Posted by Andy_G on 31/03/2023 00:07:12:
The fundamental problem they face is that the LASER beam is affected by thermal gradients, turbulence and convection currents in the air. (Even having somebody stainding near it is enough to cause a beam deviation of several hundred microns over a few metres).
I designed & built a LASER guided cutting tool in the late 1980s (using a quadrant photodiode as the target). It was easily capable of micron level resolution, however the beam deviation due to air currents within the machine enclosure rendered it useless.
Ah, but did your cutting tool or KW56's Renishaw calibrator work in the same way as the Youtube leveller? I think a cutting tool guidance system is much harder than a leveller because a guidance system has to work fast and accurately, more-or-less in real-time? The leveller only has to be accurate; it can take as long as it needs to get a good answer.
As I understood it, a rather wobbly laser beam is scanned to fill the whole room with a plane of light. The test girder is set up just below the plane, such that a digital camera sensor interrupts the scan as it sweeps the room. Thus the sensor, with pixels about 4 microns apart, detects a sequence of hits spread across several vertical lines of pixels either side of the horizontal plane.
Which pixels are lit up by hundreds of scans, are recorded by a computer. They're distributed evenly either side of a mean, and the computer calculates the mean. Air movement will spread the distribution but not alter the mean, and, although the mean's certainty will reduced, this can be corrected by taking more samples. Basically, the leveller relies on the software (Python) to achieve accuracy by identifying where the majority of a large number of photons hit the sensor. The method gets more accuracy than the pixel spacing suggests, and is less vulnerable to air currents because it averages them out.
The main problem I see is the time averaging takes to get results. Hard to see how it could guide a tool unless the laser scan, sensor and computer were all super-fast.
Looking at the Renishaw XK10 blurb, I suspect it works in the same way as the Youtube leveller. 'The laser plane is aligned and datumed at positions 1, 2 and 3. The deviation measured at position 4, in combination with the axis length, is used to calculate the vertical angle between the two axes.'
Much better engineered and the XK10 does range correction and self-checking, but at root there's also a laser plane, measurement of a deviation and lots of software running on a powerful Windows 10 box. I guess the deviation is calculated in the same way as the Youtube leveller does it, but the numbers are crunched faster and more elaborately from multiple sensors if required. Similar, but faster, easier to use, considerably more capable, and reliably accurate. (Perhaps 100 times better than Youtube!)
Bouncing lasers off the moon is harder than I thought. I imagined it being done with a red pen laser. Nope. A grown-up laser is fired through a big telescope to collimate the beam, about 3.5 metres diameter on earth. After travelling 380,000km to a reflector thoughtfully left behind by a moon mission, the laser beam is 2km across. Then, the tiny amount of reflected laser light that gets back to the telescope has to be separated from all the rest. It's all very high-tech. I expect they had to use an Arduino!
Dave
Dave
Edited By SillyOldDuffer on 31/03/2023 15:42:04