hexagon logo
Register Sign in
  • Replies 13 replies
  • Subscribers 19 subscribers
  • Views 235 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related

When do you generate your results?

Michael R
Do you have a preference where in your program you create you measured results. I find if I wait till the end of the program it takes longer because I have to go back and identify my features.
So once I've named my datums I'll create the results while the ID's are still fresh in my head.
  • dims with features for 2 reasons.

    (1) If you put all the dims at the end of the program, it actually takes longer to run the program, if the dims are with the feature, they calculate/generate as the machine is moving to the next feature.

    (2) SOMETIMES, if you have to edit the program for whatever reason, and need to re-order the features, SOMETIMES the dimensions get blown away, but if the dim is with the feature, you move both at once, no problem.

    I've always put my dimensions in at the end of the program, so I had some questions about implementing this method in my situation.

    I deal with a lot tube shaped parts - DAT-A as the OD of the cylinder, DAT-B as the bottom, Dat-C as a timing hole - where I will measure hole patterns to ABC when I haven't "fully" captured DAT-A (measured half of the cylinder for example). This is done to save run time and probe head rotations FWIW

    So if I'm understanding this right, to implement your method, I would have to measure the datums first then the other features? Also, is what I'm currently doing correct?

  • For me it's more efficient to measure features and then dimension. I measure all the features I can with a particular probe rotation. Rotate the probe to a new orientation and then repeat. With dimensions at the end, I can more easily order my results in a semi-logical fashion. If I have to edit the program I don't have to be concerned about messing up the balloon numbering. I can click on the feature name in the report and jump to where it's measured easily enough and so I don't lose any time searching for the feature. But that the way my brain makes sense out of all this...
  • in reply to Matthew D. Hoedeman
    I used to program this way until I started here..... All of the legacy programs here were run with measurements first then tolerance at the end and I believe it does take longer but I decided to follow the previous programmer's method for this as the only thing that matters from the shop people is clean and readable reports.
© 2024 Hexagon AB and/or its subsidiaries. Privacy Policy | Cloud Services Agreement