Scratch Detection Systems Selection Guide
Compare in-line optical scratch inspection with offline surface review or measurement. Use the same application conditions and record what each proposal includes, excludes or still needs to prove.
Demonstrate coverage and separate missed defects from false rejects. Compare the same defect definition and agree how samples and production disposition remain controlled.
For in-line inspection using automated surface-scratch detection, a short trial that reproduces the difficult condition is often more useful than a long list of nominal specifications.
Compare options in the conditions where they must work — Scratch Detection Systems
Plan scratch detection systems around representative good, bad and marginal samples, line presentation, lighting, reject handling and challenge criteria. Discuss an optical feasibility trial with Oxford Vision Systems. A useful shortlist should show how every option copes with visible defect or measurement definition for automated surface-scratch detection and recipe, reject and line-control interfaces.
Discuss your application
Define the scratch decision before specifying resolution
“Find small scratches” leaves several questions unanswered. State the region, appearance and acceptance rule for an unacceptable mark, then ask whether the optical setup can distinguish it from acceptable surface texture throughout that region.
Record the acceptance rule in a usable form
Describe whether length, width, direction, location or visual severity matters to the quality decision. A long fine mark and a short broad mark may have different consequences. Use approved examples near each relevant boundary, and avoid inferring depth or functional damage from a two-dimensional appearance unless that relationship is separately established.
Include orientation and texture in the trial
Turn the scratch direction relative to the proposed illumination and include the normal grain or machining pattern. A lighting arrangement that reveals a mark across the grain may not reveal the same mark along it. Keep acceptable tool marks and finish variation in the comparison so increasing sensitivity does not simply reject every textured surface.
Evaluate coverage and sampling together
The field of view, lens, working distance and presentation influence the detail available in the image. Camera pixel count alone does not establish the smallest dependable detection. Place boundary examples near the edges of the required area as well as its centre, and repeat them at the intended movement and focus range.
Choose the production response for ambiguous marks
A review image, held part and automatic reject route involve different operating work. Agree how uncertain results are handled and how retained images are linked to the actual part. Separate missed known scratches from unnecessary rejection of acceptable surfaces in the trial record. Use the scratch-detection checklist to compare proposals against the same samples and acceptance rules.
Pause before choosing when…
- Only perfect or hand-selected examples of in-line inspection using automated surface-scratch detection are available.
- No one has defined how false-accept, false-reject and challenge criteria will be evaluated.
- The normal range for visible defect or measurement definition for automated surface-scratch detection is described only as “usually fine” but has not been bounded.
- Your operator, cleaning, maintenance or recovery access has not been considered.
- Quoted performance depends on another machine or data source that is not included.