Jump to content

calypso corrupting the rest of inspection upon saving


---
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hi all. We have a problem where, upon saving in calypso on an unfinished inspection, when I start again the program to finish the job, the alignment is shifted and the remaining actuals that I probe are also off. My base alignment is an RPS alignment and I notice that the action of saving, changes the "value A" of .0003 in the break condition of the RPS alignment. It goes from something like .0003 to 37.3 !!! The original break condition value A is .001.

Thank you
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to view this quote.

I start it again with the "start measurement" button, with "all characteristics" ON and "clear existing results" OFF. The program has also has a start alignment. Have you ever heard of that problem before? Thank you for the fast reply !
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did you create the program yourself (so that you know exactly what it does)?
Is "Set base alignment to zero" in the BA window on or off?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to view this quote.

Thank you for helping! The "Set base alignment to zero" is ON. I did not do the program but I am building programming skills to work on some issues.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reason why I asked is because there may be some PCM code or similar things in the program which interfere with the normal expected behavior. Can you rule that out?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to view this quote.

I already had a look at the pcm code in the program. There is one bit that I don’t understand and I’ll come back on it next week at work and post on the forum. But still it would be strange that pcm code cause the alignment bestfit (itterations) value to corrupt itself upon saving.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That depends on the code and when it's executed. Normally it shouldn't be a problem, but some people are quite creative 😉

Fixed translations defined in the alignment (special functions) may also lead to unwanted shifts.
But with set base alignment to zero this shouldn't happen.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe this will help?

I have had issues with constructions, recalled points/features, and shifts/rotations in Base Alignments. Not always, but just enough that I eliminate that variable. That is why I only use probed features in Base Alignments and the features are the zeroes. Then I use a Standard, 3D Best Fit, etc alignment for features. If I need a Feature from the Base Alignment I make another feature and use recall points.

The 3D Best Fit with tooling balls is easy now that I understand it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote:
I start it again with the "start measurement" button, with "all characteristics" ON and "clear existing results" OFF. The program has also has a start alignment.

For clarity, the clear existing results should be check-marked.
The start alignment should be selected in the selection menu with the manual alignment chosen.
Make sure the features measured for the start alignment are taken in the correct order. Sometimes programmers will label features like 1, 2, 3 and not the position, like left front, right, ect.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to view this quote.

There is definitely nothing special in the PCM code. I just had a look and it's basic stuff to ask for employee number and so on.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to view this quote.

I guess you mean that I must ensure the probing order of the base alignment datums is in the same sequence as the datums shown in the RPS base alignment window.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...