hexagon logo
Register Sign in
  • Replies 30 replies
  • Subscribers 16 subscribers
  • Views 462 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related

Viva LaPaloozagon

Wes Cisco
I am being deployed last minute to research metrology options for a purchase we need to make. I will be there tomorrow and Wednesday if anyone from here would like to meetup, maybe even see if we find some squirrel lasagna and side salad. Rolling eyes

  • in reply to Wes Cisco
    Waiting for a small summary of the GD&T library sesh.
  • Waiting for a small summary of the GD&T library sesh.

    Soon.

    Got back to SFO last night. Have a lot of nasty workish type things to deal with today. ASAP I will post full updates. I intend a general review of the IMNSHFO overall experience, and a separate detailed dive into the GD&T sessions I attended. I may not get these posted today or tomorrow, but they should be up by Moanday Mourning.

    Thanks for the interest & Happy Friday Eve!

    P.S. I had the privilege to meet and have a couple of beers with Rich P. Good times.


    Sunglasses
  • in reply to Wes Cisco
    Bahahaha Monday 'mourning'! Can't wait.
  • Excellent as always seenior Cisco. The word on the street from 2019 R2 is: (from 'the' Don) regarding re-tooling Demon GD&T varieties ASME & ISO both.
    ...We have decided to hold it back to 2020 R1 so we can release support all dimensions at launch.
    We are looking for feedback from customers and a special version will be made available. This should not be used in production though.
    Rob Jensen is the contact if you're interested.
    It seems you are ahead of us once more with Vegas info of the newest and bestestest goodies.
    Que lastima I could not have exited Joisey to attend, amigo!! Sunglasses
  • in reply to Wes Cisco
    Good meeting Wes
    a beer and a whiskey too!!


  • Howdy Y'all! What follows is the promised IMNSHFO summary of my experiences at the Hexagon convention. There will be a separate, technical post about the GD&T and Pc-Dmis sessions I attended. . . soon.

    The tl:dr: Las Vegas is in the middle of the desert. It is very hot there. The hotels are absurdly luxurious, the casino is loud and smokey, the food good but $$$-$$$$-$$$$$. Hexagon has expanded their trade show to offer many presentations, hands-on training sessions, and key note megapresentations ranging from meh to freakin' fantastic.

    When Hexagon began holding these events nearly a decade ago I was not interested in attending. The agenda appeared to be nothing more than a long series of sales pitches and I have never been inclined to visit Sin City for any of it's so called attractions. Just not my sort of thing. I never caught the gambling bug, which I attribute to understanding the mathematics of "odds" a bit too well; somewhat akin to my aversion to meat that is not fully cooked and my limited knowledge of microbiology. I manage to "sin" plenty no matter where I go. I never wanted to empty my bank account pretending to be the subject of a Robin Leach piece.

    However my present employer is Zoox. We are building a full stack robotaxi service from scratch. For the past few months we have been using our Leica Tracker a great deal. Recent activities have revealed a need for expanded capabilities to the point that we are considering a second system, ideally one that will be even more versatile than our current system. So it was decided to send myself and a colleague to this year's event, mostly to research the newest offerings and make contacts with the some of the most knowledgeable folks for each platform we are interested in. We went armed with a set of needs and an Engineer's wish list of capabilities we do not currently have.

    This was a bit last minute, but not as outrageously so as I first thought given Las Vegas is only a one hour flight from San Francisco and flights and hotels there are cheap, even at the last minute. Seeking to balance spending a sufficient amount of time at the event to achieve the main mission and also attend some sessions of extreme interest I found in the agenda against my need to keep up with my regular work and need to be at my desk/in the office, I decided to fly out early Tuesday morning, stay the night and return Wednesday evening. My accomplice chose the same schedule but a day later. The conference officially ran Tuesday thru Friday.

