Jump to content

Stylus Radius Tolerance


Recommended Posts

Do you set your nominal value to what the styli is purchased as. Like 1.5mm? The probe many times isn't is 1.5, so one or two microns can be eaten by that.

We have quite a lot of special ordered probe sizes, and when they are used as gauge balls, we need to order like 10 to find 1 or 2 usable.
Consider that the radius value from the CMM qualification could be affected by the Quality of the probe (too much glue, material of the stem, number of connections, etc.)
other common problems are when the qualification doesn’t touch wear areas or ignore that the Sigma / radius value doesn’t represent with accuracy the wear in the probe.
When the probe ball diameter is used as guage this is even more significant.
I would say that tolerances and type of probe verification depends from every kind of inspection.

Accessories -Stylus-Systems.pdf

Please sign in to view this quote.

Thermofit is the material of the stem; actually there are some adapters to adjust your probes in any angle but these solutions don’t have the best accuracy, if your tolerances are tight, I would recommend them as something interim.

When your custom design configuration is decided, Zeiss can quote an optimum solution with fixed or less parts (improving the qualification accuracy).. I think most of times the cost / quality is competitive.

Please sign in to view this quote.

If I remember correct Zeiss use Grade 5 as standard. (?) So I guess I sould have said up to 0.0013 based on Rodriguez chart.

I cant figure out if your reply is a question, statement or your personal opinion?

Anyway, the whole point was to shed light on a potential issue here. Setting nominal to 1.5 (as an example) with a tolerance of 0.003, when the probe infact might be 1.4987.

But I can't answer if its a to tight tolerance. I have no clue how Clarkes stylus system looks like, material, lengths, number of joints, sensor, etc. So I tried to give atleast some relevant info to consider.

Instead of claiming that 3 microns is too high and say what I achieve . Because its totally irrelevant and doesnt help him at all. 😃

Clarke try to see how well the stylus radius repeat when you qualify it several times. If it repeats good, then set the median value as your nominal. Then you also know how good it repeats, base your tolerance on that.
The grade ball is not the same in all probes,
with other suppliers this info is in their catalogs, and is common to see probes from grade 5 to 50..

Unfortunately, the grade only classifies the quality of the ball.
If you have access to a high precision instrument (like a mahr ULM with good traceability methods) is easier to determinate a calibrated value for the sphere. If the qualification value in the CMM is different maybe there is a problem in the construction of the probe.
According to this, there is no difference in "grade" based on size. Only material.
Where Diamong is "grade" 10, Diamond coated (up to 10mm) and ruby is "grade" 5.

They only mention limitations in roundness for Diamond and Diamond coated, so it sounds like ruby are "grade" 5, unless you order "grade" 3.
114_8f9ca40fcdf969a26ad11a55065de875.pdf
Do you have any documentation showing "grades" upon size? (I'm asking since Im intrested 🙂)

Please sign in to view this quote.

it’s a program scanning on the reference sphere (if you do it be aware that you could catch and misunderstand some limitations of the scanning and qualification).

The rigidity is related to how much the probe flex during the touch, a bigger value is better.

Please sign in to view this quote.


nop, the purpose of our graphics is detect potential issues in the probe (like wear)..
We don’t calculate the rigidity, it comes from the CMM probe qualification:

1375_2baab96b14cad3f227397e92f7d07047.png


in case of scanning error, I prefer to use: RONt from the machine specs and use it as a constant for uncertainty estimation (Normally is 0.8um for a Prismo).
  • 1 month later...
×
×
  • Create New...