Softening Machine Lines

I'm not at the cmm, you can choose theindicated edge, the major" edge...
In one of those choices, you can indicate the number of the edge that you want.
If you choose searching from blak to white, out to in, first edge, you should find the right one...

I'm not at the cmm, you can choose theindicated edge, the major" edge...
In one of those choices, you can indicate the number of the edge that you want.
If you choose searching from blak to white, out to in, first edge, you should find the right one...

You know, I never really understood Specified Edge. Rarely use it because I never really got it to work. If you or any other programmer or NeilRyan has an example of how it's used, that would be fantastic.

I combatted this slightly different than I had setup. This is a combo tool that machines in this "spotface" along with a chamfer on the through hole (slightly pictured in the right corner). I had the spotface diameter checked first, then the chamfer checked afterward. I flipped these two features around. The chamfer is found automatically since the machine can find that edge quite nicely. Since these two features are in the same tool, the XY of the chamfer diameter and the edge of the spotface should be in the same spot. With the known XY location of the chamfer, I targeted the spotface diameter to that location and shrunk my zone down to 0.015mm and scanned light to dark from outside to inside, and it found it relatively close enough.

Worked out pretty good.

Hi all you Vision guys. Holy cow. My guess is that it all depends on your machine. For me? If I setup for Barry's edge check - for sure it would not check well on his, but on my 443 performance... presto!
Like said, there are SO many tweaks for checking in Vision.
Example: check I.D. on a ring gage. Depending on illumination, focus, zoom, edge etc.... you can get (I have anyway) crazy results from +- .001 if not more. So, somehow there needs a way to 'Master' settings to a 'Master' ring (or surface, or ??) The measurement will change depending until setting parameters for similar parts/features. This is regardless of using the glass/lasered plate Hex supplies.
Maybe I'm wrong, but as you mention... Neil might need to come in on this thread and fill some info in! I have gone crazy with settings in illumination - especially when I create one call it sea... go to next similar feature and using the illumination I set, and I get ' sea*'. The asterisk means It doesn't use it!!! I am totally lost on that.
My last take is that I agree Barry, the Specified Edge is a very foggy notion. With as many times experimenting? The Matching Edge has always been the best accuracy - when the feature can be verified with other method. For profiles? Ha.... many products in my last company were +-.001 and they just stuck with a comparator & a mylar. Inspector eyes did not want to piss off the production manager with reports from the Optiv (but actually? they were accurate)

Heh, happy to see that we have all the same difficulties on our optivs...
I'm often confronted to this, but like you i play with the detection options to find the "least bad" setting...
Or, like you said, just turn to manual, using tiny targets to place by the user. After all, there is no harm to do it, the goal is to have the real edge. Sometimes i even mark the edges with some pen , especially on white parts.
Anyway, i realize that it's pretty difficult to have repeatable measurements in visio !
I mean, last week i began to validate a new 2D vision machine with a Type1 R&R (not done yet), and decided to apply it before on the Optiv just to see. I took 50 consecutive measurements on a 6mm calibrated ring, looks pretty easy on black/green contrast, but huh, there are sometimes 0.008mm gap between measures... R&R fails
I'm pretty sure that just by changing the illumination (going a bit overexposed) i'll divide the gap, but heh, hard to explain that to the quality guys !
Let's be happy, look like visio machines will never replace our eyes

Heh, happy to see that we have all the same difficulties on our optivs...
I'm often confronted to this, but like you i play with the detection options to find the "least bad" setting...
Or, like you said, just turn to manual, using tiny targets to place by the user. After all, there is no harm to do it, the goal is to have the real edge. Sometimes i even mark the edges with some pen , especially on white parts.
Anyway, i realize that it's pretty difficult to have repeatable measurements in visio !
I mean, last week i began to validate a new 2D vision machine with a Type1 R&R (not done yet), and decided to apply it before on the Optiv just to see. I took 50 consecutive measurements on a 6mm calibrated ring, looks pretty easy on black/green contrast, but huh, there are sometimes 0.008mm gap between measures... R&R fails
I'm pretty sure that just by changing the illumination (going a bit overexposed) i'll divide the gap, but heh, hard to explain that to the quality guys !
Let's be happy, look like visio machines will never replace our eyes

I love when R&R's fail the R Chart by microns. Great times!