how long do parts last?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • how long do parts last?

    I was asked a strange question by my boss this week, and he sent me on a quest for information
    We have B&S FX, Image, & Advantage cmm's, and all run pretty much continuous all day and night.
    The advantage is only 2-3 years old, but the image and advantage are 10-15 years old.
    the information i am seeking is……….. without a devastating crash, how long do the components of a standard Renshaw PH10MQ wrist mechanism last?
    How long does a TP20 touch trigger last?
    The question arises because we seem to be qualifying our styli allot.
    Sometimes we will have a problem with a tight tolerance part checking out of tol, we requalify the tips, and now it checks in tol.
    So we have lost some of the faith in the results.
    We already requalify the full rack each night, but sometimes we will do a “mark used” during the day as well.
    Any info will be welcomed.
    And that's all I've got to say on this matter........

  • #2
    I was told that a standard exchange is good every 3 or 4 years (for a TP2) and is impossible after 10 years because the probe is too old...
    I had a PH10 during 11 years, and it worked fine, without any control from Renishaw.

    Comment


    • #3
      ESL - economic service life, Every machine has one. Your sales rep should be able to help you with those figures. Depending on factors such as machine care, environment, work load, most CMM's are traded every 7-10 years. you could look on the web to see what is available on the used open market. you may find your exact machine and how many of them are being refurbished....
      sigpicTAU ALPHA PI INDIANA DELTA CHAPTER
      "Due to the highly confidential nature of my job, I am not allowed to know what I am doing" - author unknown

      Comment


      • #4
        I have to agree with above, it all depends on the care and use of the machine. I have worked with 18 year old machine, all original PH10M and othe parts, worked like it did day 1. We did replace a few ph200 modules, and ph200 body a couple times. The head though is solid build.
        B&S One
        PC-DMIS CAD v2014

        Romer Infinity

        Comment


        • #5
          I would ask what type of dimensions are causing you trouble? For example a concentricity check of a bore to a cylinder that were probed with articulations 90/0 and 90/180 will be far more troublesome (measurement "noise") than the same check done with a probe build that can access both without the articulation. It may be more beneficial to break the "tight" tolerance checks into separate routines that don't produce as much "noise" rather than trying to keep a full rack calibrated current and tight for the ones that are being used. You'll be able to calibrate less often, not calibrating because you are unsure of the results. A master would also help you feel confident in the results or tell you you must calibrate.

          TK
          sigpicHave a homebrew

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by RobertoFlores View Post
            I was asked a strange question by my boss this week, and he sent me on a quest for information
            We have B&S FX, Image, & Advantage cmm's, and all run pretty much continuous all day and night.
            The advantage is only 2-3 years old, but the image and advantage are 10-15 years old.
            the information i am seeking is……….. without a devastating crash, how long do the components of a standard Renshaw PH10MQ wrist mechanism last?
            How long does a TP20 touch trigger last?
            The question arises because we seem to be qualifying our styli allot.
            Sometimes we will have a problem with a tight tolerance part checking out of tol, we requalify the tips, and now it checks in tol.
            So we have lost some of the faith in the results.
            We already requalify the full rack each night, but sometimes we will do a “mark used” during the day as well.
            Any info will be welcomed.
            Can't say for a TP20 TTP, but according to Renishaw? You'll get >10 million triggers for a TP200/B (from their site)
            Chances are someone will crash it before it wears out. Personally? I like the TP200b, but it's not exactly a 'robust' probe. (maybe Renishaw should sell a 'Crashmaster' for companies just getting into the CMM thing.
            As for the PH10MQ, AFAIK? There are the shiny ones, and the dull ones. Buyer beware. We've been very lucky with our RBE/with Hexagon Wixom. But every once in a while you get a bad apple.
            (i think the shiny ones are the older rebuilds) Politics aside? A Hexatech would probably push a Tesa product, but I prefer Renishaw.
            The caveat is that your mileage will vary, and it all depends on the 'deal' they give your buyer/bo$$hole. My advice is that since you're the 'pilot' of the flights? Let them know what YOU think is best, and then fasten your seatbelt......

            btw, we have an Image 7-7-7 and Advantage 7-10-7 applicable to the above.
            Last edited by sealevel; 05-28-2014, 01:51 PM.

