几何尺寸与公差论坛------致力于产品几何量公差标准GD&T (GDT:ASME)|New GPS(ISO)研究/CAD设计/CAM加工/CMM测量  


返回   几何尺寸与公差论坛------致力于产品几何量公差标准GD&T (GDT:ASME)|New GPS(ISO)研究/CAD设计/CAM加工/CMM测量 » 三维空间:产品设计或CAX软件使用 » CMM检测 » PC-DMIS
用户名
密码
注册 帮助 会员 日历 银行 搜索 今日新帖 标记论坛为已读


 
 
主题工具 搜索本主题 显示模式
旧 2007-11-27, 01:21 PM   #1
huangyhg
超级版主
 
huangyhg的头像
 
注册日期: 04-03
帖子: 18592
精华: 36
现金: 249466 标准币
资产: 1080358888 标准币
huangyhg 向着好的方向发展
默认 iterative versus best fit

We have some parts that are mostly curves (airfoil shaped).
They lie in the aircraft coordinate system at very odd angles.
When these parts are set up on CMM table, aircraft X plus may
be rotated and elevated at extreme angles to the machine axies (say 45 and 45 degrees).
As in the past this presented problems when using iterative alignment,
we generally have to go with a small section of the part and expand
from there.
We created the first two iterative alignments but when we came to
the third PC D-MIS would not align.
The part is still constrained in the fixture, so I don't think distortion is
an issue.
The CMM operator decided to use a best fit through the same six points he was trying to use for the third iterative alignment.
The best fit alignment worked.
When we re-inspect the six points they are all within .0004
Question: with a tolerance of .002, why would the iterative alignment not work?
I'm assuming it's because the iterative and best fit alignment use different algorithms?
V3.7 MR-2
Comments?
huangyhg离线中   回复时引用此帖
GDT自动化论坛(仅游客可见)
 


主题工具 搜索本主题
搜索本主题:

高级搜索
显示模式

发帖规则
不可以发表新主题
不可以回复主题
不可以上传附件
不可以编辑您的帖子

vB 代码开启
[IMG]代码开启
HTML代码关闭

相似的主题
主题 主题发起者 论坛 回复 最后发表
Iterative Alignment Rules huangyhg PC-DMIS 0 2007-11-14 03:23 PM


所有的时间均为北京时间。 现在的时间是 03:09 AM.


于2004年创办,几何尺寸与公差论坛"致力于产品几何量公差标准GD&T | GPS研究/CAD设计/CAM加工/CMM测量"。免责声明:论坛严禁发布色情反动言论及有关违反国家法律法规内容!情节严重者提供其IP,并配合相关部门进行严厉查处,若內容有涉及侵权,请立即联系我们QQ:44671734。注:此论坛须管理员验证方可发帖。
沪ICP备06057009号-2
更多