Actual point data does not seem to be updating.

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

  • Actual point data does not seem to be updating.

    I'm running a correlation study between two machines using the same program and the same part, but one set of dimensions on one of the machines is getting drastically different results.

    One machine is running 2019 R2. The other machine is running 2016. The 2019 machine is having the problem.

    The program is using three auto-lines to find two intersection points then measuring the distance between the two points.
    The theoretical locations and vectors are correct for all hits on all three lines.
    The probe appears to be hitting in the right spot on the part.
    The "actual" locations in the data are quite a bit off from where they should be. Because of this, the distance measurement between the two points is no good.
    When I look at the location of the lines on the graphic display they appear to replicate the location of the false "actual" location. Visibly different from where they should be.

    For the life of me I cant figure why this is happening, nor how to change it. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.


  • #2
    Check the work planes, the 2D/3D distances.
    Check also the calibration.
    Can you post the code ?

    Comment


    • #3
      I would look at workplane 1st like JEFMAN said. DISTANCE is workplane dependent, location is not.

      Comment


      • #4
        The calibration is good on the machine and the probe.
        The workplane stays consistent throughout the program.
        The program also measures several other dimensions, including distance, that turn out fine.

        I am including the code for the lines and the constructed points.
        If you need more code or if I didn't post the code you need let me know and I'll post it.

        Thanks


        Code:
        13_WIDTH_LOCATION_1_SURFACE_2=FEAT/CONTACT/LINE/DEFAULT,CARTESIAN,UNBOUNDED
        THEO/<-8.934,104,-2>,<0.500011,0,-0.8660191>,<0.8660191,0,0.500011>,<0,1,0>,3
        ACTL/<-8.73928,103.64929,-2.0248>,<0.506038,0,-0.8625112>,<0.8625112,0,0.506038>,<-0.5339189,0.8455357,0.0000417>,3.00553
        TARG/<-8.934,104,-2>,<0.500011,0,-0.8660191>,<0.8660191,0,0.500011>,<0,1,0>
        SHOW FEATURE PARAMETERS=NO
        SHOW CONTACT PARAMETERS=YES
        NUMHITS=3,DEPTH=0
        SAMPLE METHOD=SAMPLE_FEATURE
        SAMPLE FEATURE=NONE
        AVOIDANCE MOVE=NO,DISTANCE=10
        SHOW HITS=YES
        HIT/BASIC,<-8.934,104,-2>,<0.8660191,0,0.500011>,<-8.96564,104.00229,-2.01913>
        HIT/BASIC,<-8.18398,104,-3.29903>,<0.8660191,0,0.500011>,<-8.20264,104.00186,-3.3157>
        HIT/BASIC,<-7.43397,104,-4.59806>,<0.8660191,0,0.500011>,<-7.44473,103.99989,-4.61143>
        ENDMEAS/
        13_WIDTH_LOCATION_1_SURFACE_1=FEAT/CONTACT/LINE/DEFAULT,CARTESIAN,UNBOUNDED
        THEO/<-5,104,-6.15>,<1,0,0>,<0,0,1>,<0,1,0>,10
        ACTL/<-3.57492,101.7426,-6.14695>,<1,0,0.0001579>,<-0.0001579,0,1>,<-0.5339189,0.8455357,0.0000417>,10.00158
        TARG/<-5,104,-6.15>,<1,0,0>,<0,0,1>,<0,1,0>
        SHOW FEATURE PARAMETERS=NO
        SHOW CONTACT PARAMETERS=YES
        NUMHITS=3,DEPTH=0
        SAMPLE METHOD=SAMPLE_FEATURE
        SAMPLE FEATURE=NONE
        AVOIDANCE MOVE=NO,DISTANCE=10
        SHOW HITS=YES
        HIT/BASIC,<-5,104,-6.15>,<0,0,1>,<-5.00057,103.9999,-6.14664>
        HIT/BASIC,<0,104,-6.15>,<0,0,1>,<0.001,104.00014,-6.14643>
        HIT/BASIC,<5,104,-6.15>,<0,0,1>,<5.001,104.00017,-6.14507>
        ENDMEAS/
        13_WIDTH_LOCATION_1_SURFACE_3=FEAT/CONTACT/LINE/DEFAULT,CARTESIAN,UNBOUNDED
        THEO/<8.934,104,-2>,<-0.500011,0,-0.8660191>,<-0.8660191,0,0.500011>,<0,1,0>,3
        ACTL/<8.72255,104.34002,-2.01406>,<-0.5053125,0,-0.8629364>,<-0.8629364,0,0.5053125>,<-0.5339189,0.8455357,0.0000417>,2.9998
        TARG/<8.934,104,-2>,<-0.500011,0,-0.8660191>,<-0.8660191,0,0.500011>,<0,1,0>
        SHOW FEATURE PARAMETERS=NO
        SHOW CONTACT PARAMETERS=YES
        NUMHITS=3,DEPTH=0
        SAMPLE METHOD=SAMPLE_FEATURE
        SAMPLE FEATURE=NONE
        AVOIDANCE MOVE=NO,DISTANCE=10
        SHOW HITS=YES
        HIT/BASIC,<8.934,104,-2>,<-0.8660191,0,0.500011>,<8.94545,103.99351,-2.00911>
        HIT/BASIC,<8.18398,104,-3.29903>,<-0.8660191,0,0.500011>,<8.18478,103.99291,-3.30464>
        HIT/BASIC,<7.43397,104,-4.59806>,<-0.8660191,0,0.500011>,<7.42961,103.9916,-4.59775>
        ENDMEAS/
        13_WIDTH_LOCATION_1_PNT1=FEAT/POINT,CARTESIAN,NO
        THEO/<6.53793,104,-6.15>,<-0.500011,0,-0.8660191>
        ACTL/<6.30336,103.04131,-6.14539>,<-0.5053125,0,-0.8629364>
        CONSTR/POINT,INT,13_WIDTH_LOCATION_1_SURFACE_3,13_WIDTH_L OCATION_1_SURFACE_1
        13_WIDTH_LOCATION_1_PNT2=FEAT/POINT,CARTESIAN,NO
        THEO/<-6.53793,104,-6.15>,<0.500011,0,-0.8660191>
        ACTL/<-6.32054,102.69594,-6.14738>,<0.506038,0,-0.8625112>
        CONSTR/POINT,INT,13_WIDTH_LOCATION_1_SURFACE_2,13_WIDTH_L OCATION_1_SURFACE_1
        Code:
        T6= 3D DISTANCE FROM POINT 13_WIDTH_LOCATION_1_PNT2 TO POINT 13_WIDTH_LOCATION_1_PNT1,SHORTEST=OFF,NO_RADIUS UNITS=MM,$
        GRAPH=OFF TEXT=OFF MULT=10.00 OUTPUT=BOTH
        AX NOMINAL +TOL -TOL MEAS DEV OUTTOL
        M 13.07585 0.07500 0.07500 12.62862 -0.44723 0.37223 <--------

