Why didn't this work?

[DAN_M]

2019 R2 SP2...

I have two ID cones I need to measure. They are being picked up with the Y+ facing tip of a starprobe.

Three sections of the ID are being probed. CON_118 worked, the other one (CON_113) keeps coming up with whacky numbers and I can't figure out why.

The model is correct. If I just click an autocone CON_113's surface, it returns the correct nominal values.

The autofeature at the end of my code example was put there to show you all where the construction numbers SHOULD have ended up..but as you can see.. the Z value on the construction wants to be at -55.1668.

Does anybody have any idea why? (yes, base alignment used constrains all 6DOF ...level, rotate, XYZ in that order).

LOADPROBE/7107_B_FRONTTIP_4
TIP/T1A0B0, SHANKIJK=0, -1, 0, ANGLE=0
RECALL/ALIGNMENT,INTERNAL,A11_AB_TANGS
MOVE/POINT,NORMAL,<-1.3,0.75,6>
TIP/T1A-20B60, SHANKIJK=0.8138, -0.4699, -0.342, ANGLE=101.1707
MOVE/POINT,NORMAL,<-1.3,0.75,2>
MOVE/POINT,NORMAL,<-1.3,0.75,0>
CON_118_1 =FEAT/CONTACT/CONE/DEFAULT,CARTESIAN,IN
THEO/<0,0,0.2908>,<0,0,-1>,40,0.2404,5.456
ACTL/<0,0,0.2908>,<0,0,-1>,40,0.2404,5.456
TARG/<0,0,0.2908>,<0,0,-1>
START ANG=17,END ANG=43
ANGLE VEC=<-1,0,0>
SHOW FEATURE PARAMETERS=NO
SHOW CONTACT PARAMETERS=NO
CON_113_1 =FEAT/CONTACT/CONE/DEFAULT,CARTESIAN,IN
THEO/<0,0,-0.3377>,<0,0,1>,6,-1.2546,5.747
ACTL/<0,0,-0.3377>,<0,0,1>,6,-1.2546,5.747
TARG/<0,0,-0.3377>,<0,0,1>
START ANG=120,END ANG=180
ANGLE VEC=<1,0,0>
SHOW FEATURE PARAMETERS=NO
SHOW CONTACT PARAMETERS=NO
MOVE/POINT,NORMAL,<-1.3,0.75,0>
MOVE/POINT,NORMAL,<-1.3,0.75,2>
TIP/T1A-20B-180, SHANKIJK=0, 0.9397, -0.342, ANGLE=0.0032
MOVE/POINT,NORMAL,<0,-1.5,2>
MOVE/POINT,NORMAL,<0,-1.5,0>
CON_118_2 =FEAT/CONTACT/CONE/DEFAULT,CARTESIAN,IN
THEO/<0,0,0.2908>,<0,0,-1>,40,0.2404,5.456
ACTL/<0,0,0.2908>,<0,0,-1>,40,0.2404,5.456
TARG/<0,0,0.2908>,<0,0,-1>
START ANG=17,END ANG=43
ANGLE VEC=<0.5,-0.8660254,0>
SHOW FEATURE PARAMETERS=NO
SHOW CONTACT PARAMETERS=NO
CON_113_2 =FEAT/CONTACT/CONE/DEFAULT,CARTESIAN,IN
THEO/<0,0,-0.3377>,<0,0,1>,6,-1.2546,5.747
ACTL/<0,0,-0.3377>,<0,0,1>,6,-1.2546,5.747
TARG/<0,0,-0.3377>,<0,0,1>
START ANG=240,END ANG=300
ANGLE VEC=<1,0,0>
SHOW FEATURE PARAMETERS=NO
SHOW CONTACT PARAMETERS=NO
MOVE/POINT,NORMAL,<0,-1.5,0>
MOVE/POINT,NORMAL,<0,-1.5,2>
TIP/T1A-20B-60, SHANKIJK=-0.8138, -0.4698, -0.342, ANGLE=-101.1697
MOVE/POINT,NORMAL,<1.3,0.75,2>
MOVE/POINT,NORMAL,<1.3,0.75,0>
CON_118_3 =FEAT/CONTACT/CONE/DEFAULT,CARTESIAN,IN
THEO/<0,0,0.2908>,<0,0,-1>,40,0.2404,5.456
ACTL/<0,0,0.2908>,<0,0,-1>,40,0.2404,5.456
TARG/<0,0,0.2908>,<0,0,-1>
START ANG=17,END ANG=43
ANGLE VEC=<0.5,0.8660254,0>
SHOW FEATURE PARAMETERS=NO
SHOW CONTACT PARAMETERS=NO
CON_113_3 =FEAT/CONTACT/CONE/DEFAULT,CARTESIAN,IN
THEO/<0,0,-0.3377>,<0,0,1>,6,-1.2546,5.747
ACTL/<0,0,-0.3377>,<0,0,1>,6,-1.2546,5.747
TARG/<0,0,-0.3377>,<0,0,1>
START ANG=0,END ANG=60
ANGLE VEC=<1,0,0>
SHOW FEATURE PARAMETERS=NO
SHOW CONTACT PARAMETERS=NO
MOVE/POINT,NORMAL,<1.3,0.75,0>
MOVE/POINT,NORMAL,<1.3,0.75,2>
RECALL/ALIGNMENT,INTERNAL,A9_ABC
SCN3 =FEAT/SET,CARTESIAN
THEO/<0,0,0.1706>,<0,0,1>
ACTL/<0,0,0.1706>,<0,0,1>
CONSTR/SET,BASIC,CON_118_1.HIT[1..CON_118_1.NUMHITS],CON_118_2.HIT[1..CON_118_2.NUMHITS],CON_118_3.HIT[1..CON_118_3.NUMHITS],,
CON_118 =FEAT/CONE,CARTESIAN,IN,LENG,NO
THEO/<0,0,7.7858>,<0,0,-1>,0.1504,5.4887,5.5981
ACTL/<0,0,7.7858>,<0,0,-1>,0.1504,5.4887,5.5981
CONSTR/CONE,BF,SCN3,,
CIR_120 =FEAT/CIRCLE,CARTESIAN,IN,NO
THEO/<0,0,0.2141>,<0,0,-1>,5.5118
ACTL/<0,0,0.2141>,<0,0,-1>,5.5118
CONSTR/CIRCLE,CONE,CON_118,HEIGHT,0.2141,REF_POINT = ORIGIN,REF_VECTOR = ZPLUS
RAD_120 =GENERIC/CIRCLE,DEPENDENT,CARTESIAN,OUT,$
NOM/XYZ,<ZERO,ZERO,0.21408+ZERO>,$
MEAS/XYZ,<ZERO,ZERO,0.21408+ZERO>,$
NOM/IJK,<ZERO,ZERO,ONE>,$
MEAS/IJK,<ZERO,ZERO,ONE>,$
DIAMETER/5.5118/2,CIR_120.D/2
SCN7 =FEAT/SET,CARTESIAN
THEO/<0,0,-0.965>,<0,0,1>
ACTL/<0,0,-0.965>,<0,0,1>
CONSTR/SET,BASIC,CON_113_1.HIT[1..CON_113_1.NUMHITS],CON_113_2.HIT[1..CON_113_2.NUMHITS],CON_113_3.HIT[1..CON_113_3.NUMHITS],,
CON_113_CONSTRUCTED_WRONG=FEAT/CONE,CARTESIAN,IN,LENG,NO
THEO/<0,0,-55.1668>,<0,0,1>,0.9546,5.6312,5.7312
ACTL/<0,0,-55.1668>,<0,0,1>,0.9546,5.6312,5.7312
CONSTR/CONE,BF,SCN7,,
MOVE/CLEARPLANE
CON_113_CORRECT_NOMS_ON_MODEL=FEAT/CONTACT/CONE/DEFAULT,CARTESIAN,IN
THEO/<0,0,-0.3377>,<0,0,1>,6,-1.2546,5.747
ACTL/<0,0,-0.3377>,<0,0,1>,6,-1.2546,5.747
TARG/<0,0,-0.3377>,<0,0,1>
START ANG=0,END ANG=360
ANGLE VEC=<1,0,0>
SHOW FEATURE PARAMETERS=NO
SHOW CONTACT PARAMETERS=NO

