[Ja...] Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 Just out of curiosity, I’m wondering what the smallest sigma value people use before you consider it to be to the point where you’re eliminating too much data. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Lu...] Posted January 7 Share Posted January 7 My filters are set for plus/minus 3 sigma Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Pa...] Posted January 8 Share Posted January 8 I've never considered using sigma for this. I'm not sure there's an answer. I mean scan a circle with a gazillion points with any attenuation settings, then come back in and take 5 discrete points at the same location. They will both have sigma values. They will both report different results. I can't use S to determine which is correct. I know the 5-point method threw away no points. Maybe use the S value of this as your target? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ke...] Posted January 8 Share Posted January 8 I think I remember someone stating thet a Features Sigma value should be about 25% of it's Form... but IDK where one would go from there. I'm more of a visual person, so I always "show masked actual points" when I'm programming, and I plot roundness & flatness for important features so that I can see if there is too much filtering Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ch...] Posted Friday at 03:46 PM Share Posted Friday at 03:46 PM This is a question that is dependent on too many factors. A default of 3 sigma should be good for most. Remember, with 3 sigma you're keeping 99.7% of your data. At one sigma you're only keeping 68% of your data. Its just a normal distribution. There's only been a few times where I knew I wanted to eliminate a ton of data where I lowered the sigma value on my filtering. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ke...] Posted Friday at 05:03 PM Share Posted Friday at 05:03 PM Please sign in to view this quote. There have been a few times that I have needed to increase the the value to 4... always on a Flatness evaluation on a stamped part, so that I did not discard a large chunk of "good data" on a "bad part" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ja...] Posted yesterday at 06:43 PM Author Share Posted yesterday at 06:43 PM Far and away I use +/- 3 sigma for the huge majority of the dimensions as 90% of the tolerances here aren’t very tight. But when the tolerance window starts getting below 0.002” I start tightening up the sigma values because I don’t want noise, random freak vibrations, probe chatter and the like affecting the results. The closer the window gets to 0, the closer I get to a sigma value of 2.0. At that value I’m eliminating roughly 4.5% of the data and for me personally, I don’t want to be removing any more than that. I’ve been using this method for quite some time and seems to work fairly well. I was just wondering what other people here consider the stopping point. 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