a generated measurement
signal from the strain gauge sensor. During measurements on the
machine tool, inertia of the moving masses causes the tip to move
much deeper up to the PO position. While travelling this way, the
movable part of the kinematic mechanism rotates around an axis
that passes through a pair of supports (as in Fig. 2a), or around
an axis passing through one of the supports (as in Fig. 2b). Conse-
quently, this causes the remaining third arm or the other two arms
to separate from the supports. After the impact between the mea-
sured object surface and the probe tip has ended, the transducer
returns to its resting state. However, the frictional forces present
in the supports of the kinematic unit cause it to stop when the
moments reach a state of equilibrium. This occurs slightly before
the swinging arm of the kinematic unit properly seats. Therefore,
there is a new neutral position PH of the measuring tip from the
equilibrium state.
The state of equilibrium for the moments of the forces are con-
sidered in simplified form for the resting position PH1, as shown in
Fig. 2a.
Then, the moment of friction MF in the two kinematic pairs will
be counterbalanced by the force resulting from h1 compressing the
preload spring and by the inertial force of the movable part of the
kinematic mechanism FI:
 
a a v 2m
2M F ¼ ðkh1 þ F I Þ ¼ kh1 þ ; ð1Þ
2 2 2s
 A. Woźniak, K. Me˛czyńska / Measurement 156 (2020) 107568 3

a) Fs b) Fs

2MF FI FI MF
h1 h2
r a/2 a a/2 a
FF

2Fs/3 Fs/3

L L

H1 H2
PN PH1 PO PO PH2 PN

Fig. 2. Scheme of the kinematic probe transducer and its forces and friction moments acting on it after a measurement.

where a is the length of the arm, m is the mass of the movable part 3. Experimental set-up
of the kinematic mechanism together with the stylus, k is the spring
constant, v is the probing speed, and s is the travel required to reach The complete measurement system, which is composed of a
the rest position. probe, an interface, and a machine tool, can be tested based on
It is assumed that due to the symmetry of the kinematic assem- measurements of material master artefacts, such as reference
bly, the tension force of the preload spring force FS is evenly dis- spheres or ring gauges [18]. Such methods allow checking the util-
tributed into three identical reactions in three kinematic pairs. ity of a complete system to a given measurement task, but they do
Then, Eq. (1) after transformation and considering the coefficient not enable separating the probe errors from machine tool errors.
of friction f will take the form: To more precisely describe the probe errors (including hystere-
4F s f v 2 m sis), special set-ups were developed and described in [19]. Testing
h1 ¼  : ð2Þ of the probe can also take place without dismantling it from the
3ka 2ks
machine spindle because the set-up is portable and fits within
Therefore, assuming that the tilting angle of the probe mecha- the working space of the vast majority of CNC machine tools used
nism is small and the stylus has length L, we can calculate the hys- in the industry. A view of the main part of the set-up is presented
teresis H1 from the equation: in Fig. 3.
 
2Lh1 8F s f v 2 m Test set-up uses Physik Instrumente P-615.3CD NanoCube as a
H1 ¼ ¼L  : ð3Þ XYZ stage with integrated capacitive sensors. According to the
a 3ka2 ksa
manufacturer’s specifications the repeatability in X and Y is equal
In the case of when changes to the triggering direction are in the
opposite direction (Fig. 2b), analogous analysis can be performed.
Then the frictional moment MF in one kinematic pair will be
balanced by the force resulting from the h2 compression of the
preload spring FS and the inertia force of the movable part of the
kinematic mechanism FI. probe
Then, the frictional moment MF in one kinematic pair will be
counterbalanced by the force resulting from h2 compressing the
stylus
preload spring FS and the inertial force of the movable part of the
kinematic mechanism FI. The hysteresis H2 in this case is then
finally expressed by the equation: ring gauge
 
Lh2 Fsf v 2m
H2 ¼ ¼L  : ð4Þ 2D/3D piezo
a 3ka2 2ksa
positioning
The total measurement hysteresis H of the touch-trigger probes system
for CNC machine tools includes the two cases discussed and is
finally defined as:
 
Fsf v 2m
H ¼ H1 þ H2 ¼ 3L  : ð5Þ
ka2 2ksa Fig. 3. View of the main part of the set-up.
4 A. Woźniak, K. Me˛czyńska / Measurement 156 (2020) 107568

Fig. 4. Graphical interpretation of the parameters describing the errors of the touch trigger probes (a) without considering hysteresis and (b) considering hysteresis.

a) b)

Fig. 5. Characteristics of the average triggering radius for each angle of the strain gauge transducer probes for (a) OMP400 and (b) OMP600.