        Comment


        • #5
          I would say that intersect points are wrong (but I don't know why !!!!!!)
          Maybe the space between red letters ?

          CONSTR/POINT,INT,13_WIDTH_LOCATION_1_SURFACE_3,13_WIDTH_L OCATION_1_SURFACE_1

          Excel gives those results (2d calculation...):
          droite 3 points.JPG

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by JEFMAN View Post
            I would say that intersect points are wrong (but I don't know why !!!!!!)
            Maybe the space between red letters ?

            CONSTR/POINT,INT,13_WIDTH_LOCATION_1_SURFACE_3,13_WIDTH_L OCATION_1_SURFACE_1

            Excel gives those results (2d calculation...):
            droite 3 points.JPG

            I took a second look at the program and that space is not there. I must have accidently inserted it when pasting the code.
            I have several saved versions of the program, and that space is not present in any of them.

            By the way, I like your excel program. That is exactly the feature I'm measuring.

            Comment


            • #7
              Update for anyone interested.

              I ran the same program on the same part, but with 2017 R2 and the dimension results are correct.
              Making a program from scratch in 2019 R2 and manually inputting the hit locations from the original program, I was able to recreate the glitch with the incorrect results.

              Right now, I can only assume it is some sort of bug with 2019 R2.

              If you have any other input, please let me know. Thanks



              Comment


              • #8
                Update #2.

                I assigned variables to all the x,y,x hit locations for each line, then constructed generic feature points at those locations, then constructed new lines and intersection points.

                The distance measurement is now good. The original distance measurement is still bad.

                Comment

                Related Topics

                Collapse

                Working...
                X