[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 15 hours ago Share Posted 15 hours ago 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 14 hours ago Author Share Posted 14 hours ago 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ke...] Posted 13 hours ago Share Posted 13 hours ago caddyshack-judge-smails.mp4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ri...] Posted 13 hours ago Share Posted 13 hours ago 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 9 hours ago Author Share Posted 9 hours ago (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 9 hours ago Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ma...] Posted 8 hours ago Share Posted 8 hours ago 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...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in