hexagon logo
Register Sign in
  • Replies 17 replies
  • Subscribers 221 subscribers
  • Views 359 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related

Scan results different from keyed-in points

TheBradish
I have a part with a very tight profile tolerance (form+location) of .0005. I wrote a program with a model and aligned to all 3 datums.

I keyed in gage points and read the vectors from the model. Part is out of tolerance (which I expected) by about .001, the profile being off center.

Next I added a linear TTP scan along the same section where I probed the gage points. The scan shows deviations up to .018!Confused Same program, same part, same alignment.

What could I be doing wrong with my scan to get a result that differs so much from my keyed-in points?
Parents
  • when you take a hit on the .652 and .333 what are your actuals?

    The .470R you can check as a radius

    I have aligned the part so Z+ is toward the small end on the left, X+ is toward the tapered side on top.

    On one side that GP reads: <0.6858,0.2245,-0.6521><1.0000,-0.0000,-0.0000> DEV -0.0002
    The opposite side: <0.3525,0.2201,-0.6521><-1.0000,0.0000,-0.0000> DEV .0006

    Thanks for making me take a closer look at these, WolfMan. I really had only been looking at the deviations, not the XYZs. I don't know why they look like this. Y should be 0, and X should be equidistant from 0, yet the deviations are so small. I'm reading off the report from the first program I mentioned above. Don't have a printout from the subsequent ones, but I'll have to open up the program when my machine is free today.
Reply
  • when you take a hit on the .652 and .333 what are your actuals?

    The .470R you can check as a radius

    I have aligned the part so Z+ is toward the small end on the left, X+ is toward the tapered side on top.

    On one side that GP reads: <0.6858,0.2245,-0.6521><1.0000,-0.0000,-0.0000> DEV -0.0002
    The opposite side: <0.3525,0.2201,-0.6521><-1.0000,0.0000,-0.0000> DEV .0006

    Thanks for making me take a closer look at these, WolfMan. I really had only been looking at the deviations, not the XYZs. I don't know why they look like this. Y should be 0, and X should be equidistant from 0, yet the deviations are so small. I'm reading off the report from the first program I mentioned above. Don't have a printout from the subsequent ones, but I'll have to open up the program when my machine is free today.
Children
No Data
© 2024 Hexagon AB and/or its subsidiaries. Privacy Policy | Cloud Services Agreement