I found the classes taken from a university to be much more understanding than the Hexagon class. This was a while ago. Our company used Mark Rusco from Ferris State University. Of course this wasn't a PCDMIS class. Are you looking for GD&T knowledge specifically? Or how to us it in PCDMIS? Or both?
I wouldn't be able to tell you from personal experience for said course but I'm sure it will be beneficial more ways than one. You don't have to answer this, but did you guys pay out of pocket or was it done through your employer? Employer luckily paid the way for level 1 which was $2500 and 80 hours.
I found the classes taken from a university to be much more understanding than the Hexagon class. This was a while ago. Our company used Mark Rusco from Ferris State University. Of course this wasn't a PCDMIS class. Are you looking for GD&T knowledge specifically? Or how to us it in PCDMIS? Or both?
Our quality manager before us took the class in Irvine I believe, the company paid for everything, hotel stay, travel, and then he gave his two week notice. Don't know if he would be able to align now much less calibrate angles, it's all gone. As far as source material, I saw what he had access to and once thats gone and you dont have access to it or pc-dmis you kind of forget it. I went through a professional development type of deal through the employer where you had to qualify which meant them forcing a pay raise.
Depending on how many hours those 5 day hexagon classes are, 80 hours is likely more time compared to the hexagon classes? It would be nice to take hexagon class for sure just to have it, but I dont think they give you a license as you would get if you went through a development center/college which was like 6 months worth of the latest pc-dmis use at home until the class was over, you had to connect through vpn. I can see why it's only a week though, 80 hours is a long time, they hammer alignments till you get it and some instructors actually allow you to record the class.
I took the online GeoTol class last year and thought it was pretty good. The instructor was good and the materials were good. I did screenshots and saved as much as I could as we are not moving beyond 2019R2 (management decision) for a while due to the amount of changes we will need to make to jump from Xact to GeoTol and the lack of manpower to make those changes on all 3 shifts.
That's what I'm currently taking, fundamentals 2020. Which I kind of took back in college under Print Interpt 2 but they go only so far. The videos are indeed nice. They also just went from 6 month access to a full year. I also have their workbook and answers.
I have not. But from what I gather is the class is not about teaching GD&T but to teach how to use the Dimensioning part of the software. I see the benefit for such a class because it is more complicated now than back when it was only Legacy.
I have not. But from what I gather is the class is not about teaching GD&T but to teach how to use the Dimensioning part of the software. I see the benefit for such a class because it is more complicated now than back when it was only Legacy.
I've been programming in PC-DMIS for 13 years and I personally find that dimensioning in GEO-TOL is WAY easier and so much faster than Legacy, but that's just me YMMV
XactMeasure (the old feature control frame reporting method) is obsolete and was replaced with the Geometric Tolerance command in version 2020 R2.
Legacy still has it's uses but requires the user to interpret the print and to create the appropriate alignments and dimensions required to verify the specification. Legacy can not perform advanced datum fitting, is unable to report patterns of features and can not perform simultaneous evaluations. It is also, primarily designed to work with ASME. Although there is a registry setting (UseISOCalculations), the only real difference it makes is to use the single value method for profile (twice the largest deviation) instead of looking at the MAX and MIN.
Since their initial release, ISO and ASME have gradually diverged more and more, such that there are now considerable differences in both interpretation and function when working with ISO as opposed to ASME. One major difference is datum fitting - constrained MIN/MAX (ISO) vs Constrained L2 (ASME) and whether datums are fixed in location and orientation (ASME) or orientation only (ISO). All of this is covered in the new Hexagon GDT training course.
If you align to ABC, then dimension everything to that alignment, are not all those dimensions a simultaneous evaluation? ALL are being reported to the exact same DRF, there just isn't any datum shift being done for any of the dimensions, but they are all simultaneous evaluations....
Matthew D. Hoedeman, Yes, but the whole point of a simultaneous evaluation is to ensure the correct datum shift is performed when there is MMB on the datums and multiple features reference the same datum reference frame.
I took part in a HEXAGON GD&T course 2 years ago. I have to say that it was very comprehensive and brought many things closer to me. Furthermore, each individual symbol is shown and explained in GeoTol.
