Star Woes

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

  • Star Woes

    3.5 MR 1
    PH 10 T
    TP 20
    150MMEXT FROM HEAD TO TP 20, 5 WAY, TIP 1,2 AND 4 ARE 3 X 30 CARBON FIBER, TIP 3 AND 5 ARE 4 X 100 CARBON FIBER.

    I know, i know, WWAAAYYY TOOOO LOOONG. this is the only way i can see to check my part. but a little past that point. i get standard deviation on tip 3 at .0004" and tip 5 at .0005". no matter how slow or fast or anything else that i try, it repeats at this deviation. I just purchased these tips and received them yesterday so they are new. i checked a 1" ring gage and gage blocks and repeat within .0001 to .0002" to the nominal size. my question is if i get it to repeat on these gages, will my programming and deminsioning of the part be in question. closest tolerance on the part is +/- .001"
    thanks in advance for the input,

  • #2
    I would give it a go. Did you try a qualification check on the sphere with each tip? That is really all you can do when you have to reach waaaayyy out there to check the part. If you are a student of Hilton Roberts you should have a "known" object/part that you check regularly and you might want to measure some features on that with your superstar and compare the deviation from the established norm.
    BTW I always back up tight tolerance, (.002" or less), diameters with bore gages and micrometers and comparing those check to what the CMM reports might also boost your confidence in this method.


    P.S. The really bad thing about what you are doing is the wear and tear on the tp20 module. If you run this often, expect to be replacing the module.
    sigpic"Hated by Many, Loved by Few" _ A.B. - Stone brewery

    Comment


    • #3
      I tried a qualifying check on the 2 long tips and got same deviation. but ive never done qualify tips before so i have nothing to compare. i always calibrate.
      I do however have a gold part, and hopefully one of these days the boss......will understand the purpose and importance and let me spend the time writing the program and doing repeatability checks on it. what i am trying to do is what by boss wants and that is to duplicate the method that our customer uses. but they have a zeiss calypso scanning blah blah blah. but this is beyong my means so im doing as close as i can withing my capabilities.
      i need to check to see the max weight allowed for the tp 20 ext force. i am using all carbon fiber ( which took me 2 weeks to convince the boss....... the justification for the cost) except for the 5 way adapter.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Kevin Watts View Post
        I tried a qualifying check on the 2 long tips and got same deviation. but ive never done qualify tips before so i have nothing to compare. i always calibrate.
        I do however have a gold part, and hopefully one of these days the boss......will understand the purpose and importance and let me spend the time writing the program and doing repeatability checks on it. what i am trying to do is what by boss wants and that is to duplicate the method that our customer uses. but they have a zeiss calypso scanning blah blah blah. but this is beyong my means so im doing as close as i can withing my capabilities.
        i need to check to see the max weight allowed for the tp 20 ext force. i am using all carbon fiber ( which took me 2 weeks to convince the boss....... the justification for the cost) except for the 5 way adapter.
        Oh, I bet you are overweight and I know you are over length. What is giving you most of your deviation is the length and number of connections. Each connection allows a tiny bit of flex, it adds up. With the qualification check, don't worry about the deviation, look at the reported sphere size. My artifact is dia. .7500" so if I get a number like .7532 I know that won't fly, but if I get .7499 then I am probably going to be ok. HTH

        P.S. Tell your boss if he wants to duplicate the method he needs to duplicate the hardware! If you want the family truckster to perform like a European sports car you have put $ into the high quality components. I think for about $50K BNS can put a scanning head on there for you. LOL
        sigpic"Hated by Many, Loved by Few" _ A.B. - Stone brewery

        Comment


        • #5
          be careful

          Originally posted by Kevin Watts View Post
          3.5 MR 1
          PH 10 T
          TP 20
          150MMEXT FROM HEAD TO TP 20, 5 WAY, TIP 1,2 AND 4 ARE 3 X 30 CARBON FIBER, TIP 3 AND 5 ARE 4 X 100 CARBON FIBER.

          I know, i know, WWAAAYYY TOOOO LOOONG. this is the only way i can see to check my part. but a little past that point. i get standard deviation on tip 3 at .0004" and tip 5 at .0005". no matter how slow or fast or anything else that i try, it repeats at this deviation. I just purchased these tips and received them yesterday so they are new. i checked a 1" ring gage and gage blocks and repeat within .0001 to .0002" to the nominal size. my question is if i get it to repeat on these gages, will my programming and deminsioning of the part be in question. closest tolerance on the part is +/- .001"
          thanks in advance for the input,
          Be careful I had a 1x30 tip (wich I had no other choice to use) Calibrate well and checked dead on to the ring gage dia. Checked roundness and it was off .002 USED VERY SLOW TOUCH SPEED FOR DEFLECTION AS WELL!!!
          sigpic

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by AJHVW93 View Post
            Be careful I had a 1x30 tip (wich I had no other choice to use) Calibrate well and checked dead on to the ring gage dia. Checked roundness and it was off .002 USED VERY SLOW TOUCH SPEED FOR DEFLECTION AS WELL!!!
            For roundness the tp2 & tp20 have a known mechanical lobing error inherent in the probe design. If you really need to check roundness on the CMM you probably want a strain gage probe like the tp200 or one of the scanning probes. The best way to check roundness I know of is a roundness tester. Renishaw can provide more info about the lobing. HTH
            sigpic"Hated by Many, Loved by Few" _ A.B. - Stone brewery

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Wes Cisco View Post
              For roundness the tp2 & tp20 have a known mechanical lobing error inherent in the probe design. If you really need to check roundness on the CMM you probably want a strain gage probe like the tp200 or one of the scanning probes. The best way to check roundness I know of is a roundness tester. Renishaw can provide more info about the lobing. HTH
              Thanks for the info Wes, The problem was with a shorter tip on the tp 20 the roundness on the ring gage checked out well. I was thinking more of the out of round condition, because of the average dia would throw off location.
              sigpic

              Comment

              Related Topics

              Collapse

              Working...
              X