I have a partial sphere, 2" diameter. The grinding isnt right and caused a visable circular mark which is verified using a Mic. Is there a way to show the variance of the actual hits compared to a theoretically perfect 2" sphere.
You can try taking individual hit points. Create a generic or offset point at the theoretical center and evaluate your hit points from this point using the distance function and checking the 3D and feature options.
I never thought about individual points, my head was stuck on autosphere. Im going to import the IGES and try points. The lab wants to see something graphical showing deviations.
Assuming he sets the sphere as origin for his reporting alignment, he should be able to report each hit just with a T-value via feature location. The value will be the deviation from perfect with the centroid as origin, which may be of more direct use than actual distance. Maybe.
I would use the auto sphere and dimension it with graph on then they should be able to see graphicly where the deviation is.
+1, Adam !
It's also possible to calculate T_values for each hit of an auto sphere... Something like ASSIGN/V1=SQRT(DOT(SPH1.HIT[1..SPH1.NUMHITS].XYZ-SPH1.XYZ),SPH1.HIT[1..SPH1.NUMHITS].XYZ-SPH1.XYZ))-SPH1.R
+1, Adam ! It's also possible to calculate T_values for each hit of an auto sphere... Something like ASSIGN/V1=SQRT(DOT(SPH1.HIT[1..SPH1.NUMHITS].XYZ-SPH1.XYZ),SPH1.HIT[1..SPH1.NUMHITS].XYZ-SPH1.XYZ))-SPH1.R
Or, instead of being this complicated, you can do what was suggested above, much easier that formulas....Then output T value for each and display devs using Graphical analysis
I would use the auto sphere and dimension it with graph on then they should be able to see graphicly where the deviation is.
