Printable View
We have several parts that are GD&T with tight tolerance hole locations. The production process is as follows: 1. We currently 5-axis machine the parts with undersized holes. 2. Inspect the parts with the CMM where results are recorded and movements are given. 3. Holes are opened/moved into tolerance on a conventional mill. 4. Another CMM inspection is performed to verify all parts. I wonder if this may be a application where probing technology can help. Any thoughts?
hy :) under some circumstances, is no longer profitable to use a cnc to deliver tight bores, because mrr and productivity will decrease; such a scenario is when there allready exists an alternative, that simply allows for the part to be finished on another machine, and overall is better
off couse, is also possible to use a probe, and preprefinish , probe, prefinish, probe, finish, probe ... frequency of probing, calibration and prefinishes must be related to bore tolerance
another approach is to stick to your actual method, but eliminate the cmm if possible, and replace with other kind of control methods
if you wish for a more specific approach, please share more details / kindly :)
I just want to clarify that it is not the diameter as much as the location of the hole that is in question. I assume probes can detect and recover an out of tolerance condition(X,Y location)but I am not certain this capability exists.
if you imagine something, and the machine can move in such a way to do it, then is possible :)
is possible to detect a hole center, then also calculate if it is where it should be :) it may require a macro; i can not help with code for hass, since i don't know the machine, but i can tell you will need acces to specific variables ( actual position ); you may ask/search for their existance, and, once you found them, then is possible to write the code to do what you wish :)
pls be specific, share an example with how you detect origin, how&why the actual hole position is out of spec, why you finish on other machine, etcQuote:
not certain this capability exists
even if you coulf create a macro to handle all those, in the end, more important, may be the calibration, thus the things required to proof the accuracy of the process
please, don't focus on uncertainty, leave it behind; be specific, just tell what you wish to do; is that simple
if i get it right, you would need to read actual position after probing, then calculate the shift requied to put the hole in spec; question is why now is not possible to have the hole in position, without all this measurements ? kindly :)