[To...] Posted Friday at 11:53 AM Share Posted Friday at 11:53 AM Looking for suggestions for settings on a self-centering point. In the pic below, view is from -Y) I am using a 0.8 stylus to measure the depth of a step that is 0.5 wide. Though this will be done with VAST Gold head, sometimes when using a star probe on an XXT, there is a tendency for the probe to glance of the step and slide past the step. I'm thinking a self-centering point with some force towards the side wall, along with force in the probing direction might help. I am also taking a point on the side wall to help control the location of the point on the step, so I can get as close as possible. I am also considering lowering the probing dynamic. How would you guys approach this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Cl...] Posted Friday at 12:37 PM Share Posted Friday at 12:37 PM Maybe I'm not quite understanding exactly what you are trying to do, but why not measure a line on each surface and intersect them for a point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[To...] Posted Friday at 12:40 PM Author Share Posted Friday at 12:40 PM (edited) Please sign in to view this username. I am measuring the depth of the step where the tip of the probe is at and want to make sure the probe doesn't slip off the step. Edited Friday at 12:45 PM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Cl...] Posted Friday at 12:42 PM Share Posted Friday at 12:42 PM (edited) OK. I didn't see that at first. I thought it was just the corner of some square geometry. Edited Friday at 12:43 PM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Cl...] Posted Friday at 12:52 PM Share Posted Friday at 12:52 PM (edited) On that wall parallel to the shaft probe a point. Create a secondary alignment using that point (XYZ). Place a nominal point feature on the other surface recalling that secondary alignment. insert a formula to put the point at 0.45 in Z. Edited Friday at 12:58 PM 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Cl...] Posted Friday at 01:28 PM Share Posted Friday at 01:28 PM I guess you don't need a formula. Just 0.45 in Z from the secondary alignment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ke...] Posted Friday at 01:48 PM Share Posted Friday at 01:48 PM Exactly as you said: I have often needed to execute a self-centering point with some force directed at the side wall. I would target 45 degrees, use a midpoint evaluation, and use a formula to calculate the point of contact. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[To...] Posted Friday at 01:52 PM Author Share Posted Friday at 01:52 PM Please sign in to view this username. Seems like a touch point would still calculate to the tip, but I will try both and compare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ni...] Posted Friday at 02:19 PM Share Posted Friday at 02:19 PM I'd personally just try a single point with the feature aligned on the nearest surfaces with the probing dynamic turned down to 12.5% Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ri...] Posted Monday at 10:58 AM Share Posted Monday at 10:58 AM In the past, I would probe a point on the side wall, use that for my location control from the side wall (PCM) to probe the point you require. Now it will always be X amount from the side wall ensuring your contact is good for the point you require. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ke...] Posted yesterday at 01:36 PM Share Posted yesterday at 01:36 PM Although I am loathe to do any trial and error with a 0.8mm, it may be worth experimenting with the clamping of the machine axis during self centering, or using the "own selection" to set the directional forces. Adding a bit of downward force will likely help keep the probe from slipping off. My screenshot is from a +Z point in an empty program, so the Fz is simply -200 by default Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[To...] Posted yesterday at 02:48 PM Author Share Posted yesterday at 02:48 PM I had trouble with using "Own Selection". No matter which values I used, it would slide off the step. I ended up using a touch point but modified the vector to come at an angle less than 45° and used "Probe in Normal Direction". Haven't confirmed the results yet. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ke...] Posted yesterday at 03:58 PM Share Posted yesterday at 03:58 PM caddyshack-judge-smails.mp4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ri...] Posted yesterday at 04:08 PM Share Posted yesterday at 04:08 PM If you are going to probe in the direction, I would personally feel safer using mid-point, and just offsetting the probe radius manually. I'd be nervous of incorrect vector compensation. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[To...] Posted yesterday at 07:43 PM Author Share Posted yesterday at 07:43 PM (edited) Please sign in to view this username. I did both and got the same exact result. Touch point reports to closest primary axis, which is X, so vector doesn't matter, as long as more X than Z. Checked depth in Z direction with .5 probe and result was within .0002". I'm going home and taking my ball with me. Edited yesterday at 07:44 PM 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ma...] Posted yesterday at 08:40 PM Share Posted yesterday at 08:40 PM Tom, if possible, put a known gage pin in the hole touch the top and use a formula to subtract the difference using Result Element. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[To...] Posted 9 hours ago Author Share Posted 9 hours ago (edited) Please sign in to view this username. Not a hole. But that does remind me that I have had relatively good results using Step Points. Edited 8 hours ago 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in