Cargando…

Comparison of 3D Sensors for Automating Bolt-Tightening Operations in the Automotive Industry

Machine vision systems are widely used in assembly lines for providing sensing abilities to robots to allow them to handle dynamic environments. This paper presents a comparison of 3D sensors for evaluating which one is best suited for usage in a machine vision system for robotic fastening operation...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Dias, Joana, Simões, Pedro, Soares, Nuno, Costa, Carlos M., Petry, Marcelo R., Veiga, Germano, Rocha, Luís F.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10181583/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37177514
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s23094310
_version_ 1785041608840839168
author Dias, Joana
Simões, Pedro
Soares, Nuno
Costa, Carlos M.
Petry, Marcelo R.
Veiga, Germano
Rocha, Luís F.
author_facet Dias, Joana
Simões, Pedro
Soares, Nuno
Costa, Carlos M.
Petry, Marcelo R.
Veiga, Germano
Rocha, Luís F.
author_sort Dias, Joana
collection PubMed
description Machine vision systems are widely used in assembly lines for providing sensing abilities to robots to allow them to handle dynamic environments. This paper presents a comparison of 3D sensors for evaluating which one is best suited for usage in a machine vision system for robotic fastening operations within an automotive assembly line. The perception system is necessary for taking into account the position uncertainty that arises from the vehicles being transported in an aerial conveyor. Three sensors with different working principles were compared, namely laser triangulation (SICK TriSpector1030), structured light with sequential stripe patterns (Photoneo PhoXi S) and structured light with infrared speckle pattern (Asus Xtion Pro Live). The accuracy of the sensors was measured by computing the root mean square error (RMSE) of the point cloud registrations between their scans and two types of reference point clouds, namely, CAD files and 3D sensor scans. Overall, the RMSE was lower when using sensor scans, with the SICK TriSpector1030 achieving the best results (0.25 mm ± 0.03 mm), the Photoneo PhoXi S having the intermediate performance (0.49 mm ± 0.14 mm) and the Asus Xtion Pro Live obtaining the higher RMSE (1.01 mm ± 0.11 mm). Considering the use case requirements, the final machine vision system relied on the SICK TriSpector1030 sensor and was integrated with a collaborative robot, which was successfully deployed in an vehicle assembly line, achieving 94% success in 53,400 screwing operations.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10181583
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-101815832023-05-13 Comparison of 3D Sensors for Automating Bolt-Tightening Operations in the Automotive Industry Dias, Joana Simões, Pedro Soares, Nuno Costa, Carlos M. Petry, Marcelo R. Veiga, Germano Rocha, Luís F. Sensors (Basel) Article Machine vision systems are widely used in assembly lines for providing sensing abilities to robots to allow them to handle dynamic environments. This paper presents a comparison of 3D sensors for evaluating which one is best suited for usage in a machine vision system for robotic fastening operations within an automotive assembly line. The perception system is necessary for taking into account the position uncertainty that arises from the vehicles being transported in an aerial conveyor. Three sensors with different working principles were compared, namely laser triangulation (SICK TriSpector1030), structured light with sequential stripe patterns (Photoneo PhoXi S) and structured light with infrared speckle pattern (Asus Xtion Pro Live). The accuracy of the sensors was measured by computing the root mean square error (RMSE) of the point cloud registrations between their scans and two types of reference point clouds, namely, CAD files and 3D sensor scans. Overall, the RMSE was lower when using sensor scans, with the SICK TriSpector1030 achieving the best results (0.25 mm ± 0.03 mm), the Photoneo PhoXi S having the intermediate performance (0.49 mm ± 0.14 mm) and the Asus Xtion Pro Live obtaining the higher RMSE (1.01 mm ± 0.11 mm). Considering the use case requirements, the final machine vision system relied on the SICK TriSpector1030 sensor and was integrated with a collaborative robot, which was successfully deployed in an vehicle assembly line, achieving 94% success in 53,400 screwing operations. MDPI 2023-04-27 /pmc/articles/PMC10181583/ /pubmed/37177514 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s23094310 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Dias, Joana
Simões, Pedro
Soares, Nuno
Costa, Carlos M.
Petry, Marcelo R.
Veiga, Germano
Rocha, Luís F.
Comparison of 3D Sensors for Automating Bolt-Tightening Operations in the Automotive Industry
title Comparison of 3D Sensors for Automating Bolt-Tightening Operations in the Automotive Industry
title_full Comparison of 3D Sensors for Automating Bolt-Tightening Operations in the Automotive Industry
title_fullStr Comparison of 3D Sensors for Automating Bolt-Tightening Operations in the Automotive Industry
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of 3D Sensors for Automating Bolt-Tightening Operations in the Automotive Industry
title_short Comparison of 3D Sensors for Automating Bolt-Tightening Operations in the Automotive Industry
title_sort comparison of 3d sensors for automating bolt-tightening operations in the automotive industry
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10181583/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37177514
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s23094310
work_keys_str_mv AT diasjoana comparisonof3dsensorsforautomatingbolttighteningoperationsintheautomotiveindustry
AT simoespedro comparisonof3dsensorsforautomatingbolttighteningoperationsintheautomotiveindustry
AT soaresnuno comparisonof3dsensorsforautomatingbolttighteningoperationsintheautomotiveindustry
AT costacarlosm comparisonof3dsensorsforautomatingbolttighteningoperationsintheautomotiveindustry
AT petrymarcelor comparisonof3dsensorsforautomatingbolttighteningoperationsintheautomotiveindustry
AT veigagermano comparisonof3dsensorsforautomatingbolttighteningoperationsintheautomotiveindustry
AT rochaluisf comparisonof3dsensorsforautomatingbolttighteningoperationsintheautomotiveindustry