hexagon logo
Register Sign in
  • Replies 17 replies
  • Subscribers 222 subscribers
  • Views 355 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related

Composite true positions in Legacy

Lake Monster
I'm being required to use Legacy GDT reporting for a program.
I haven't used legacy before and need help on how to measure/report these composite true positions using it.

Datum A is a surface
Datum B is a bore
Datum C is a bore
I have my alignment set up to ABC.

In TP#1 how do I ignore C to get the AB alignment?
and how do I get just B for the composite?

In TP#2 How do I get the composite with no datums?

Can Legacy do MMC bonus or MMB datum shifts?


TP #1:

{"data-align":"none","data-size":"medium","data-tempid":"temp_22355_1648740249085_596"} ​
TP #2:

​ {"data-align":"none","data-size":"medium","data-tempid":"temp_22356_1648740215078_727"} ​ ​​
​​
Parents
  • Cris_C

    What typed of measurement difference would be alarming to you if you did a composite profile of a surface with in the newer geometric dropdown deal vs the legacy best fit deal? I tried your above method and the bottom A|B section max measurement value was off from the geometric by .010". The analysis graphic output was quite similar and showed all points relatively similar in their shift pattern. If you are interested I can post it on here, but I only have a couple more days at this school, so I've been tidying up some of the tutorials I've made and fixing some old programs before I new what I was doing.

    The results should be very similar. Typically, I get the same results to 4 decimal places. However, I did notice that Xact measure totally couldn't handle a completely unconstrained lower segment with the example I gave in my earlier posts. I got very wacky numbers when I tried. For some reason it was rotating the datums several degrees about the X-axis or Y-axis. When I constrained it to datum A only (which is a much more common callout on the lower segment of a composite position callout), I got the same numbers with both Xact and Legacy. I'll see if I can show you those results tomorrow. The wacky results and the more sensible results.
Reply
  • Cris_C

    What typed of measurement difference would be alarming to you if you did a composite profile of a surface with in the newer geometric dropdown deal vs the legacy best fit deal? I tried your above method and the bottom A|B section max measurement value was off from the geometric by .010". The analysis graphic output was quite similar and showed all points relatively similar in their shift pattern. If you are interested I can post it on here, but I only have a couple more days at this school, so I've been tidying up some of the tutorials I've made and fixing some old programs before I new what I was doing.

    The results should be very similar. Typically, I get the same results to 4 decimal places. However, I did notice that Xact measure totally couldn't handle a completely unconstrained lower segment with the example I gave in my earlier posts. I got very wacky numbers when I tried. For some reason it was rotating the datums several degrees about the X-axis or Y-axis. When I constrained it to datum A only (which is a much more common callout on the lower segment of a composite position callout), I got the same numbers with both Xact and Legacy. I'll see if I can show you those results tomorrow. The wacky results and the more sensible results.
Children
No Data
© 2024 Hexagon AB and/or its subsidiaries. Privacy Policy | Cloud Services Agreement