New Zeiss users measuring tubes.

[[ZE...]]

Hello, we are a tube fabrication company for the automotive industry and recently purchased a Zeiss Duramax. Our team has recently gone through the Basic and Curve training and are beginning to use the Duramax CMM for measuring tubing and gages. If anyone has any tips and tricks for measuring tubes your input would be greatly appreciated. I am aware that some companies prefer using a Lexan type fixture specific to the part to hold the tube while measuring, or would it be better to use universal CMM clamping fixture components? One of the hurdles we are having is setting up the alignments using the tube features (cylinders, tube ends, bracket, etc.). Any information is greatly appreciated. Thank you.

Gary Soulliere | 04-04-2018 05:43 PM |

[[ZE...]]

Consider a Zeiss Cookbook, if you don't already have one. As for fixturing, I have the Inspection Arsenal fixturing kit, and I almost never use it. it's a good system, but it just doesn't really work for me.

Casey Sigler | 04-04-2018 06:05 PM |

[[ZE...]]

Ah the Torus.

Clarke Gilbert | 04-04-2018 08:46 PM |

[[ZE...]]

Thank you for the suggestion. We did look through the alignment section of the cookbook. We also have a fixturing kit and some of the components do help with our set ups.

Gary Soulliere | 04-06-2018 03:48 PM |

[[ZE...]]

I've never used it, but I understand that the P6 alignment method was developed specifically for the tubing industry...

Kai KendallKKendall | 04-07-2018 12:10 AM |

[[Ow...]]

A couple nice doc's on alignments attached .

Simple_Alignments[pdf.pdf

[[Ow...]]

Another

$ Alignments.pdf

[[Ow...]]

Ultimately, a part drawing should define how a part should be aligned. From datum reference points to types of fixtures needed to constrain the part to simulate the real functional fit to fixtures that are designed to ensure no distortion is applied while clamping the part. However, fully conclusive drawing are far and few between in my 30+ years of working experience.If you have good drawings great, if you do not, be sure to work with the design engineer or the end product user to make sure you are giving them what they want to know. In the automotive field where parts are often re-checked when the people you make the parts for receive them, make sure you're checking them the same way to avoid many hours of debate and potential rejection. Most companies who outsource their products to made elsewhere will fully appreciate a phone call to discuss how they want their parts inspected.

[[Da...]]

So, Owen, If I create a base alignment that checks , lets say a chuck. Then I make alternate alignments to various different parts that I put on that chuck, I can apply a loop for the alternate alignments? Then run under "current alignment" ( after running the base alignment ) and have the machine run an alternate alignment with a loop each time I load a part ?

[[Ow...]]

I've never done it that way, using current alignment but, I guess you could (?) using differenceSystem().valueA<0.000X.
This will loop the second alignment and only the second alignment until the argument is satisfied.

[[Da...]]

Please sign in to view this quote.

Hope I'm not hijacking this thread but, This works miracles for me. I have hundreds of programs that all work off the same magnetic chuck . Each has it's own individual base alignment and up till now it really hasn't been too much of a problem. I just tested using a "MASTER" alignment to the mag chuck. Then use recall alignment as the base alignment in each individual part program. Now apply a secondary alignment for each part and loop as though it was a base alignment. If we move the chuck or change chucks all I have to do is run the manual alignment on the "master" alignment and all 100 different parts can be run from the recalled alignment under the run current alignment setting. They all run the secondary alignment with a loop and then run all the features without running the master alignment.

The first time you save the new program you have to change the name of the recall alignment but that's about it.

[[ZE...]]

Thank you, I have found the P6 alignment option and we are trying it out.

Gary Soulliere | 04-11-2018 12:03 PM |

[[ZE...]]

Ultimately, a part drawing should define how a part should be aligned. From datum reference points to types of fixtures needed to constrain the part to simulate the real functional fit to fixtures that are designed to ensure no distortion is applied while clamping the part. However, fully conclusive drawing are far and few between in my 30+ years of working experience.If you have good drawings great, if you do not, be sure to work with the design engineer or the end product user to make sure you are giving them what they want to know. In the automotive field where parts are often re-checked when the people you make the parts for receive them, make sure you're checking them the same way to avoid many hours of debate and potential rejection. Most companies who outsource their products to made elsewhere will fully appreciate a phone call to discuss how they want their parts inspected.

Owen Long | 04-11-2018 04:28 PM |

[[Ri...]]

There is a purchasable option for Tubes on the product list for Calypso but essentially you will be measuring cylinders and tori. Your alignments will likely be either P6 or 3D Best fit. I have measured exhaust systems in the past and the most difficult part of those was getting an alignment you can count on. I used primarily the intersection points of cylinders and iterated at least 3 times. Are time constraints something you have to worry about? How tight are your tolerances? What is your manufacturing method? What sensor do you have? What version of Calypso?