How to ensure probe model in planner is in the correct position? (Stylus system creator/Planner/Simulation question)

[[Lu...]]

Hello! I was recently informed that my company will be investing in planner and simulation so i can make programs while the CMMs are running. To prepare i have been trying to create the probe models off of stylus system creator.

Creating the probe models has gone well so far, but one probe setup i cannot find in the drop down menu and there is no documentation to confirm exactly what it is (the setup was created before i started working here) so i measured it and used the generic setups to create it.

Which leads to my main question, how can i be sure the placement of the styli on the model, is the same as the placement of the actual styli? I'm not very confident in the way i measured it, so I'm expecting it to be a little bit off. How off can it be for planner before it would start to cause issues? Is there a way to measure distances on the probe model, which i could then hard check to ensure it is the right probe setups? 

I have just been going off of measurement and looks in order to find these builds since i have no records from my predecessors on what parts were used, so its likely that i selected the wrong one, and I'm worried that it can mess up programs i create via planner/simulation.

I will likely be asking more questions about planner/simulation once i actually have it in front of me so any advice is appreciated, thank you!

[[No...]]

It depends on how much space is left between the probe and the part during actual measurements. Simulation does exctly 2 things:

• Move the probe along the ideal (!) paths as defined by the strategies in the measurement plan
• Check for collisons between the probe and the part on the way

It does NOT take actual measurements, which means, if it "scans" a 360° circle and the model has a gap or a bulge in the circle, it won't move into the gap or scan over the bulge (like a physical CMM would). It just follows the path defined by the strategy. In the case of the bulge it would then (falsely) detect a collision.

So you see that the realism of Simulation leaves a lot to be desired. That's why I wouldn't overrate the importance of a 100% correct stylus model. Of course it is best to use the correct elements, but I have more than one stylus where I use custom-made styli that are not even always 100% identical on repeat orders. I also put them together from generic elements and they work well. After all a programmer usually leaves a certain amount of safety space between probe and part if possible, so small deviations shouldn't matter most of the time.

Edited yesterday at 06:55 AM

[[Mi...]]

Once you have your offline seat you should be able to update the stylus system offline to reduce false simulated collisions. So, even if you don't have the exact components offline you'll have the real world numbers from the qualification for that stylus system online. You can export the .pcf file from your online seat to a flash drive and then import it offline. After that, import the .ssc file to your planner and update the stylus system so that you have the graphics from the .ssc and the actual numbers from the .pcf

[[No...]]

Please sign in to view this quote.

But as far as I know the collision detection always works with the stylus model, so even if you import the actual numbers from the physical CMM, it will ignore them for collision detection or even overwrite them with the ideal SSC values (hmmm, I never checked if the latter is true 🤔. I'd find it strange if Calypso would allow inconsistent values to coexist). If it would use the raw numbers for CD, it wouldn't be able to detect collisions of extensions etc., because they are not stored in a PCF.

Edited 10 hours ago

[[Mi...]]

 

Please sign in to view this quote.

I see what you're saying but I wouldn't overwrite the values, I'd want to update them. Order of operations would most likely play a big part too. Ideally, you'd already have the ssc file created and then you could update it with the pcf numbers from the actual stylus system. I don't normally use ssc files or simulations but it should work...in theory😎. 

[[No...]]

Sorry, but I still doubt it. 🤔The imported SSC model data is fixed and cannot be updated (as in "changed in dimension") through other data. The actual dimensions from the PCF may be present in the stylus list, but collision detection is still done with the original SSC model.

Edited 2 hours ago

[[Lu...]]

Please sign in to view this quote.

So, based on my understanding. I would load the PCF (which im assuming is the actual probe information from my online cmm, just confirming this im still pretty new) then import the SSC model in order for the program to be compatible with the online cmm, and to have a semi-accurate model for collision?

My main goal is to have all of our probes set up on this planner seat in a way to where i can edit or create programs on planner, and then import the programs into the online seat with little to no issues between probes. Currently we have no models created for our stylus systems so when I bring the stylus system PCF files into planner i would like to add in the SSC models i just created into the stylus systems.

Or would i just not bring in the actual stylus information (PCF?) and only import the SSC model, and make sure each probe is named the same as it is in my online CMM?