hexagon logo

Perpendicularity of cylinder

Hi everyone,

I am new to the forum and by searching the topics I couldn't find the answer to my question.
I need to measure the perpendicularity of a hollow cylinder according to its planar surface used as datum. I have used two different approaches in this regard, but I obtain very different results.
in the first approach, I measure 5 circles at different levels along the cylinder height [using auto circle feature] then I construct a cylinder from these 5 circles [constructed feature] and finally I chose Perpendicularity Dimension to measure the perpendicularity.
in the second approach, I use Auto Cylinder feature[using Adaptive Cylinder Concentric Circle Scan] to construct the cylinder geometry as showed in the attached image, where the scans are performed at the same positions along the axis compare to the previous approach. by measuring the perpendicularity according to the same datum as the first approach, this time I get perpendicularity values which are much worst than the previous case. [in first case I get 0.006 mm while in second case it is 0.098mm].
I would appreciate if you can help me find out which of these two approach is correct, or is there a better solution to measure the perpendicularity precisely?

Thank you in advance.

Attached Files
Parents
  • I think the problem in the first case is that you are constructing a cylinder from circles. I think you need to construct the cylinder from the circle hits.

    But, I also don't do any analog scanning, so I can't say that there isn't a problem there. I would think that your adaptive scans are the better (more correct) result.
  • "Construct cylinder from circles" is a special case in PC-DMIS, and uses all the measuring points of the circles, so it shouldn't be the source of the problem. BF or BFRE in the construction might give small differences, but I doubt it could be as much as is the case here.
Reply Children
No Data