Long story short. When I came-in this morning, I noticed a nick (shiny-spot) on my PH9A probe head. Obviously one of my CMM operators on the off-shifts had wrecked my CMM without telling me. I calibrated the tip at various angles and noticed a distinct problem. I performed the "ink-pen test" ... I've seen the calibration tech's do this before. I placed an ink-pen in one of the mounting holes in the granite plate, rotated head to A90B0 and aligned on the ink pen ball. Then locked X-axis rotated head to A90B180 and moved back to the ink pin ball. I was approx. 0.060 off. I re-aligned the probe head to eye-ball spec. My question is how square do I need to be and how do I get there?
Wrecked! Need Help!
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by DOUG MORTON View PostLong story short. When I came-in this morning, I noticed a nick (shiny-spot) on my PH9A probe head. Obviously one of my CMM operators on the off-shifts had wrecked my CMM without telling me. I calibrated the tip at various angles and noticed a distinct problem. I performed the "ink-pen test" ... I've seen the calibration tech's do this before. I placed an ink-pen in one of the mounting holes in the granite plate, rotated head to A90B0 and aligned on the ink pen ball. Then locked X-axis rotated head to A90B180 and moved back to the ink pin ball. I was approx. 0.060 off. I re-aligned the probe head to eye-ball spec. My question is how square do I need to be and how do I get there?
HOWEVER, you may want to remove the head from the quill and MAKE SURE that the mounting bolt that holds the head to the taper is still tight, then put it back in and square it up.sigpic
Originally posted by AndersII've got one from September 2006 (bug ticket) which has finally been fixed in 2013.
-
Eyeball is enough if you eyeball is calibrated traceable to National Standards. Yours is, isn't it?
Seriously, eyeball should be ok. Run calibration again and see how it comes out. Hopefully you have on hand a part you ran yesterday, (or before the crash) that you can run again to compare results. HTHsigpic"Hated by Many, Loved by Few" _ A.B. - Stone brewery
Comment
-
Eyeball should be OK.
UNLESS you do a lot of measurements at angles such as A90Bxxx. In that case, you may find that the off-square causes shanking problems if you set your part up square to the machine axes.
Probe tip calibration will comp. the off-square situation but it won't do anything for shanking out in holes. You will either need to square the part with the probe or square the probe with the machine axes. I would do the latter as it is easier to square the part with the machine axes than with the probe.
Comment
-
Originally posted by DOUG MORTON View PostLong story short. When I came-in this morning, I noticed a nick (shiny-spot) on my PH9A probe head. Obviously one of my CMM operators on the off-shifts had wrecked my CMM without telling me. I calibrated the tip at various angles and noticed a distinct problem. I performed the "ink-pen test" ... I've seen the calibration tech's do this before. I placed an ink-pen in one of the mounting holes in the granite plate, rotated head to A90B0 and aligned on the ink pen ball. Then locked X-axis rotated head to A90B180 and moved back to the ink pin ball. I was approx. 0.060 off. I re-aligned the probe head to eye-ball spec. My question is how square do I need to be and how do I get there?
I prefer to make sure my probe is mechanically square to the machine. Many times I use a 0/0 probe to "eyeball" a part parallel to the machine and then use dcc alignment in the part program.
If you have parts with holes in the sides that require a 90/90 probe angle for example and your probe is reaching fairly deep into a bore or small counterbore, you can run into probe shanking. If the probe is out of square and you shank, the error will show up in the Y axis or the X axis if using for example a 90/180 angle.
If you have had a serious crash in Z, you would probably see the change just by eyeballing the probe. Your error would show up in the Z component of the hole location.
You can get very good results squaring up your probe in the X/Y plane by setting a right angle iron on the plate and "tramming" which ever face you choose to use parallel to either X or Y axis.
Once it is parallel ( assume we are parallel to X axis here ) change the probe angle to 90/90 and set a zero on the Y face. Get the probe clear and set the angle to 90/-90 and measure the Y location on the opposite side of the angle plate.
Rotate the probe to take out one half of the error and repeat as often as required to get the readings from each side of the angle plate to within .001 or so. It IS easier than you might think.
You should be good to go.
Try to use an extension as well as a probe cartridge and stylus. The longer length you have will make it easier to see the difference in the probe pointing in the two directions although it will make it a little harder to get the squareness right on. You can take that stuff out for your regular tool configuration.
Making everything as square and parallel as you can get it will help control some of the variables you will see in everyday part measurement.
Where you do not want to be is in the position of explaining why a part brought in for reinspection of some disputed feature does not repeat.
Fortunately for me, I am the only one who uses my machine. If I were you, I would have a test part to measure periodically ( you KNEW I was gonna get that in here....right Matt???)
That way if I saw something on my machine that indicated a crash, I would throw that part up on the machine and measure it to be certain nothing had changed.
HTH
HiltonHilton Roberts
"Carpe Cerveza"
Comment
-
Originally posted by Hilton Roberts View PostFortunately for me, I am the only one who uses my machine. If I were you, I would have a test part to measure periodically ( you KNEW I was gonna get that in here....right Matt???)
sigpic
Originally posted by AndersII've got one from September 2006 (bug ticket) which has finally been fixed in 2013.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Hilton Roberts View PostHOWEVER, you may want to remove the head from the quill and MAKE SURE that the mounting bolt that holds the head to the taper is still tight, then put it back in and square it up.
HOWIZZATMATT
H[/QUOTE]
Much better, now go check your 'master' part!sigpic
Originally posted by AndersII've got one from September 2006 (bug ticket) which has finally been fixed in 2013.
Comment
-
No credibility here?
Originally posted by Matthew D. Hoedeman View PostWMS
HOWIZZATMATT
H[/quote]
What is an acceptable part variance?
You mean a GR&R?
Do I need three appraisers?
What would be the acceptable equipment variation?
Do I use ANOVA?sigpic
Comment
Related Topics
Collapse
-
by ErikirI was bent over the machine table with my head under the PH10T. When I stood up I smacked my head into the PH10T head hard. I can now see that the PH10T...
-
Channel: PC-DMIS for CMMs
05-08-2014, 01:52 PM -
-
by stevemWe need to replace a cable from the probe head controller to the probe, which is a ph10t renishaw. We may have to lossen and or remove the probe head...
-
Channel: PC-DMIS for CMMs
01-13-2017, 01:56 PM -
-
by UnderspecIn order to take the front cover off of my CMM, the PH10T head needs to be taken off first. How would you square the head when putting it back in? I was...
-
Channel: PC-DMIS for CMMs
01-02-2007, 10:53 AM -
-
by BWilliamsI recived a replacement probe head for my machine today and I have a question when it comes to installation. It is a TesaStar-I and it is going on a Global...
-
Channel: PC-DMIS for CMMs
05-14-2007, 05:39 PM -
-
by sbuesoAny 1 knows how to do a squareness check on the ph9 head, I think is of but don't know how to check it, please help.
-
Channel: PC-DMIS for CMMs
06-15-2012, 12:29 PM -
Comment