CIRP Encyclopedia of Production Engineering

2019 Edition
| Editors: Sami Chatti, Luc Laperrière, Gunther Reinhart, Tullio Tolio

Flatness

  • Han HaitjemaEmail author
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-53120-4_16794

Synonyms

Definition

The minimum distance separating two parallel planes between which the surface can be contained.

Theory and Application

Scale of Flatness

Although in theory there is no minimum or maximum, in engineering practice we take as minimum size the field of view of a microscope, even an STM type, and as a maximum the size of large telescope mirrors or very large surface plates. This means that sizes where flatness is relevant can range between a few nm2 and a few m2.

A flatness deviation is a geometrical error, where this error is determined, implicitly or explicitly, for surface wavelengths from a minimum value, while all longer wavelengths that define the geometrical deviation are not filtered. This implies that the bandwidth can be rather small when flatness is assessed over a course grid. For example, for a square grid, this implies that surface wavelengths smaller than twice the pitch are neglected and are...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Creath K, Wyant JC (1990) Absolute measurement of surface roughness. Appl Opt 29:3823–3827CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Debenham M, Dew GD (1980) Determination gravitational deformation of an optical flat by liquid surface interferometry. Precis Eng 2:93–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Drescher J (2003) Analytical estimation of measurement uncertainty in surface plate calibration by the Moody method using differential levels. Precis Eng 27:323–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Evans CJ, Davies AD (2013) Certification, self-calibration and uncertainty in optical surface testing. Int J Precision Technol 3(4):388–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Evans CJ, Kestner RN (1996) Test optics error removal. Appl Opt 35:1015–1021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Evans CJ, Tyler Estler W (1996) Self-calibration: reversal, redundancy, error separation, and ‘Absolute Testing’. Ann CIRP 45(2):617–634CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Evans CJ, Parks PE, Sullivan PJ, Taylor JS (1995) Visualization of surface figure by the use of Zernike polynomials. Appl Opt 34:7815–7819CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Geckeler RD, Weingärtner I (2002) Sub-nm topography measurement of large flats: an ultra-precise flatness standard for semiconductor industry. Proc SPIE 4779:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Geckeler RD, Just A, Probst R, Weingärtner I (2002) Sub-nm-Topographiemessung mit hochgenauen Autokollimatoren [Sub-nm topography measurements with highly accurate autocollimators]. Tech Mess 69:535–541 (in German)Google Scholar
  10. Grzanna J, Schultz G (1990) Absolute testing of flatness standards at square grid points. Opt Commun 77:107–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Haitjema H (1992) Uncertainty propagation in surface plate measurements. In: Proceedings of the 4th international symposium on dimensional metrology in production and quality control. ISMQC, Tampere, pp 304–320Google Scholar
  12. Haitjema H, Meijer J (1993) Evaluation of surface plate flatness measurements. Eur J Mech Eng 38:165–172Google Scholar
  13. ISO 1011 (2012) GPS geometrical tolerancing – tolerances of form, orientation, location and run-out. ISO, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  14. ISO 12781-1 (2011) GPS-flatness-part 1: vocabulary and parameters of flatness. ISO, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  15. Meijer J (1989) From straightness to flatness: about surface plate measurement. Thesis, Twente UniversityGoogle Scholar
  16. Meijer J, de Bruijn W (1981) Determination of flatness from straightness measurements and characterization of the surface by four parameters. Precis Eng 3:17–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Moody JC (1955) How to calibrate surface plates in the plant. Tool Eng 1955:85–91Google Scholar
  18. Powell I, Goulet E (1998) Absolute figure measurements with a liquid-flat reference. Appl Opt 37:2579CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Zernike, F (1934) Beugungstheorie des Schneidenverfahrens und seine verbesserten Form, der Phasenkontrastmethode. [Diffraction theory of the knife-edge test and its improved form, the phase-contrast method] Physica 1 :689–704 (in German)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© CIRP 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Mitutoyo RCEBestThe Netherlands
  2. 2.KU Leuven, Department of Mechanical EngineeringLeuvenBelgium

Section editors and affiliations

  • M. Alkan Donmez
    • 1
  1. 1.National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), 100 Bureau Drive - Stop 8220GaithersburgUSA