    It worked out quite well, but I was pretty much on the go go go the entire two days, and with being out of the office for two days, the three days at work were also jam packed. That's all fine. Just saying that if I go again I will try to allow more time for talking to people outside of sessions & events. If one is only going for the trade show effect of seeing the newest tech in the area they call "The Zone", then one day is probably sufficient. However if you are interested in any of the Keynotes, presentations, or hands-on training sessions, then you will need more time. I think one could justify the cost of attending if there were at least 5 or 6 sessions of key interest. I would give a bit of extra weight given to the 'master class', 'hands-on', and 'training' sessions vs. the 'keynotes' and 'presentations'. The former are on a par with the formal Hexagon training offerings. The later tend to be more high-level and fewer technical details. If one of your goals is shopping research such as was my primary mission, I would allow for a minimum of 8 hours devoted to the Zone and for cost justification purposes I would consider it to be of equivalent value to 3 or 4 sessions.

    Hexagon is more than just a CMM OEM. Much more. Their theme this year is "Smart" and all about the industry 4.0 concepts of all portions of the organization sharing data with each other to be leveraged in every which way possible. They had the Zone divided into the following sections:
    - Smart Buildings & Infrastructure
    - Smart Cities & Nations
    - Smart Autonomous Mobility
    - Smart Factories
    - Smart Mines
    - Smart Industrial Facilities

    CMMs are in the Smart Factories section, but there was only one small shop floor model on display and it was really only there to show off the robot arm that was cleaning, loading, and removing parts from the CMM.

    I did not attend Hexagon CEO & President Ola Rollen's keynote: "Your Data Can Save The World" but I have watched it on the innerwebz and you can too.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...&v=tYWuwVJylVQ

    Clearly he did not get the memo that AlGoreythm duped the scientists. Ola thinks there is lots of money to be made as we attempt to change course before we hit the doomsday limit.

    The Vennetian hotel is nothing but suites. I am pretty sure I was in the smallest cheapest 660sq/ft "Luxury King Size Suite". It was plenty plush. The place is diabolically laid out with three wings, the Vennetian, the Pallazio, & the Sands. My room was in the first, the restaurants are in the second, and the convention in the third. The diabolical part is that the casino is in the middle, so to get from anywhere to anywhere you have go schelp thru the casino. Definitely a sensory overload zone and oh the noise noise noise.

    My wife bought me a very apropos t-shirt a few years ago with the text: "You have read my shirt, that's enough social interaction for one day." Yet ironically the highlight of this event for me was meeting and talking to two people. Rob Jensen the chair of the Y14.5.1 math standard and Rich P the fellow forum member and metrologist from Massachusetts. After the GD&T and Pc-Dmis hands-on trainings on Tuesday afternoon I had a lengthy conversation with Rob. Tuesday evening I chose to skip Ola's keynote to have dinner with Rich and his wife, followed by Rich and I having a few beers.

    Lastly a few words about food. If you pay attention to schedules and locations most all of your nutritional and hydration needs can be met with Hexagon provided fare. However the serving windows are a bit narrow and without careful scheduling one finds oneself resorting to purchasing from one of the many establishments within the hotel/casino complex. The two places I ate at were both excellent in terms of service and food quality. First time travels to Vegas should expect some sticker shock when it comes to the pricing.

    HTH & ymmv

    Thanks for reading. I had hoped to be able to post the techy stuff by this time too, but I am behind my self-imposed schedule. Hopefully by tonight.
  • Deja vu! I feel like I just read this somewhere. Rolling eyes
  • Here is the promised summary of the three GD&T focused sessions I attended at HxGN LIVE 2019:
    ASME Standards Update and Overview of Y14.5-2018 - Fred Constantino @ASME & Rob Jensen @ Hexagon.
    New GD&T Library for PC-DMIS v2019R2 and v2020R1 – Rob Jensen @ Hexagon.
    Pc-Dmis Mathmatical Definition of Datum Features per ASME Y14.5 & Y14.5.1 - Dr. Daniel Wilcox @ Hexagon.

    I have struggled to write this review. The subject mater is complex and not easily communicated without images. I am hesitant to take too liberal an approach to copy/paste from the standards and slide decks because I respect intellectual property and I believe professionals working in industry needing this information should purchase the standards. So I have tried to strike a balance by mentioning all of the key points from each presentation, but not trying to fully explain every concept. Overall I find this unsatisfactory, but it is the best I can do at this time and I do not want to keep putting off finishing this project.

