I never really thought of this till today, but is it proper practice to use an alignment feature as a feature for actual measurement, or is it considered in-accurate?
Example: I MANUALLY use a plane, line and point for my manual alignment. The I go to DCC mode and use another Plane (more points this time), line and point. Can I then use that DCC created Plane as a feature of measurement? What about as a Datum? Or should I, after the DCC Alignment create ANOTHER Plane and use IT as the measured plane, and never use the DCC Alignment Plane again?
It should not matter if you use the DCC alignment features as part of a datum set, or even as features being inspected. Even if you were to consider that the hits were taken in a (only very slightly) different coordinate system (i.e. the manual alignment), all the feature characteristics including the hits are transformed into the coordinate system in place at the time it is being used. This could be a construction, a dimension, etc. Taking the same hits over again would not make any difference.
That said, there is an argument for taking fewer hits as part of the alignment process,and more hits as part of the inspection process, but if you plan accordingly a single feature can do "double-duty".
It should not matter if you use the DCC alignment features as part of a datum set, or even as features being inspected. Even if you were to consider that the hits were taken in a (only very slightly) different coordinate system (i.e. the manual alignment), all the feature characteristics including the hits are transformed into the coordinate system in place at the time it is being used. This could be a construction, a dimension, etc. Taking the same hits over again would not make any difference.
That said, there is an argument for taking fewer hits as part of the alignment process,and more hits as part of the inspection process, but if you plan accordingly a single feature can do "double-duty".