Holes on an angled surface

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

  • Holes on an angled surface

    Greetings,
    When measuring a vertical hole that comes through an angled surface. Using CAD data and auto circle. When I select the hole on the cad it places the circle hits on the same plane as the surface. The problem is, the nominals (X&Y) are not correct. (because it is an egg shaped hole when looked at from the angle)If I change the normal vector to 0,0,1 and move the hits down into the hole using the depth feature I can measure the hole OK but the nominals are still incorrect. The only way I have found to get the correct nominals is to pick my hits down in the hole at the next lower wire frame line and then move them up in the hole to measure. However, that is not always possible.
    Does anyone know of another way to do what I want with PCDMIS?

    Using Ver. 3.7 mr3

    Any and all input is appreciated!
    Thank You,
    John

  • #2
    Have you tried rotating your alignment to the angle of the hole so your vector will 0,0,1 or 1,0,0 or 0,1,0 ? I find it is much easier, especially with compound angles to rotate the alignment for the measurement then recall your previous alignment for dimensioning. BTW I almost never get a CAD model, so I can't help you on that aspect of this. HTH
    sigpic"Hated by Many, Loved by Few" _ A.B. - Stone brewery

    Comment


    • #3
      Try Cyl-Pln intersect

      or

      Level to angled surface, set zero then auto circle.
      Be careful with nominals to input for auto circle when angled surface is set level (may have to do some trig or probe hole to find new noms).
      PC-DMIS CAD++ 3.7 from 4.2 MR1

      Comment


      • #4
        No, from what I understand from your question, there is no way to do what you want to do with Pcdmis, it will not 'see' the round circle as data when it pierces the surface at an angle not perpendicual to the surface. You will need a wire frame circle created by your cad guys inside OR a different piece of trimmed surface (like the inside of the hole) that does make a true circle. When you pick the elipse of an off-angle cylinder intersecting a surface, you will not get the true, correct circle. You might be able to get the correct XYZ IF INDEED the intersection of this cylinder is through a totally flat piece of surface data (not square, but flat) by using the elipse option, but I have never used the elipse option.

        You might also try finding a cylinder, if you have the 'side' data down inside the hole, then once you have the cylinder picked out in autofeatures, change to circle.
        sigpic
        Originally posted by AndersI
        I've got one from September 2006 (bug ticket) which has finally been fixed in 2013.

        Comment


        • #5
          Thanks for your help. You've given me some things to try. Often if I'm not sure DMIS has picked the correct nominal I will go to the data (VISI) and check the feature myself and then if I have to I enter the correct nominal before outputting my results. As many of you know, the quality (inspection) dept., in my case that is ME alone, is held to a higher standard then those doing the machining. In other words if I tell the EDM dept. that their holes are 3 thou off location I better know what I'm talking about!

          Thanks again,
          John

          Comment


          • #6
            John,

            One other suggestion, you can take a hit next to the hole then select your hole on the CAD then set your nominals to what ever they are (I'm assuming that the nominals are in the same axis of your hole).


            P1 =AUTO/VECTOR POINT,SHOWALLPARAMS = YES
            THEO/6.888,2.7456,11.642,-0.9269885,-0.3693438,0.0654031
            ACTL/6.8736,2.7421,11.635,-0.9273874,-0.3683044,0.0656083
            TARG/6.888,2.7456,11.642,-0.9269885,-0.3693438,0.0654031
            THEO_THICKNESS = 0,RECT,SNAP = NO,$
            AUTO MOVE = NO,DISTANCE = 0.5

            Then assign that point as your surface reference.

