Jump to content

Cone angle


---
 Share

Recommended Posts

I've found circle paths perpendicular to the cone axis on small cones tend to give bogus results. If you do linear paths parallel to the cone axis you should get results that are more believable. If you didn't need the cone angle, and just needed the feature for say surface profile, I'd recommend using free form surface on small sections of cones. Calypso struggles with small cones or sections of conical features it seems, and free form surface has definitely given me much more plausible results in those circumstances.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I have small sections I like to scan in both directions so the data kicked out by the 0.3 seconds gets repopulated in the opposite direction scan so I am grabbing as much data as possible.

Sometimes using single points may help instead of scans.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you would know how it is done on machine or if you could ask machinist about details, then you would have much informations to your own decision. But taking points should be better.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've had success with using a point strategy to "find" the cone, then referencing that cone for scanning another cone. I've applied the same process to radii.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to view this quote.

The method he mostly uses for radii less than 180 degrees.

Please sign in to view this quote.

Also don't forget to turn on Filtering.
Your form value, which is 0.09 mm, is also high. If the points are not good, your production section may be operating at high speed or with a blunt tool.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...