to ±7.5 mm and closed loop linearity not exceed 0.02%. The stage
controller communicates with a PC by National Instruments NI
USB-6259 BNC data acquisition card and the measurement is con-
trolled by a computer program developed in LabVIEW environ-
ment. The extended uncertainty (for coverage factor k = 2) of the
test set-up for measurement of triggering radius for all measure-
ment directions is equal to 0.034 mm [13].
The measuring tip of the tested probe is placed inside a ring
gauge with a radius of about a dozen micrometres larger than
the radius of the tip. After the probe is fixed (in the machine tool
spindle or outside the machine tool in a special holder), the ring
gauge is moved using a 2D piezoelectric positioning system along
different radial directions in relation to the probe axis, and its posi-
tion at the moment of probe triggering is measured. Taking into
consideration the trigger points from all directions, a circle is fit
using the least squares method. The radius of this circle is the aver-
age triggering location. The unidirectional repeatability UDR can
then be calculated as the double standard deviation of the trigger-
ing radii for a given i-th measuring direction. The triggering radius
variation VR is calculated as the difference between the largest and
smallest values of the average switching radius for the different
  rmin
measurement directions, V R ¼ rmax  . A graphical interpreta-
tion of the parameters describing the measuring errors of the probe
is shown in Fig. 4a.
To measure the hysteresis, the test is carried out in a similar
way, but in two stages. In the first stage the recorded triggering
is followed with triggering from the same direction. The recorded
points (marked with full circular markers in Fig. 4b) enable the
determination of the average triggering radius ri . In the second
stage, the recorded triggering is proceeded with an unregistered
triggering from the opposite direction.
The recorded points (marked with full square markers in
Fig. 4b) allow to measure the second average triggering radius rHi
which contains hysteresis. The hysteresis received from the exper-
iment can, therefore, be calculated as:
H ¼ r Hi  r i : ð6Þ
4. Experimental results
Fig. 5 presents results of the hysteresis test for two popular
probes, OMP400 and OMP600, with a strain gauge transducer.
 A. Woźniak, K. Me˛czyńska / Measurement 156 (2020) 107568 5

had not been used before. The OMP400 probe was previously used
during normal technological processes on a machine tool. The
probes were tested from 0 to 360° with a step of 10°. 10 measure-
ments were taken for each measuring direction.
Fig. 5 shows the individual triggering points as a function of the
measuring direction in the plane perpendicular to the probe axis.
The same point designations as Fig. 4 are assumed in this case.
The dashed line indicates the double standard deviation (2r).
The results presented refer to a test probe with a 50 mm long sty-
lus and a measuring speed of 50 mm/min. Based on the obtained
characteristics, it is clearly noted that both cases visibly show a
H VR UDR H VR UDR
measurement hysteresis, because the triggering points have been
OMP400 OMP600
shifted by approximately 1 lm for each measuring direction.
Fig. 6. Share of random (UDR) and systematic (VR) errors including hysteresis (H). Fig. 6 shows the contribution of individual errors (H hysteresis,
VR triggering radius variation, and UDR unidirectional repeatabil-
ity) in the total probe error.
For the tested OMP400 probe, the hysteresis H is equal to
approximately 0.7 lm. Its value is similar to the triggering radius
variation VR and several times greater than the average unidirec-
tional repeatability UDR. For the OMP600 probe, the hysteresis H
is equal to more than 1.3 lm and is the dominant component of
the probe errors.
Fig. 7 presents the results of the OMP400 probe hysteresis test
carried out for two measuring velocities v of 30 and 50 mm/min,
as recommended by the manufacturer, and two stylus lengths of
50 and 100 mm. The heights of the columns in the graph indicate
the average value of the hysteresis while the error bars determine
v 30 mm/min 50 mm/min 30 mm/min 50 mm/min the range of the experimental results. Additionally, the theoretical
L 50 mm 100 mm values (modelled using Eq. (5)) of the hysteresis are marked on the
graph with square markers and a dotted line. For the hysteresis cal-
Fig. 7. Comparison of the experimental and theoretical values of the probe
hysteresis for different probing speeds v and stylus lengths L. culations, the force value of FS = 5.56 N and the spring constant of
k = 1.79 N/mm were experimentally determined. The weight and
length of the arm of the kinematic mechanism were estimated to
According to the manufacturer’s specifications, in both cases be 0.02 kg and 13 mm, respectively.
unidirectional repeatability (2r) is equal to 0.25 mm, and 3D lobing It is clearly noted that the theoretical results (calculated using
in X, Y and Z is equal to ±1.00 mm. The OMP600 probe was new and (5)) fit to the obtained experimental results. Both results indicate