    ASME Standards Update:

    ASME is focused on helping the global engineering community develop solutions to real world challenges. ASME was founded in 1880 to address issues with industrialization and mechanization, in particular boilers and pressure vessels that were exploding with alarming frequency. ASME seeks to achieve it’s goals primarily through the creation and revision of consensus based standards.
    The Y14 group of standards, and in particular Y14.5 have proven to be extremely useful to industry and have been adopted widely. ASME has an official Spanish translation committee for several Y14 standards. ASME has agreements for the translation of Y14.5 into German, Japanese, Swedish, and Chinese (tentative). ASME offers GD&T Training and Certifications.
    ASME is currently working hard to fill the gaps and develop the standards necessary for industry to complete the transition to model based definitions. There is a long way to go, but the future is in sight when 2D drawings will be as obsolete as a true “Blue Prints” are today. This transition was begun in Y14.5-2009 and has been expanded in Y14.5-2018.


    An overview of Y14.5-2018:

    Surface texture is included in conformance to tolerance now.
    4.1 Fundamental Rules
    (s) Unless otherwise specified, elements of a surface include surface texture and flaws (e.g. burrs and scratches). All elements of a surface shall be within the applicable specified tolerance zone boundaries.



    Per ASME Y14.5-2009 the method of datum definition is 'Candidate Datum Set'. This method has a few flaws including:
    Ambiguous coordinate systems
    Impractical (almost never actually used)
    Encourages form error
    Undefined for multi-feature datums

    So they have abandoned Candidate Datum Sets and started over. This is huge and fundamental. Going forward it should help reduce differences in results from various softwares and inspection methods (i.e. surface plate vs. CMM). The new method truly represents how parts assemble and fit to physical datum simulators.

    In ASME Y14.5-2018 there is a new datum definition: 'Constrained Least Squares' (A.K.A. Constrained L2)

    7.11.2 Irregularities on Datum Features Applicable RMB
    If irregularities on a datum feature are such that the part is unstable (i.e. it rocks) when it is brought into contact with the corresponding true geometric counterpart, the default requirement is that the part be adjusted to a single solution that minimizes the separation between the feature and the true geometric counterpart per ASME Y14.5.1M. If a different procedure is desired (candidate datum set, Chebychev, least squares, translational least squares, etc.), it shall be specified.


    This single solution is 'Constrained Least Squares'. The problem with plain least squares is that it yields solutions that are in part "in material". Constrained least squares achieves a similar minimizing of deviation from nominal while constraining the solution to being entirely external to the material.
    Nonmandatory Appendix B of the draft of Y14.5.1 explains in detail the pros and cons of the various methods of datum definition.

    ASME Y14.5 -2018 section 5.17 has introduced a Tangent Plane Modifier ( “T” in a circle) for when it is desired to control a tangent plane established by contracting points of a surface. The standard illustrates this with orientation tolerances, however it may also have applications using other geometric characteristic symbols such as runout and profile when it is applied to a planar feature.

    ASME Y14.5-2018 has also introduced a new Dynamic Profile Tolerance Modifier (a triangle symbol). The function of the dynamic profile is to allow form to be controlled independent of size. The example given was the gas tank on a motorcycle, it is fairly easy to understand the form needs to be precisely controlled but the size can vary much more without detriment to function.

    Concentricity and Symmetry have been removed. ***Vigorous Applause***
    Position and Runout are the recommended geometric tolerance to use for these applications now.


    An overview of Y14.5.1-2019*:
    *currently a draft, intent is to publish in 2019, but it might be delayed to 2020 if rejected during the approval process.

    First a few relevant bits many may not be aware of. The current revision of Y14.5.1 - the math standard was issued in 1994 and reaffirmed in 2012. It was the first attempt to mathematically define the principles Y14.5 is based upon. Ideally there would have been a new revision to accompany Y14.5-2009 within a few years. Instead the existing was reaffirmed in 2012. There was a draft for public review of the Y14.5.1 based on Y14.5-2009 issued in December of 2018, just a few months after ANSI approved Y14.5-2018.
    The committees of Y14.5 & Y14.5.1 have tremendous overlap. So while the Y14.5.1. committee could not begin working from Y14.5-2018 until after it was published, they were aware of the changes it would encompass before they finished work on the revision in response to Y14.5-2009. They have managed to word the critical passages in such a way that while defaulting to the Y14.5-2009 definitions, there are also allowances for the Y14.5-2018 definitions.


