Constructed Circle Origin Skewed Due to Lack of Arc Degrees??

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

  • Constructed Circle Origin Skewed Due to Lack of Arc Degrees??

    (See pics below) I am having issues dimensioning the highlighted 5.65 and 1.08 locations of the R 21.36 in between 13 pads on a cylindrical part. In order to measure this radius, the alignment is rotated to in between each of the pads and the XY alignment is established offset from the datum origin Z5.65 and X1.08. From here, I have individual points programmed and the radius each of these points is dimensioned individually and as a constructed circle. The individual points and the constructed circle are both coming up as w/in tolerance +/-.060. And as you can see from the screen shot of the hits in relationship to the CAD, they are exactly where they are supposed to be. That being said, when I go back to dimension the 5.65 and 1.08 locations of the constructed circle to the origin they are coming up as OOT back to the origin. How can this be true if those points were programmed in establishing the radius origin already at 5.65 and 1.08? And the radius is w/in tolerance? My theory is that the lack of degrees on the constructed circle and the limitations of the software are causing the measured origin to be skewed. Does anyone know of a way to remove the error in the calculation? Right now my only remedy is treating the called out locations solely as where the origin of the radius is established, not an actual measurable feature despite being toleranced.

    Any thoughts?




    Annotation 2020-07-27 094222.pngAnnotation 2020-07-27 094222.png

  • #2
    Take a look at this post https://www.pcdmisforum.com/forum/pc...846-small-arcs
    Neil Challinor
    PC-DMIS Product Owner

    T: +44 870 446 2667 (Hexagon UK office)
    E: [email protected]

    Comment


    • Sharisa Wetherell
      Sharisa Wetherell commented
      Editing a comment
      Thanks, changing the constructed circle to the fixed radius calculation worked.

  • #3
    Ouch... Personally I would look into translating it to profile.

    Comment


    • Schlag
      Schlag commented
      Editing a comment
      100% agree

    • Sharisa Wetherell
      Sharisa Wetherell commented
      Editing a comment
      Yes, I agree also. It would make the surface much easier to inspect and prove whether or not the surface is where it needs to be. I have talked with engineering about going back to the customer and having this changed.

Related Topics

Collapse

Working...
X