Fig. 8. Different strategies to measure sample parts and the different results based on the occurrence of hysteresis.
6 A. Woźniak, K. Me˛czyńska / Measurement 156 (2020) 107568
that the stylus length and measurement speed influence the hys-
teresis. The hysteresis increases for longer styli, while the opposite
is true for the measuring speed; decreasing the measurement
speed causes the hysteresis to increase. This observation may
explain why manufacturers provide a minimum probing speed in
the probe specifications.
5. Conclusions
The presented theoretical and experimental results prove that
hysteresis is the primary component of probe errors.
Among the currently known parameters describing the errors of
touch-trigger probes for CNC machine tools, none include hystere-
sis. Probe users and researchers of machine tools are not aware of
the occurrence of hysteresis during measurements, and, therefore,
have not included this error source when planning for the mea-
surement strategy.
The occurrence of the hysteresis of touch-trigger probes is illus-
trated by the example measurement cases presented in Fig. 8. The
measurement by the probe is different when the next measure-
ment point is arranged along the opposite direction (Fig. 8a) as
opposed to measuring points that are in the same or similar
directions with the previous measurement (Fig. 8b). In the first
case, a measurement hysteresis is to be expected, while the second
case minimized the hysteresis.
The hysteresis phenomenon for probes used in CNC machine
tools has not been previously studied. This article compares both
theoretical and experimental occurrences of hysteresis from a
probe. The hysteresis values may significantly exceed the values
of the other systematic and random errors for probes and could
be the most important component of measurement errors for
CNC machine tools.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Adam Woźniak: Conceptualization, Methodology, Formal anal-
ysis, Writing - review & editing. Katarzyna Me˛czyńska: Investiga-
tion, Visualization.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-
cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared
to influence the work reported in this paper.
References
[1] R. Guiassa, J.R.R. Mayer, M. Balazinski, S. Engin, F.-E. Delorme, Closed door
machining error compensation of complex surfaces using the cutting
compliance coefficient and on-machine measurement for a milling process,
Int. J. Comput. Integr. Manuf. 27 (11) (2014) 1022–1030.
[2] J.R.R. Mayer, Five-axis machine tool calibration by probing a scale enriched
reconfigurable uncalibrated master balls artifact, CIRP Ann. Manuf. Technol. 61
(2012) 515–518.
[3] S. Ibaraki, T. Iritani, T. Matsushita, Error map construction for rotary axes on
five-axis machine tools by on-the-machine measurement using a touch-trigger
probe, Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf. 68 (2013) 21–29.
[4] S. Ibaraki, Y. Ota, Error calibration for five-axis machine tools by on-the-
machine measurement using a touch-trigger probe, Int. J. Autom. Technol. 8
(1) (2013) 20–27.
[5] N. Alami Mchichi, J.R.R. Mayer, Axis location errors and error motions
calibration for a five-axis machine tool using the SAMBA method, Procedia
CIRP 14 (2014) 305–310.
[6] Z. Jiang, S. Bao, X. Zhou, X. Tang, S. Zheng, Identification of location errors by a
touch-trigger probe on five-axis machine tools with a tilting head, Int. J. Adv.
Manuf. Technol. (2015), https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-015-7189-9.
[7] J.R.R. Mayer, M.M. Rahman, A. Łoś, An uncalibrated cylindrical indigenous
artefact for measuring inter-axis errors of a five-axis machine tool, CIRP Ann. –
Manuf. Technol. 64 (2015) 487–490.
[8] M.M. Rahman, R. Mayer, Calibration performance investigation of an
uncalibrated indigenous artefact probing for five-axis machine tool, J. Mach.
Eng. 16 (2016) 33–42.
[9] G.H.J. Florussen, F.L.M. Delbressine, M.J.G. van de Molengraft, P.H.J. Schllekens,
Assesing geometrical errors of multi-axis machines by three-dimensional
length measurements, Measurement 30 (4) (2001) 241–255.
[10] J.H. Jeong, G. Khim, J.S. Oh, S.-C. Chung, Method for measuring location errors
using a touch trigger probe on four-axis machine tools, Int. J. Adv. Manuf.
Technol. 99 (2018) 1003–1012.
[11] Y.-T. Chen, P. More, C.-S. Liu, C.-C. Chun Cheng, Identification and
compensation of position-dependent geometric errors of rotary axes on five-
axis machine tools by using a touch-trigger probe and three spheres, Int. J. Adv.
Manuf. Technol. 102 (2019) 3077–3089.
[12] U. Mutilba, A. Sandá, I. Vega, E. Gomez-Acedo, I. Bengoetxea, J.A. Yagüe Fabra,
Traceability of on-machine tool measurement: Uncertainty budget assessment
on shop floor conditions, Measurement 135 (2019) 180–188.
[13] M. Jankowski, A. Woźniak, Mechanical model of errors of probes for numerical
controlled machine tools, Measurement 77 (2016) 317–326.
[14] A. Woźniak, M. Dobosz, Research on hysteresis of triggering probes applied in
coordinate measuring machines, Metrol. Meas. Syst. 12 (4) (2005) 393–413.
[15] J. Sładek, Coordinate Metrology. Accuracy of Systems and Measurements,
Springer-Verlag Berlin, 2016.
[16] J. Sładek, A. Ga˛ska, Evaluation of coordinate measurement uncertainty with
use of virtual machine model based on Monte Carlo method, Measurement 45
(2012) 1564–1575.
[17] M. Poniatowska, Deviation model based method of planning accuracy
inspection of free-form surfaces using CMMs, Measurement 45 (2012) 927–
937.
[18] J. Zeleny, M. Janda, Automatic on-machine measurement of complex parts,
Mod. Mach. Sci. J. 1 (2009) 92–95.
[19] A. Woźniak, M. Jankowski, Wireless communication influence on CNC machine
tool probe metrological parameters, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 82 (1) (2016)
535–542.