    2.1.1 Establishing Surface Points - this paragraph has been eliminated in light of surface texture now being included in tolerance conformance.

    4.7.11 Alternate Stabilization Procedure
    In accordance with ASME Y14.5-2009 the default stabilization procedure is per candidate datum sets. However ASME Y14.5-2009 does allow for different stabilization procedures to be specified. When a single solution that minimizes the separation between the features and the simulator is specified the default procedure is Constrained L2 for datum features of size and Constrained L2 applied to the external envelope for planar features.

    New mathematical definitions for Actual Local Size:
    Evaluation of Actual Local size now has two prescribed methods.
    1. Opposed points – an actual local size exists for every line perpendicular to the local size spine at the point this line intersects the 2 dimensional local size spine.
    2. Circular Elements – If actual local size is to be evaluated by the circular elements method, two actual local sizes exist for every point on the local size spine in the cross-section perpendicular to the local size spine at that point (cylindrical features of size); or every plane passing through the center point (spherical features of size). Where Rule 1 does not apply, both maximum material and least material local sizes are of interest. If Rule 1 applies, only the least material local size is of interest.

    New Actual Value for Profile (bilateral tolerance): In the 1994 version two actual values, one for surface variations in the positive direction and one for the negative direction were calculated. For each direction, the actual value of profile is the smallest intermediate tolerance to which the surface conforms. The new Actual Value of a profile tolerance is based on an enveloping zone called the ‘actual zone’ that is generated in the same way as the tolerance zone.
    I find this very difficult to describe at the level of the mathematical standard and will not attempt to explain it further here.

    Lastly, the New GD&T stuff in Pc-Dmis.

    Due to these changes there is a new GD&T library in v2019 R1 and there will be a new GD&T command in v2020 R1.
    The goals for these changes are Accuracy, Reliability, Ease of Use, and Performance. To achieve these goals they have adopted a Test-driven development plan with emphasis on an automated test suite to ensure new changes don’t break old functionality. Additionally, they have sanity checked the new stuff against other software packages. There have been improvements to make it easier and more intuitive to use Pc-Dmis in compliance with the standards. Lastly there has been a strong focus on ensuring a smooth migration for routines from Xactmeasure to the new GD&T command.

    V2019 R1 - New GD&T library:
    Constructed Primary Datum Plane. This command replaces the High Point Plane from previous versions. Use this option to construct a primary datum plane per ASME y14.5 or ISO 5459. Input features can be:
    • Three or more of any feature type
    • Any single feature set
    • Any plane feature
    • Any scan
    Constructed Secondary and Tertiary Datum Planes. Constructed Line and Constructed Point used for orientation constrained secondary and tertiary datum planes. Tertiary datum basic angle to secondary is variable (90 degrees is the default). This means you can finally, easily and correctly handle inclined datum features such as shown Y14.5-2009 fig 4-7.

    Local Size Options – opposed points or circular elements.

    V2020 R1 – New Geometric Tolerance Command:
    Supports ASME Y14.5-2018
    Supports ISO 1101:2012
    Features:
    • Expanded Datum Definition Capabilities – Define a Common Datum (previously Multiple Datum Feature, often colloquially called Compound Datums) or a Single Datum from multiple features of size ( a hole pattern).
    • Supports Four Segment Composite Feature Control Frames. (5 is the max, but more than 4 is extremely rare). Analysis by Segment and Math option for Datums and Features of composite FCFs.
    • Intelligent Simultaneous Evaluation – Profile and Position.


    That is all I have for now. I expect there will be questions aplenty. I will try to answer them as best I can, but please bear in mind I have limited time available for forum fun these days.

    P.S. Look for a draft of Y14.45 to be available for public review later this year!
  • in reply to Wes Cisco
    Thanks for sharing, Wes. Only question I have is, did they deal with the squirrel lasagna quandary?
© 2024 Hexagon AB and/or its subsidiaries. Privacy Policy | Cloud Services Agreement