Evaluate runout diferences between softwares

[[Jo...]]

Hi, 

I'm using a Bruker alicona uCMM, an optical 3D to acquisition. 

After acquisition, I export a .stl file and open it on ZEISS INSPECT. 

My task now is evaluate a runout, and I'm getting results about 0.7 mm at ZEISS INSPECT, but I can easily identify that's not a correct value. I can measure it manually with a runout device and a dial indicator. 

Anyway, I asked another software to make the same evaluation, I just sent the same .stl file and the results were very similar to the results that I get manually. 

Is there someone who can explain why this happens? 

[[Ja...]]

Please sign in to view this username.

my guess would be data selection .  Bare in mind that in an stl you will select the complete cylinder/cone whereas in tactile you will take discrete sections/ points.  If your automatic selection for your primitive selects something that is not appropriate , even by one triangle then it could return a very different result.

[[Ch...]]

Please sign in to view this username.

: The best way would be you take a deeper look onto the deviation plot of the runout tolerance (this can be enabled using the properties tab of the tool box).

As you can see the software displays for any used point the distance to computed chebyshev circle as required from the ISO/ASME standard. Please have an look on the area where you can find the unexpected value. If this located on the upper or lower area, maybe you should restrict the selection from you cylinder/cone.

 

Hope this helps.

 

Christoph