hexagon logo
Register Sign in
  • Replies 2 replies
  • Subscribers 31 subscribers
  • Views 41 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related

Romer Sigma checking

Quizmaster
Im am trying to work out a routine for checking our arm.

How do you guys do ?

Do you use the check bar that was included with the arm or have you made an own checking routine ?

I have made an own "checkbar" to test the arms repeatability.

The bar is 1,5 mm thick and 1200x150 with 6x Ø25 holes

Made a program and measured in the the alignment plane-line-line (intersection point line-line) and then measured in the holes as 8 hit circles.

Now when I re-measure the circles over and over again and evaluates the X-Y possision i get aprox a diff off ±0,06 mm

Is this a normal result off a arm ?

When I read the spec off the Romer sigma 2025 it says ±0,034 lenght (but i figure this is if i measure between 2 points)

How do you do with the probes ?

Do you run the Romotic GDS probe calibration once a while or just run the .gds files that comes from hexagon after the annual calibration ?
Parents
  • Hi Quizmaster, the problem is you are not just looking at the repeatability of the arm with the test you are performing. . . .since you are doine a manual plane line line alignment, you are including the repeatibility of the operator. . . Namely depending on where the individual hits are taken that are used in the measurement of each feature. . . If you are going to continue this method, you should use multiple alignments and after the first full alignment, enable auto trigger, making sure to approach each point from the same direction each time. . . This will improve the repeatibility of your alignment. On the issue of measuring the circles, same issue applies. . . .on a part that is only 1.5 mm thick, and 25mm in diameter, if any of your hits fall too high or too low, you will get bad results, also, having the multi point circle, now you also have to take roundness into account. . . If the form is not perfect, and parts NEVER are perfect, different hits will yield different locations for the resulting circle. . . There are always ways to make the arm more repeatable but it does require a good bit of technique and training. . . .

    HTH
Reply
  • Hi Quizmaster, the problem is you are not just looking at the repeatability of the arm with the test you are performing. . . .since you are doine a manual plane line line alignment, you are including the repeatibility of the operator. . . Namely depending on where the individual hits are taken that are used in the measurement of each feature. . . If you are going to continue this method, you should use multiple alignments and after the first full alignment, enable auto trigger, making sure to approach each point from the same direction each time. . . This will improve the repeatibility of your alignment. On the issue of measuring the circles, same issue applies. . . .on a part that is only 1.5 mm thick, and 25mm in diameter, if any of your hits fall too high or too low, you will get bad results, also, having the multi point circle, now you also have to take roundness into account. . . If the form is not perfect, and parts NEVER are perfect, different hits will yield different locations for the resulting circle. . . There are always ways to make the arm more repeatable but it does require a good bit of technique and training. . . .

    HTH
Children
No Data
© 2024 Hexagon AB and/or its subsidiaries. Privacy Policy | Cloud Services Agreement