Scanning results

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

  • Scanning results

    I read on a previous thread that the way PCDMIS calculates a profile is incorrect. I could not find anything confirming or denying this. Does any know of a thread I can review or have comments for this?
    Robert Horne
    Va.

  • #2
    I use profile all the time and the results seem to be correct.

    The only thing to watch is plus and minus deviations are: Material on / material off, not dimensionally posative and negative.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by robehor4 View Post
      I read on a previous thread that the way PCDMIS calculates a profile is incorrect. I could not find anything confirming or denying this. Does any know of a thread I can review or have comments for this?
      You may be thinking of probe comp ? One of the aces can help you on this one.
      sigpic

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by robehor4 View Post
        I read on a previous thread that the way PCDMIS calculates a profile is incorrect. I could not find anything confirming or denying this. Does any know of a thread I can review or have comments for this?
        It depends on exactly what you mean:

        IF you are scanning WITH cad data, then Pcdmis uses the cad nominals and cad vectors for all touches. The results will be reasonably close (on the order of microns) unless your form is really whacked (on the order of 15 degrees off or more)

        IF you are scanning anything with a touch-trigger-probe (the only kind I have so the only kind I know for sure), then unless you are using SURFACE POINTS with a minimum of 3 sample hits per hit, then the comp for the probe radius will NOT be correct, it will only be along 2 axis, not 3. This is fine if you are scanning a 2-D profile. However, if you are scanning a 3-D surface, then the probe comp will not be correct. If you are scanning 'up/down' in the 'x-axis', you will get no probe comp in the 'y-axis' direction and you could easily be off a BUNCH. For this reason, when doing a NON-CAD scan of a 3-D surface for reverse engineering, COMP=OFF is your best bet.


        IF you are talking about the PROFILE dimension itself, it will depnd on what version you have. It WILL be correct, but you may need help in understanding what it is telling you. In some versions it takes teh highest deviation and doubles that value (treating it like true-pos) and in some versions it takes the highest to lowest and reports that value. If you report each point as a point and not part of a scan or set and use the T axis, that will always tell you the correct value (use 1/2 of the profile tolerance for the +/- value ie profile tol of 1.0mm = +/-0.5mm).
        sigpic
        Originally posted by AndersI
        I've got one from September 2006 (bug ticket) which has finally been fixed in 2013.

        Comment


        • #5
          What I usually do is enable text analysis to prove it. This will list the point deviations.
          I used to be high on life but I built up a tolerance.

          Brown & Sharpe Global Advantage
          PCDMIS CAD++ v2011mr2
          PH10MQ/SP600M


          sigpic

          Comment


          • #6
            Thanks for your info. I wish I could find that thread again, since I use CAD for everything here and have compared results to a profrile tracer Im confident with my results. Since I didnt here any negative responses from you guys I will continue with my current process. Thanks again.
            Robert Horne
            Va.

            Comment


            • #7
              See this post:

              http://www.pcdmisforum.com/showthrea...hlight=profile

              Yes, I remain strongly opinianated against the way PC-DMIS reports profile using the 4.x XactMeasure profile dimension. It is dead WRONG. But Wilcox disagrees and that is OK because by using the MIN/MAX you can get to the correct answer. So as long as you know what the problem is, it is easy to get to the correct answer.


              Jan.
              Last edited by Jan d.; 09-12-2007, 10:53 AM.
              ***************************
              PC-DMIS/NC 2010MR3; 15 December 2010; running on 18 machine tools.
              Romer Infinite; PC-DMIS 2010 MR3; 15 December 2010.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Jan d. View Post
                See this post:

                http://www.pcdmisforum.com/showthrea...hlight=profile

                Yes, I remain strongly opinianated against the way PC-DMIS reports profile using the 4.x XactMeasure profile dimension. It is dead WRONG. But Wilcox disagrees and that is OK because by using the MIN/MAX you can get to the correct answer. So as long as you know what the problem is, it is easy to get to the correct answer.



                Jan.



                Jan.
                Thanks Jan, that is exactly what I was looking for. Too bad I missed all that.
                Robert Horne
                Va.

                Comment

                Related Topics

                Collapse

                Working...
                X