            ASSIGN/DP1 = (P1.X-P1.TX)*P1.I+(P1.Y-P1.TY)*P1.J+(P1.Z-P1.TZ)*P1.K

            Then set your depth

            C1 =AUTO/CIRCLE,SHOWALLPARAMS = YES,SHOWHITS = NO
            THEO/6.8318,2.722,11.9589,0.7071068,0.7071068,0,0.76
            ACTL/6.8318,2.722,11.9589,0.7071068,0.7071068,0,0.76
            TARG/6.8318,2.722,11.9589,0.7071068,0.7071068,0
            THEO_THICKNESS = 0,RECT,IN,CIRCULAR,LEAST_SQR,ONERROR = NO,$
            AUTO MOVE = BOTH,DISTANCE = 0.5,RMEAS = None,None,None,$
            READ POS = NO,FIND HOLE = NO,REMEASURE = NO,$
            NUMHITS = 4,INIT = 0,PERM = 0,SPACER = 0,PITCH = 0,$
            START ANG = 45,END ANG = 405,DEPTH = 0.005+DP1,$
            ANGLE VEC = 0,0,1

            This works the same as using an initial point but the measured value follows the axis of the hole and is not projected to the surface so you won't see any error based on where the surface is located. the deviation will be based on the theoretical pierce point.

            In other words your deviation is based on a 2 dimensional measurement (X and Y) instead of a 3 dimensional deviation forced by PCDMIS when using an initial point.

            P.S. Note: add the depth reference if your measuring from the front of
            surface subtract the depth reference if your measuring
            from the back of the surface.
            Job Function:
            Quality Engineer/Programmer
            Machine Type:
            Global
            Software Version:
            V2010 MR1
            CMM Experience:
            25+ yrs.

            Comment


            • #7
              John,
              I run into this same thing many times. When ever I can "on such a hole" I select the bottom of the hole and set the depth up to where I want to measure it. Much like you are doing. Most holes have wire frame at top and bottom. I know this isn't alot of help but working off the bottom of the holes has been my only means of getting many holes like this.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by JohnCTB View Post
                As many of you know, the quality (inspection) dept., in my case that is ME alone, is held to a higher standard then those doing the machining. In other words if I tell the EDM dept. that their holes are 3 thou off location I better know what I'm talking about!
                I wonder how many that applies to in this forum? I got the same situation.
                sigpic:eek: Bring out the comfy chair!:eek:

                Comment


                • #9
                  Bingo!
                  sigpic
                  Originally posted by AndersI
                  I've got one from September 2006 (bug ticket) which has finally been fixed in 2013.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    ....if I tell the EDM dept. that their holes are 3 thou off location I better know what I'm talking about!
                    I would hope this applies to everyone... isnt that our jobs - to measure parts, give correct answers, and understand and explain how we got them???
                    Or am I missing something here.
                    Links to my utilities for PCDMIS

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by cmmguy View Post
                      I would hope this applies to everyone... isnt that our jobs - to measure parts, give correct answers, and understand and explain how we got them???
                      Or am I missing something here.
                      Yes, that is our job. I think he is bringing up the point that CMM results (and Inspection results) get questioned so often. If we are wrong 1 out of 100 times, they throw that in our faces everytime we say a part is out of tolerance.
                      When in doubt, post code. A second set of eyes might see something you missed.
                      sigpic

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by John Kingston View Post
                        Yes, that is our job. I think he is bringing up the point that CMM results (and Inspection results) get questioned so often. If we are wrong 1 out of 100 times, they throw that in our faces everytime we say a part is out of tolerance.
                        Ok. and your right, the guys in the shop can put holes in the wrong location but you better never be wrong about your answer..
                        Links to my utilities for PCDMIS

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by cmmguy View Post
                          Ok. and your right, the guys in the shop can put holes in the wrong location but you better never be wrong about your answer..
                          Egg-Zachary.
                          When in doubt, post code. A second set of eyes might see something you missed.
                          sigpic

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            We have similar jobs come up regularly. If you level to the plane that the job theoretically lies on and create an auto vector circle that then you can remove the alignment that does the levelling, leaving you with your auto circle with a compound vector

                            Comment

                            Related Topics

                            Collapse

                            Working...
                            X