Equate Alignment program problem

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

  • Equate Alignment program problem

    I have a part program, i have successfully written it to where i can flip the part, and equate the alignment, all works well, until the next part is ready to be measured. I cannot get the Dmis to go back to the startup alignment at the beginning of the program. I am forced to do a manual alignment for each part. Normally, i manually align the part once, run it through, then the next time i turn off the manual alignment features and run it over and over again letting the dcc alignment take over.

    This program will not do that, everytime i start the program over again without the manual alignment features selected, it thinks that the probe head is still on the negative side of the Z axis, which is not true. I don't know why it is not looking at the startup alignment that should tell the program that the probe head is in the space relative to the machine and not the part.

    any thoughts? i hope i have just missed something stupid here....

    Sam

  • #2
    I don't think there is a way to get around that. Once you Equate alignment, you are fundamentally altering your workspace. The manual alignment allows you to redefine it at the beginning of the program. I've only used it to leapfrog though, so I'm no expert on this.
    "This is my word... and as such is beyond contestation."

    Comment


    • #3
      I figured it out, at the very end of the program you just have to equate back to the original alignment, and it will set things right.

      Thanks guys/gals!

      Sam

      Comment


      • #4
        IMHIO (humble and ignorant), this a useless feature. It involves being able to level, align, and origin on the same features to equate. So why not just skip the equate and and create a new alignment using the same origin? What would be super cool is if they could come up with a way to shift a part longer than the machine envelope, origin off the last feature measured, and offset the shift by the amount of the last result with said feature.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by NUGUY View Post
          IMHIO (humble and ignorant), this a useless feature. It involves being able to level, align, and origin on the same features to equate. So why not just skip the equate and and create a new alignment using the same origin? What would be super cool is if they could come up with a way to shift a part longer than the machine envelope, origin off the last feature measured, and offset the shift by the amount of the last result with said feature.
          That would be leapfrogging, and that is what equate alignment does, basically. Whether flipping the part, or just moving it. I measured a 20ish foot long part in 3 segments on an 11-22-10 CMM. Well, I was a green operator at the time, so it was my programmer who accomplished the task, but still.

          If you physically flip a part, what you suggest wouldn't relate the old measured data to the new alignment. You don't have to use the same features, you just have to have features that can be reached in both orientations.
          Last edited by VinniUSMC; 10-06-2015, 06:36 AM.
          "This is my word... and as such is beyond contestation."

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by seppley View Post
            I figured it out, at the very end of the program you just have to equate back to the original alignment, and it will set things right.

            Thanks guys/gals!

            Sam
            Ah, simple enough. Thanks for sharing.
            "This is my word... and as such is beyond contestation."

            Comment


            • #7
              A 20 foot long part. Let's say your original origin has been shifted beyond the parameters of the machine travel. Suppose your original origin is your datum reference, which is call out in a FCF. How can you equate to an origin off the machine if you can't reach it? Especially if your origin is a hole at the very end of the part, with a TP of let's say .010 to all the other holes 18 feet away? How does one use equate alignment for that? From what I have read in posts, can't be done.

              Comment


              • #8
                A 20' long part? How long the CMM table?

                There are options like glueing tooling balls at a location that when moving the part down the tooling balls are accessible to equate.
                Common sense, if the part is more than double the inspection area don't bother.
                Last edited by Roberto; 07-24-2014, 03:04 PM.
                sigpicIt's corona time!
                737 Xcel Cad++ v2009MR1....SE HABLA ESPAÑOL

                Comment


                • #9
                  My point is.....if one can reach the original features for level, rotation, and origin after a "shift" or "flip", why use equate at all?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Say you need to report a distance between to circles in a long part.
                    First circle is measured in the first section of the prog, the second one is measured "After" shifting the part.
                    How would you keep the relationship?
                    Last edited by Roberto; 08-06-2014, 03:35 PM.
                    sigpicIt's corona time!
                    737 Xcel Cad++ v2009MR1....SE HABLA ESPAÑOL

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      What if that first circle is the datum specified on the print and in the FCF? Having shifted it off the machine travel, how does on perform an equate? I think I'm quite lost here. I also think I hijacked a thread. Is this a crime? The hijacking of a thread?

                      I must read more on equate. Thanks Roberto. I appreciate the input.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by NUGUY View Post
                        What if that first circle is the datum specified on the print and in the FCF? Having shifted it off the machine travel?

                        I must read more on equate. Thanks Roberto. I appreciate the input.
                        That's exactly what equate align is designed to do...Never mind I am going to la "casa"...
                        Excelent idea, read more about equate.
                        Last edited by Roberto; 07-25-2014, 07:02 AM.
                        sigpicIt's corona time!
                        737 Xcel Cad++ v2009MR1....SE HABLA ESPAÑOL

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          NUGUY, to equate alignment, you don't need to access only your datum features. You need to have access to several features that you can probe before and after the equate.

                          In my case, the part had holes every 150mm or so. It was long square tube with small plates welded on each end, and holes running the length. Basically, there was a plane and 2 holes near the end of travel that got probed, then the part was moved forward and we re-measure the same plane and two holes in the new position, equate alignment, viola! This was the only time I have ever been a part of the equate alignment process though, and I was only following directions.

                          The CMM bed was around 10 ft. The probe could only reach about 12" from the front of the plate, and 24" or so from the back of the plate. Old gear driven DEA machine.

                          ***
                          Also, to clarify a little, I was not 'inspecting' per se. I was reverse engineering because actual condition was much more critical than how close it was to print (no CAD). And it was in 4.3 or 2009, I don't remember what version we were on at the time.

                          To answer the question "how to relate to the origin?" The answer is literally "Equate Alignment". That is the purpose, in theory anyway.
                          Last edited by VinniUSMC; 07-25-2014, 06:49 AM.
                          "This is my word... and as such is beyond contestation."

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by seppley View Post
                            I figured it out, at the very end of the program you just have to equate back to the original alignment, and it will set things right.

                            Thanks guys/gals!

                            Sam
                            Hi Sam,

                            Would you mind expanding on this a little bit? I use Equate Align a lot but I was using a manual machine before and never had the luxury of NOT manually aligning for a second piece. For everyone's benefit...


                            I create my first orientation alignments A1 - A4 (two manual then two DCC aligns) and measure what I can.

                            I then do "recall:startup", flip/rotate part, and do A5 - A8 (two manual, two DCC in new orientation).

                            A8 must be identical to A4 relative to the part, do an equate alignment A8 to A4, and measure the rest of the part.


                            Problem is, on second run, manual alignments are not right anymore so DCC goes wherever, as though the program still thinks it's in the equated orientation. Here is the question I have. What aligns do you use to equate back? Does this work to unmark the second set of manual alignments after the change (A5 & A6)?

                            Thanks,
                            Vernon.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Bump for Help

                              Comment

                              Related Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X