[Zo...] Posted February 8, 2023 Share Posted February 8, 2023 In an attempt to measure a few R 1.000 radii on a part with loose tolerance using the radius measuring tool under "Size", the PiWeb shows 159 results for the same measurement. I measured 7 different radii, and the report came out to be 117 pages long. Obviously, that isn't correct but cannot find how to correct it. I usually measure the diameter of the feature by checking the "D" box and this is the first time I wanted to get a radius instead of the diameter. Seemed like a simple task but doesn't seem to be intuitive. I wish it also had an "R" box to check off for the report. Can anyone shed some light on what I am doing wrong? How can I get a single result for each radii? I attached a small section of the reportR 1.00 MULTIPLES.JPG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Je...] Posted February 8, 2023 Share Posted February 8, 2023 Please sign in to view this quote. . Zoltan, What you are experiencing with the radius characteristic is a behavior that has existed in Calypso for many years, even before PiWeb was created. Zeiss would say that the characteristic is functioning as intended. Other forum users: please chime in as I may only partially understand this. I think the radius characteristic outputs the result at many different sections, perhaps either by degrees of the arc or points captured. My guess would be the reason for this is because a radius does not have opposing points like a circle does, so the centerpoint of the radius feature "floats" depending on which arc segment it is evaluated at. I agree that an "R" checkbox would be useful as long as the programmer understood how this radius was evaluated i.e. minimum, maximum, averaged, etc.. The way I have dealt with this in the past is by either (1) limiting the evaluation of the feature to specific arc segment(s) or (2) reporting the minimum and maximum or average radius of the feature. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Zo...] Posted February 8, 2023 Author Share Posted February 8, 2023 Limiting would be a good idea, though I am not sure where that can be done. I will start but constraining the arc center. Hopefully this will help. Again, my tolerance on this particular radius is +-0.01, could use a tape measure, a single R1.003 or R0.995 would be fine, and I may revert to using the Diameter if I have to. The customer wants to see the Radius on the report, not diameter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[No...] Posted February 8, 2023 Share Posted February 8, 2023 Please sign in to view this quote. Correct. It's very useful if you have a fixed number of single touch points at known angles and want to evaluate all of them. We often do that for the correction of injection molds. Please sign in to view this quote. No, all radii it outputs refer to a fixed centerpoint. I THINK it's the nominal center of the feature. If not, it's the actual center. Please sign in to view this quote. Can be easily achieved with a result element and a formula 'diameter/2 ' 😃 What is an R checkbox other than just half the diameter? The evaluation method is given by the feature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[No...] Posted February 8, 2023 Share Posted February 8, 2023 Please sign in to view this quote. Isn't there an input box for an angle segment in the chracteristic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Je...] Posted February 8, 2023 Share Posted February 8, 2023 Please sign in to view this quote. I'd suggest doing what Norbert mentioned regarding a results element. You could just title the characteristic in such a way that you know its evaluating a radius: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Cr...] Posted February 8, 2023 Share Posted February 8, 2023 Go to the characteristics setting editor - Report - Additional Report - Turn the Radius measurement to off. That should fix your multiple page report Edit: Just did a test and that didn't help Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ma...] Posted February 8, 2023 Share Posted February 8, 2023 Please sign in to view this quote. Only if you use "Radius measurement" char. - there you can set evaluation angle and range. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ke...] Posted February 8, 2023 Share Posted February 8, 2023 Maybe this is too simple, and I can't test it out right now... any chance you can "Recall One Feature", and report it that way? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ri...] Posted February 8, 2023 Share Posted February 8, 2023 If you want to use the Radius Measurement instead of Size - Standards - Radius, then I would suggest only reporting the Max, Average, Min. You will need to add additional Characteristics to achieve this, but they can be found under Size - More - Minimum Result, Maximum Result, Average. The Radius Measurement outputs the radial distance of each point measured, as per the ISO standard a radius is closer to a Profile measurement than just a linear size. Most people don't scan short arc radii though unless they are outputting a Profile measurement. There have been countless studies that show 4-5 points being more optimal to report a radius due to calculation constraints. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ke...] Posted February 8, 2023 Share Posted February 8, 2023 Please sign in to view this quote. So... I'm one of those people that scan "short" arcs (never had anything come across my plate that required any segment less than 60 degrees) when evaluating with L1 Feature evaluation method, and I have had no difficulties correlating with a MarSurf and custom radius gages. Whereas, in one of these instances, the supplier used 6 single points and reported results that were much larger. In this specific example, we were looking at plastic injection molded samples, with decidedly imperfect form... If you have any documentation that you could share (PDF's or website links) regarding one or more of the studies that you mentioned, I would be very interested to see their examples & methodology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ma...] Posted February 8, 2023 Share Posted February 8, 2023 I usually mask the Radius characteristic and add Min and Max Characteristics to evaluate against the min and max radius tolerance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Je...] Posted February 8, 2023 Share Posted February 8, 2023 Please sign in to view this quote. . Keith, Here is an older document by a gentleman who included good math on the geometry involved but had a decidedly low view on the accuracy of CMMs. I would like to find a similar but more recent study on Small Arc Analysis if one exists. . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ri...] Posted February 11, 2023 Share Posted February 11, 2023 Which version of Calypso are you using? v2019 uses two separate icons for radius measurements. One simply reports the radius value. The other will report the radius value for every point in the feature. (Radius Measurement1)Capture.JPG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[To...] Posted February 13, 2023 Share Posted February 13, 2023 Please sign in to view this quote. Just add to Rick's post, Radius Measurement constrains the radius center point to it's nominal position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[To...] Posted March 1, 2023 Share Posted March 1, 2023 Please sign in to view this quote. Rick, There have been two items for as long as I can remember. 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