hexagon logo
Register Sign in
  • Replies 34 replies
  • Subscribers 225 subscribers
  • Views 330 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related

2022.1SP6 Parallelism issue

JEFMAN
I have 2 planes, PL1 is datum A (primary using minimax), and PL2 constructed from 7 basic scan/circle/plane. (least square, but it shouldn't change anything !)
Using geotol, it gives 7,1 µm
using legacy, it gives 35,1 µm
using assignments (ASSIGN/V1=DOT(PL2.HIT[1..PL2.NUMHITS].XYZ-PL1.XYZ,PL1.IJK) , then ASSIGN/V2=MAX(V1)-MIN(V1)), it gives 36,1 µm.
Then, constructing 7 planes from scans and construct a plane from their centroids, it gives about 8 µm (so I'm wondering if geotol uses them to calculate instead of hits ?)

Don Ruggieri , neil.challinor
Parents
  • So, started using [..] in my programs and it went flawlessly during creation. I had to revisit one of these programs today and PC-DMIS (2023.1 SP1) complained that the GeoTol evaluations for these features where I used the [..] trick didn't have any measured data:



    The report also showed evaluations in black with ERROR for all these evaluations.
    It started working as soon as I changed one of them to the standard syntax .HIT[1..FEATURENAME.NUMHITS] again.
    If I changed back to [..] the error message did not show up and all looked as expected. But, if I loaded the program up with the [..] syntax, it would display this error.

    neil.challinor - is this something you can verify? Is the [..] too new for usage perhaps?
  • in reply to vpt.se
    I ran quite a few tests on this issue. The construction HIT[..] will be the same as HIT[1..feature.NUMHITS].
    The no points issue comes into play when the constructed feature is used for the GEOMETRIC TOLERANCE (maybe just as a datum).
    During program load the GEOMETRIC TOLERANCE requests the hit information from the feature. The feature checks to compare the number of inputs it had during the last run or last user typed input change. If the number of hits last used does not match the current amount of hits that will be used the constructed feature will tell the GEOMETRIC TOLERANCE that there are no hits.
    This mismatch can happen if a parameter for the input feature has changed and the constructed feature is not executed. Or possibly if the input feature was executed and a different amount of hits was generated.
    Re-typing an input for the constructed feature (just backspacing on one of the . and adding it back in will trigger an update of the information on the constructed feature (which is why changing from HIT[..] to HIT[1..x.NUMHITS] would work. But so would backspacing on the .. and adding it back in.

    I loaded a PRG which contained the HIT[1..feature.NUMHITS], modified the number of hits of that feature, saved the PRG, opened the PRG and the GEOMETRIC TOLERANCE displayed the "Feature xx does not have measured data".
    It is not related to the HIT[..] entry.
Reply
  • in reply to vpt.se
    I ran quite a few tests on this issue. The construction HIT[..] will be the same as HIT[1..feature.NUMHITS].
    The no points issue comes into play when the constructed feature is used for the GEOMETRIC TOLERANCE (maybe just as a datum).
    During program load the GEOMETRIC TOLERANCE requests the hit information from the feature. The feature checks to compare the number of inputs it had during the last run or last user typed input change. If the number of hits last used does not match the current amount of hits that will be used the constructed feature will tell the GEOMETRIC TOLERANCE that there are no hits.
    This mismatch can happen if a parameter for the input feature has changed and the constructed feature is not executed. Or possibly if the input feature was executed and a different amount of hits was generated.
    Re-typing an input for the constructed feature (just backspacing on one of the . and adding it back in will trigger an update of the information on the constructed feature (which is why changing from HIT[..] to HIT[1..x.NUMHITS] would work. But so would backspacing on the .. and adding it back in.

    I loaded a PRG which contained the HIT[1..feature.NUMHITS], modified the number of hits of that feature, saved the PRG, opened the PRG and the GEOMETRIC TOLERANCE displayed the "Feature xx does not have measured data".
    It is not related to the HIT[..] entry.
Children
No Data
© 2024 Hexagon AB and/or its subsidiaries. Privacy Policy | Cloud Services Agreement