论文部分内容阅读
在评定平面度误差的方法中,“对角线法”和“最小二乘法”都是比较接近“最小条件”的方法。这两种方法哪个更接近最小条件呢?“用最小二乘法评定平面度误差”一文称:“最小二乘法与对角线法……相比较精确度要高得多”。我认为某些类型的平面,最小二乘法比对角线法更接近最小条件,而另一些类型则恰好相反。现以文献中的几个例子和我们测量工件时的两个实例(例5和例6)作对比,就可以说明这个问题。对比结果见下表。
In the method of assessing the flatness error, both the “diagonal method” and the “least squares method” are approaches that are closer to the “minimum condition”. Which of these two approaches is closer to the minimum? The article “Least square method to assess flatness error” states: “The least square method is much more accurate than the diagonal method ...”. I think that for some types of planes, the least-squares method is closer to the minimum than the diagonal method, while others are just the opposite. A few examples in the literature are compared with the two examples when we measured the workpieces (Example 5 and Example 6) to illustrate this problem. The comparison results in the table below.