Feature that PCDMIS lacks, but could be useful.

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

  • #31
    Originally posted by DAN_M View Post
    I would really like to see a simplified method of pulling points out of a scan to dimension them as features.
    I'm with you on this too! Current method is a waste of time.

    Comment


    • #32
      Ability to recall points from a scan using coordinate zones. Define coordinates by dragging a box in graphics window. With current method, if scan point density is changed all the recalls (i.e. scn.hit[3000..3500] ) must be redefined. Not to mention we're required to count thousands of points. An incredible waste of time...

      Comment


      • #33
        Filtering, outlier and algorithm available in dimension dialogs so we don't have to reconstruct a new feature in order to perform a different type of evaluation.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by norkamus View Post
          Ah yes. I get it. So you want "both", but you'd like to specify separate distances.
          Here is an example of the Multi Avoidance Move and Clearance Cube Definition.

          ClearanceCube Definiton Example.jpg
          Attached Files
          Last edited by davehocum; 05-27-2016, 08:36 AM.

          Comment


          • #35
            Scan control points editable in edit window (currently modifications don't "stick"). Should also be able to add/delete control points in the edit window.

            Comment


            • #36
              This is my biggie.

              I'd like to be able to keep commonly used dialog boxes open all the time. The ones that come to mind are Autofeatures, Constructions and Legacy dimensions. While these dialogs are open, it is still possible to interact with the edit window. Additionally, the dialogs that use features (for instance, constructions and dimensions) are "live updating", so that when a new feature is created and added to the edit window, it is immediately added to the list in the already open construction and dimension windows.

              The construction and legacy dimension dialogs would have to be updated to be able to switch between the different types of constructions and dimensions - like the autofeature dialog currently does.

              To me, this would be a big workflow improvement and save a lot of programming time. Would require dual monitors, but this is already very commonplace from my experience.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by DJAMS View Post
                This is my biggie.

                I'd like to be able to keep commonly used dialog boxes open all the time. The ones that come to mind are Autofeatures, Constructions and Legacy dimensions. While these dialogs are open, it is still possible to interact with the edit window. Additionally, the dialogs that use features (for instance, constructions and dimensions) are "live updating", so that when a new feature is created and added to the edit window, it is immediately added to the list in the already open construction and dimension windows.

                The construction and legacy dimension dialogs would have to be updated to be able to switch between the different types of constructions and dimensions - like the autofeature dialog currently does.

                To me, this would be a big workflow improvement and save a lot of programming time. Would require dual monitors, but this is already very commonplace from my experience.
                ^^^^THIS^^^^
                but not holding my breath. Issue still remains for dual monitors in that autofeature dialog loses much of its options if not kept on the primary screen. (ok, i can live with that)
                above probably would require overtime from the Hex code folks, but hope springs eternal.......
                OR, perhaps a 'dual monitor' coding specialist.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by sealevel View Post
                  but not holding my breath.
                  Yes - don't do that, you will expire! I actually asked for this a few years back (along with filtering, outlier and algorithm in dimensions). The response was "we'd have to re-architect the entire product to do this"

                  My opinion is, that's what the product needs. A wheels-up overhaul.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    We should be able to position the probe at any measurement point in an autofeature - probe touching the surface.

                    Often, clearances are tight and we need to examine each hit (please don't tell me to run collision detection - which shows collisions at every hole in 2014). Current solution is to run a script we've created that converts all the hits to vector points. F9 on each point to examine - then delete all the points created by the script. Waste of time.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      It would be nice to see a way to equally space hits after you adjust them on a feature.
                      For example... I'm measuring an outside Ø0.217 with a 0.050 long flat on the bottom..and I have to manually drag the hits that are near the flat away from the flat so the machine won't probe that area.pic for group.jpg

                      Comment


                      • Kevo_cmm
                        Kevo_cmm commented
                        Editing a comment
                        If you are ding a regular circle (not auto circle) you could manually probe the circle for say 10 points, then change the number of points to 12. When you do that a dialog opens and asks you if you want to equally space the points.

                    • #41
                      Originally posted by DJAMS View Post
                      Yes - don't do that, you will expire! I actually asked for this a few years back (along with filtering, outlier and algorithm in dimensions). The response was "we'd have to re-architect the entire product to do this"

                      My opinion is, that's what the product needs. A wheels-up overhaul.
                      That's why most of the improvement request on this thread will never get done with the current platform of PC-DMIS. These are the reasons I have been stating that the current platform of PC-DMIS needs to be replace.

                      Comment


                      • #42
                        Occasionally, I need to adjust some hit locations within an auto feature, perhaps to miss a hazard, or to adjust an approach vector. A recent example would be adjusting the hit IJKs of an auto circle to extract later and create a circular plane out of for a flatness measurement along the rim. See the example below...

                        Regular Auto Circle:
                        Normal Circle.jpg

                        Adjusted Auto Circle:
                        Plane Circle.jpg

                        Unfortunately, in the example above, adjusting the IJKs for 60 points by hand is pretty tedious.

                        Now the problem, Lets say I have to transform the entire hit pattern by some amount, like raising the circle by 0.01" in Z, or decreasing the Diameter by 0.5". This is impossible without completely ruining all my work adjusting the IJKs. I loose all ability to manipulate the pattern that I have customized, it now static and unmovable by anything but my hand typing.

                        I would be NICE if after custom locating hits, you could still adjust the entire pattern without loosing your work. Another example would be creating a cylinder and adjusting the hit pattern to miss a void, I would be nice to increase the diameter without having to custom move those points again.
                        Last edited by Incredible.Mr.Lucas; 05-29-2016, 07:43 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #43
                          Originally posted by Incredible.Mr.Lucas View Post
                          Another example would be creating a cylinder and adjusting the hit pattern to miss a void

                          I don't know if it's in all versions but auto features have a void detection toggle. So you can edit the feature and just click the toggle and it moves individual hits away from gaps or whatever.

                          Comment


                          • #44
                            Originally posted by Dsturgeon View Post
                            I don't know if it's in all versions but auto features have a void detection toggle. So you can edit the feature and just click the toggle and it moves individual hits away from gaps or whatever.
                            There is a workaround for every example I gave, I have never let this irritation stop me... but its an irritation nonetheless and it would be nice if programmers provided some feature to alleviate it in the future.

                            Adding to the tedious nature of the task in the example given, I assigned a variable as the integer "0" and another variable with the integer "1", then replaced all the IJKs with those two variables. then, no matter what I did to the nominal of the feature overall, the IJKs of the hits remained fixed at <0,0,1>... Again, tedious... I wouldn't advise changing the number of hits in the feature though, I cant imagine PC-DMIS would appreciate that at all.

                            Comment


                            • #45
                              Originally posted by Incredible.Mr.Lucas View Post
                              adjusting the hit IJKs of an auto circle to extract later and create a circular plane out of for a flatness measurement along the rim.
                              What's wrong with using the radial method of autoplane?
                              AndersI
                              SW support - Hexagon Metrology Nordic AB

                              Comment

                              Related Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X