hexagon logo
Register Sign in
  • Replies 22 replies
  • Subscribers 222 subscribers
  • Views 427 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related

Equate Alignment program problem

seppley
I have a part program, i have successfully written it to where i can flip the part, and equate the alignment, all works well, until the next part is ready to be measured. I cannot get the Dmis to go back to the startup alignment at the beginning of the program. I am forced to do a manual alignment for each part. Normally, i manually align the part once, run it through, then the next time i turn off the manual alignment features and run it over and over again letting the dcc alignment take over.

This program will not do that, everytime i start the program over again without the manual alignment features selected, it thinks that the probe head is still on the negative side of the Z axis, which is not true. I don't know why it is not looking at the startup alignment that should tell the program that the probe head is in the space relative to the machine and not the part.

any thoughts? i hope i have just missed something stupid here....

Sam
Parents
  • IMHIO (humble and ignorant), this a useless feature. It involves being able to level, align, and origin on the same features to equate. So why not just skip the equate and and create a new alignment using the same origin? What would be super cool is if they could come up with a way to shift a part longer than the machine envelope, origin off the last feature measured, and offset the shift by the amount of the last result with said feature.

    That would be leapfrogging, and that is what equate alignment does, basically. Whether flipping the part, or just moving it. I measured a 20ish foot long part in 3 segments on an 11-22-10 CMM. Well, I was a green operator at the time, so it was my programmer who accomplished the task, but still.

    If you physically flip a part, what you suggest wouldn't relate the old measured data to the new alignment. You don't have to use the same features, you just have to have features that can be reached in both orientations.
Reply
  • IMHIO (humble and ignorant), this a useless feature. It involves being able to level, align, and origin on the same features to equate. So why not just skip the equate and and create a new alignment using the same origin? What would be super cool is if they could come up with a way to shift a part longer than the machine envelope, origin off the last feature measured, and offset the shift by the amount of the last result with said feature.

    That would be leapfrogging, and that is what equate alignment does, basically. Whether flipping the part, or just moving it. I measured a 20ish foot long part in 3 segments on an 11-22-10 CMM. Well, I was a green operator at the time, so it was my programmer who accomplished the task, but still.

    If you physically flip a part, what you suggest wouldn't relate the old measured data to the new alignment. You don't have to use the same features, you just have to have features that can be reached in both orientations.
Children
No Data
© 2024 Hexagon AB and/or its subsidiaries. Privacy Policy | Cloud Services Agreement