long program run times

just do a quick test without even a part. Simply make a bogus program, move/point to X0Y0Z0, then increment to Y200 or something. Set the speed low, and simply touch the probe while it is moving that increment. Tell it to continue and see where it ends up.

Matthew D. Hoedeman I just did! Behaved exactly as you described. Will definitely have to keep this in mind. Luckily, my machines are kept very clean and are insulated from vibration that would cause them to "alarm out", so i haven't seen this issue until i jus forced it now

DAN_M Same, I set my clearance plane as soon as I probe my temporary Z plane. Then I make it smaller when I'm finished with my final alignment. I rarely have to change alignments though so I probably won't hardcode my feature into the command.

Matthew D. Hoedeman I didn't know that about the incremental moves. I use them occasionally so that's good to know!

Matthew D. Hoedeman I just did! Behaved exactly as you described. Will definitely have to keep this in mind. Luckily, my machines are kept very clean and are insulated from vibration that would cause them to "alarm out", so i haven't seen this issue until i jus forced it now

My issue isn't dirty machine or vibration. I have an almost 40 year old machine that has the original drive system for the Z axis, a rod about 4 feet long that spins to drive the machine, 'offset' bearings (or twisted bearings) pressed against the rod is what makes the machine move up and down. Do you think that 40 year old rod is perfectly straight and round? Yeah, that could be counted as vibration, but it is part of the machine, not due to train track, presses, mills, etc. I also from time to time have to over-extend the probe length, with a large probe, so that adds to the issue. Don't have the issue on the Global, but that Validator.....

Clearance Cube limitations with using star probes with articulating probe head.
When the features that are being measure at the bottom of the part using Tip 5 and trying to stop the probe from moving above the part for every tip angle changes.
Another, issue with using star probes with articulating probe head is when you switch from T5 to T3 with no probe angle changes the probe will still try to move outside of the
clearance cube constraints.
When you do get the probe head to staying within the clearance cube constraints you will get a warning message every time that you are changing the probe within the clearance cube.
Then when you want to use the MINI routines you have to use the clearance cube and that is not just a click and play either.
The other option would be to use Feature Based Measurement (FBM) in which is an add-on.
In other words your better off doing what others have posted here to work with guiding the probe around the part for now. At least until Hexagon does some major improvements with the clearance cube.


FBM help file Link: https://docs.hexagonmi.com/pcdmis/2020.2/en/helpcenter/index.htm?rhcsh=1&rhnewwnd=0#t=mergedProjects%2Fcore%2F09_edit_window_topics%2FUsing_Feature_Based_Measurement.htm&rhsearch=FBM&rhsyns=%20

My issue isn't dirty machine or vibration. I have an almost 40 year old machine that has the original drive system for the Z axis, a rod about 4 feet long that spins to drive the machine, 'offset' bearings (or twisted bearings) pressed against the rod is what makes the machine move up and down. Do you think that 40 year old rod is perfectly straight and round? Yeah, that could be counted as vibration, but it is part of the machine, not due to train track, presses, mills, etc. I also from time to time have to over-extend the probe length, with a large probe, so that adds to the issue. Don't have the issue on the Global, but that Validator.....

Thats cool as h3ll, would love to se epics of your machine! I am lucky, all of my stuff is 10 years old or newer (except the manual CMM from the Cold War lol)

Collision detection is great BUT those friggin' "fly/mode" path lines still get me every now and then wish they'd incorporated them in the graphics screen.

Wonder how much more brain power it would require for me to go without using path lines...?

Ah, yes! Scans aren't good with path lines... I skip them. Or, if I really have to include them in the path lines I still skip them but will create a scan start move/point and scan end move/point.

Putting your TIP command right before a clearp command saves me from every putting a value in that section.