hexagon logo
Register Sign in
  • Replies 17 replies
  • Subscribers 18 subscribers
  • Views 221 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related

From Geopak to PCDmis

RBHouse
My company is currently running a retro-fit Mitutoyo that still has Geopak on it. At any moment the Geopak could die. I have been given the task of training all the inspectors how to use PCDmis. Problem is I am new to it myself, and I have never operated the CMM using the Geopak software. I have used alot of information on site to get through most situations. After training a couple of inspectors, they would like to find a way to run it somewhat like the Geopak runs. Ex. Position the probe at an approximate center of a hole at the depth you want to check it at, hit the circle key, tell it how many hits, etc..Basically, do an Auto circle without making a full blown program with alignments an such. We mostly just do round stuff that we can't check any other way. Can PCDmis do this? Or any other suggestions?

Thanks for any input on this subject,
Ron
Parents
  • Hi Ron, welcome to the forum.

    I have a question - and don't take this the wrong way -

    Why do you use a CMM if "alignments and such" aren't required? That's why
    the CMM is used; it's a tool that can correctly align a part (per the specs.)
    and inspect the features. There are other ways to check "just round stuff"
    that will be easier (and maybe faster) than the CMM.

    I can understand it ir. In some environments, CMM's are needed for some part layouts, but not all the time. The big wigs want justification for their purchase, so you keep it running, even if it's not necessary.

    I would question the upgrade to PCDmis if diameter checks are what the CMM is mostly used for, since Geopak does this sort of thing much faster than PCDmis. Geopak won't die as RB said persay, but maybe the special card used on the PC to interface with the controller might though. And I can imagine they're getting harder and harder to find.
Reply
  • Hi Ron, welcome to the forum.

    I have a question - and don't take this the wrong way -

    Why do you use a CMM if "alignments and such" aren't required? That's why
    the CMM is used; it's a tool that can correctly align a part (per the specs.)
    and inspect the features. There are other ways to check "just round stuff"
    that will be easier (and maybe faster) than the CMM.

    I can understand it ir. In some environments, CMM's are needed for some part layouts, but not all the time. The big wigs want justification for their purchase, so you keep it running, even if it's not necessary.

    I would question the upgrade to PCDmis if diameter checks are what the CMM is mostly used for, since Geopak does this sort of thing much faster than PCDmis. Geopak won't die as RB said persay, but maybe the special card used on the PC to interface with the controller might though. And I can imagine they're getting harder and harder to find.
Children
No Data
© 2024 Hexagon AB and/or its subsidiaries. Privacy Policy | Cloud Services Agreement