Is there a better way to orient CAD model?

[[Je...]]

There has to be a quicker way than all the rotation of axis just to get the top or bottom cad to be level with the part on table from a z+ view perspective.

[[Za...]]

Can you expand on this issue Jerry? any screenshots you can provide to illustrate where you're having trouble? is this an issue on loading a CAD model in a certain orientation, or is this more so once the CAD has been loaded, how to rotate your view as you're programming? something else possibly?

[[Ca...]]

Hello! Are you wondering about locating a part on a simulation CMM? If so, this document will walk through a few different ways that may be simpler than the method you're currently using: https://portal.zeiss.com/knowledge-base?id=528766

[[Je...]]

Please sign in to view this quote.

Can't post pictures of customer cad models.

For your reference, lay your phone flat on your desk. That's basically what my part looks like sitting on the table of our brand new Contura, except three times the size.

 

Now rotate one corner of phone up at an angle, then hold at the at angle and pick up over your head. this represents how the cad model is located after it is loaded in Calypso 25 in relation to my base aligned flat part on the table.

 

Is there a quicker way to level the phone to be parallel to table then translate to z0?

 

 

[[Je...]]

Please sign in to view this quote.

no

[[Ca...]]

Hi Jerry! Are you working with multiple CAD models? With one CAD, typically the CAD is pulled into CALYPSO, base alignment set up, then when it is run on the CMM for the first time the CAD is aligned with the machine. Do you have the base alignment set up on a fixture and you're working to align CAD to the fixture? 

[[Je...]]

ONE CAD

[[No...]]

If all else fails you can always do what you need to do anyway in Calypso:

Create all your base alignment features from the CAD model, then define the (fully constrained) base alignment, BUT also change the automatically set axis orientations to the ones you need. Then, after you click OK in the BA window, Calypso will compare the actual orientation of the model to the one demanded by the base alignment definition and if it differs, will correct it accordingly. It takes a bit of effort getting your brain used to thinking in a different orientation, but there is no faster way.

 

If we're talking about Simulation, you will of course still have to position the model on the CMM table.

Edited 7 hours ago

[[Cr...]]

If you are talking about the trihedron being nowhere near the cad model, you can do as Norbert suggested, have someone reorientate the model in a cad software like solidworks, or as I do, extract a feature on the cad where you want your zero- go to cad/modification/cad model transformation, input the opposite values of your extracted feature in the x, y, and z (If its positive, input a negative, if it's negative, input a positive) Click apply. Then you might need to change the rotation to how you plan to inspect your part. This method only takes a minute or two.

[[Je...]]

Thanks. I'll have to give this a try.

[[Ro...]]

CAD model transformation is a part of Calypso that has never been upgraded since i started programming 20 years ago.

I have a post it note on my monitor to help me remember what direction of rotation + and - go in each axis.

I wish i could just click on a surface and snap the model to Z, or when dealing with assemblies i wish i could "Mate" surfaces, similar to SolidWorks.

[[Ch...]]

Are you doing all these CAD transformations before you do the base alignment?   For example, you pull in your model, then adjust it to fit the trihedron.   If so, you don't need to do that. 

Pull in your model, then select the features used for your base alignment.  You'll see a new trihedron show up with the correct orientation, once you create your base alignment, it will snap to that orientation.   

If for some crazy reason you were insistent on having the coordinate system in the correct location BEFORE you made your base alignment, then it'd be easier to pull it into solidworks first and create your coordinate system there.   

 

[[To...]]

My normal routine is to load a CAD model, immediately go to CAD > Modification > CAD Model transformation and rotate about the axes until I have the model oriented in the same direction as it is sitting on the table.  I don't worry about translations as the BA usually handles that with no issues.  However, if the trihedron is in unusual orientation, I do the steps listed below.

Another method is to create a base alignment by assigning the desired features to the Spatial , Planar and origins.  For example, if you extract a plane that you want in the +Z direction and it is in the +X direction according to the model's trihedron, assign it to the Spatial / Rotation in Space.  It will detect that the plane is facing the +X direction in the dropdown menu on the right.  Select +Z and it will rotation the lighter trihedron to show Z facing up.  Next, I would assign that plane to the Z Origin.  If I am using a circle/cylinder for the X/Y origin, I like to assign it to the X and Y origin before working on the Planar.  Then, assign the planar feature but I pay attention to the direction dropdown menu to make sure it gets assigned properly. There is a good possibility that it will choose the wrong direction because of the orientation of the model. It doesn't know that you are changing the orientation as it is working from the original trihedron's orientation.  I check the orientation and location of the "lighter" trihedron to make sure it is located and oriented the way I want.  Then, I click OK and the original "bold" trihedron moves to the desired location.   This process works well when the original trihedron is at a weird orientation.  Here's where I take a few more steps.  I delete the features the I created for the BA.  I go back into the BA and create a "NEW" BA.  The reason for this is when I extracted the features in the first pass, the properties of those features were based on the model in its' original orientation and in some cases, it will create odd behavior for some strategies.  Below, is an example of what I mean.  By re-creating the BA alignment with new features, the feature's coordinate systems make more sense.  Now, you might say "why waste the time, it really doesn't matter" and you would be right but I prefer to have my features in a structured format. i.e. when working on strategies, I occasionally work in the "feature's coordinate system" and if it's skewed or in a different orientation, it is a bit more challenging.  It's a personal preference.

 

Edited 27 minutes ago