image_18369.png

[louisd]

Constructing a cone needs feature inputs in a specific order (Circular cuts). Hit F1 and look through it.

If you construct a cone relative to points all willy-nilly about the cone, per probe angle, it doesn't follow the circular cut method and produces whack data...
You could assign each hit, to follow that circular-cut organization method, and it should work. more typing but it should do the deed.

[DAN_M]

louisd Hey, I still can't get this to work correctly =/ I'm at a total loss here. I have read through everything to do with cones on the F1 menu and still nothing.

[JEFMAN]

Hi Dan,
Maybe that's just a surprising information about cones...
You could check that the Z value of CON_118 is also far from Z values of 118_1 to 3.
I thinkt the value is different between an autocone, which values are driving the cmm, and a constructed cone which indicate the summit of the cone.
If the angle is little, the summit is far...
You can check it by comparing ASSIGN/V1=CON_113_CORRECT.XYZ and ASSIGNV2=CON_113_WRONG.XYZ, I guess there are the same...

[louisd]

i was thinking the same, but why would one have an angle of 6 and the wrong one shows angle of 0.9546

[gibsonridge]

just a shot in the dark 118 I,J,K is 0,0,-1 (works) 113 I,J,K are(positive) 0,0,1 (doesn't work)

[DungT]

You said CON_118 worked but the code says otherwise… I’m confused (?)
SCAN3 and SCAN7 don’t look right.
Shouldn’t it be [1 dot dot dot instead of [1 dot dot ? or it doesn’t matter if it was 1 dot, 2 dots or 3 dots or even 20 dots?

[louisd]

All the code looks correct (two dots for array range is correct, DungT ). The only thing i noticed that was weird is that all 3 of your CON_118_1, _2 and _3 have the same exact start/end angles. This is theoretically evaluating the same spot on the part 3x, not spaced 120° apart like the CON_113_1, _2, and _3 are. This points to 118 being in error worse than 113, lol.

This is all offline, correct?
Do you have all the probe angles created, defined and have calibration data associated with them? That's the only other contributor i can imagine.

If it were me, I would construct one segment of both CON113 and CON118 as points, copy, assign probe rotation, then paste with pattern/rotate alignment 120°. repeat after adding your third rotation.
From there, construct your cones from the individual hits. I completely agree that it shoudl work as you have it coded, but what's the point of continuing to fart around with a method that isn't providing the intended results.