            Comment


            • #7
              "Chances are someone will crash it before it wears out." - LOL Chances are very high.....human error keeps us all working
              sigpicTAU ALPHA PI INDIANA DELTA CHAPTER
              "Due to the highly confidential nature of my job, I am not allowed to know what I am doing" - author unknown

              Comment


              • #8
                On the tp20, you can write a short program checking the five axis using a calibration sphere. Zero out your sphere so the software and machine know where it is at, program around the sphere x=0 y = 0 z= 1, rotate A 90 and do the four sides of the sphere. Loop the program five or ten times. Your deviations should be very small, if you see a flyer, you can re-look at everything and make a determination if the tp20 is good or not. Keep the results for each tp20 for reference and you can then tell by the data if the tp20 is going bad as time and use go by. You must also take other variables out to assure the tp20 is bad, eg. are you using the cleaning kit to remove dirt and metal debris from the tp20 and module? Are you cleaning the track / bearing area? Are you inspecting the styli under a magnifying lens to see if the ruby is chipped? Hope this helps.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by tking View Post
                  I would ask what type of dimensions are causing you trouble? For example a concentricity check of a bore to a cylinder that were probed with articulations 90/0 and 90/180 will be far more troublesome (measurement "noise") than the same check done with a probe build that can access both without the articulation. It may be more beneficial to break the "tight" tolerance checks into separate routines that don't produce as much "noise" rather than trying to keep a full rack calibrated current and tight for the ones that are being used. You'll be able to calibrate less often, not calibrating because you are unsure of the results. A master would also help you feel confident in the results or tell you you must calibrate.

                  TK
                  Yes, the tight tol dims in question have allot of articulation.
                  Base alignment is at A0, B0, and several dims are taken with this angle.
                  The profiles in question are combined from scans taken at A90, B90, and A90, B-90 in a groove around the perimeter.
                  And that's all I've got to say on this matter........

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by RobertoFlores View Post
                    Yes, the tight tol dims in question have allot of articulation.
                    Base alignment is at A0, B0, and several dims are taken with this angle.
                    The profiles in question are combined from scans taken at A90, B90, and A90, B-90 in a groove around the perimeter.
                    So, perhaps this is an application that may benefit from the use of a star / T / cross shaped configuration where the tips can access the feature surfaces without articulation. This type of approach has solved many long standing issues here and saved countless hours calibrating. Definately speeds up the setup / inspect / adjust process

                    TK
                    sigpicHave a homebrew

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Its a fair question from your boss, but.....

                      It depends how many rotations you do with the head every day
                      It depends on how many crashes occur during its life.
                      It depends on too many factors to nail down a life span really.
                      This is to do with the head.

                      The tp20 has ( as stated above X million hits)

                      I would like to know and understand how often you calibrate your probes. Do you calibrate every angle used in each probe file, even though you may not use half of those angles for the next 2 weeks ?

                      I have witnessed some crazy overkill on calibrating and that alone, will surely shorten the life span of a tp20
                      Jim Jewell

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by tking View Post
                        So, perhaps this is an application that may benefit from the use of a star / T / cross shaped configuration where the tips can access the feature surfaces without articulation. This type of approach has solved many long standing issues here and saved countless hours calibrating. Definately speeds up the setup / inspect / adjust process

                        TK
                        This is an excellent idea that I use quite often. Not rotating the head, or at least not rotating the B axis will do 3 things.

                        1/ Increase life span of the head
                        2/ Be a tad more accurate
                        3/ speeds up programs.

                        Most people don't know how to use or calibrate a probe mentioned above. You can build them as a "T", an "L" or fill all of them up...

                        Its not always practical, because of interference, but it rocks where it can be used.
                        Jim Jewell

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Up until 18 months ago I worked on a Xcel from 1995 that the only problem we had was getting replacement cards for the old WorldClass controller.
                          DeWain Hodge

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by DeWain Hodge View Post
                            Up until 18 months ago I worked on a Xcel from 1995 that the only problem we had was getting replacement cards for the old WorldClass controller.
                            Got one here still DeWain, 765 March '92 DOB. Hard to just toss 'em out when they are STILL working. Running 3.2063 there so ya gotta be careful not to select a tool while programming in 3.7 that isn't implemented in 3.2063, at least that's a work around of our making

                            TK
                            sigpicHave a homebrew

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Well I no longer work for that company and last I heard was that the Controller had finally used up Hexagons last 'Y' axis card and they don't have me there to hunt other sources and the Xcel has been sitting for over a year not being used because the owner will not spend any money on such an old machine, but IMO it would be better to upgrade the controller than buy another Zeiss like they had purchased just before I left.

                              Originally posted by tking View Post
                              Got one here still DeWain, 765 March '92 DOB. Hard to just toss 'em out when they are STILL working. Running 3.2063 there so ya gotta be careful not to select a tool while programming in 3.7 that isn't implemented in 3.2063, at least that's a work around of our making

                              TK
                              DeWain Hodge

                              Comment

                              Related Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X