Rookie analog scanning question

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

  • Rookie analog scanning question

    How do you make the scan path contact the part if it's a lesser material condition than expected? My probe is missing the part by about .002 while performing a defined path perimeter scan, but when using normal TTP and honoring the check distance results come out in tolerance. Looking for the equivalent of a check distance while an analog scan...

  • #2
    F10 / Motions tab / Check Distance

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by RIDER View Post
      F10 / Motions tab / Check Distance
      This isn’t giving me the results I’m looking for. Probe is still missing the part when it is in an undersize condition even though my check distance this up to .05

      part is only about .002 undersize in actuality

      Comment


      • #4
        I have had some similar experiences, you mean that where the part actually lacks material, the probe follows the generated scan path instead of following the actual surface?

        If so, I'd like to know the answer to this as well. I had to revert to vector points in order to get a result covering the surface.
        PC-DMIS CAD++ 2o19 R1

        Comment


        • #5
          Make a local alignment, moving the origin a bit closer to the material...
          AndersI
          SW support - Hexagon Metrology Nordic AB

          Comment


          • #6
            Are you using a defined path in the scan dialog parameters?
            I've seen this happen using defined, if so change to relearn.

            Comment


            • vpt.se
              vpt.se commented
              Editing a comment
              Yes. So, if I have a part with a DEFINED path that lacks material and the probe "airscans" (following the scan path not actually touching the material) I just change to RELEARN and then just run the scan again?

            • BKulpa
              BKulpa commented
              Editing a comment
              Yes, I'd try changing to relearn.
              I've had instances where a part will have a deep dimple (as an identifier) that I want to scan to determine what variant of part it is depending on the dimple presents or not.
              I generated the scan on a variant without the dimples using defined, so it was a flat line scan.
              Then when I changed part variants to one with the dimple the scan rode right over the top and air scanning with no notice of the dimple.
              Changed to relearn and the process worked properly.

          • #7
            I always use find nominals and that works.
            Time for the Trolls to leave.

            Comment


            • #8
              Originally posted by AndersI View Post
              Make a local alignment, moving the origin a bit closer to the material...
              The local alignment has worked for the interim. I'll try what BKulpa says and switch to relearn.

              Will relearn change the nominal value compared to the CAD model??? I don't want to sacrifice the integrity of my inspection.

              Comment


              • #9
                No, relearn will not change the nominal values.
                That would be findnoms.

                Did you find a solution to your issue?

                Comment

                Related Topics

                Collapse

                Working...
                X