[haastec]

I am looking to outfit several machines with the ability to perform on machine part inspection/verification and provide a detailed report of the results. All the machine currently have the commonly installed Renishaw OMP40 inspection probe and tool setter combination. I have been talking to the Renishaw sales person for a short while about the different software available to perform such tasks, but I am looking to see if anyone on here is currently using any of the Renishaw software to do similar tasks or any other software for that matter.

I am just looking for some first hand feedback from users about what they like and/or don't like about their current software package.

[WallyL7]

I use it for verification only - and sometimes will write in tool offset adjust if part is out of spec and tool re-run macros. I haven't gotten to the point where I really care about posting a spreadsheet full of numbers that I get from the probe. As far as software goes I just use the renishaw codes.

[haastec]

Thanks for the reply, but I am looking to go a bit more advanced.

I am not expecting full on CMM probing here, but we are looking to generate code to probe many features of a part across a big product line and provide reports which can be used for our ISO audit records as well as our QC sampling per production run.

[underthetire]

Hexagon metrology has pcdimis I've used. Worked well enough, but you still need an artifact to calibrate before use.

Sent from my G-Tab Quantum using Tapatalk

[WallyL7]

Thanks for the reply, but I am looking to go a bit more advanced.

I am not expecting full on CMM probing here, but we are looking to generate code to probe many features of a part across a big product line and provide reports which can be used for our ISO audit records as well as our QC sampling per production run.

"a bit more advanced"...that is why I don't get too crazy on the Haas. It just isn't capable imo of true CMM reporting (i.e: your ISO audit). I don't think I'd trust it beyond .0005" and even then I'd have doubts. Bores are one thing as you can verify it with standards and that is normally what I limit my in-process probing/offset adjusting to on this machine. We do run full CMM probing on the Mazaks though.

[Ydna]

I've used the renishaw hardware to spit out some numbers in the past but the biggest hurtle that keeps me from doing it more often is not having a cute way of getting the info out of the machine. Up until now I just throw the values into some unused macro variables but then somebody has to take a picture of those if there is to be any record of them. I know the machines can dump certain amounts of info via RS232 but I'm not interested in that.

The parts I do are more academic though, I'm not interested in buying anything (the existing renishaw software, etc). The workpieces I probe have individual inspection sheets but most of it is generally done with bench mics rather than relying simply on the probed positions from the machine.

[CarbideBob]

Am I getting this right?
You want to use the same machine that made the parts to do the final inspection report?
Never been bitten in the ass by this, or at least understand why it is not a good idea?
Writing your own probing routines is trivial but understanding why CMMs are not built like machining centers may help you more.
Bob

[haastec]

Am I getting this right?
You want to use the same machine that made the parts to do the final inspection report?
Never been bitten in the ass by this, or at least understand why it is not a good idea?
Writing your own probing routines is trivial but understanding why CMMs are not built like machining centers may help you more.
Bob

I am not looking to debate whether this is a good idea or not as that has been done before at great length.

I am ONLY looking for feedback from anyone currently using their machines in this manner in regards to the software being used to write the code and for generating a report.

[CarbideBob]

.......

I am ONLY looking for feedback from anyone currently using their machines in this manner in regards to the software being used to write the code and for generating a report.

Sorry, did not mean to tick you off.
We have been doing it since the early 80's so maybe it just seems easy here.
We write all of our probing and size control software using the touch probes or cameras so I can't help you much with a canned solution.

Bob

[CarbideBob]

No one here using a probe to measure parts?
Come on people.... Speak up............Someone must be using their machine to do this,

What are you working with on the software side?
Bob

[haastec]

Sorry, did not mean to tick you off.
We have been doing it since the early 80's so maybe it just seems easy here.
We write all of our probing and size control software using the touch probes or cameras so I can't help you much with a canned solution.

Bob

No worries Bob, I just did not want this thread to get derailed into a completely different direction.

Not to defail my own post to much now, but your posts have me confused. Your first response left me with the impression that you do not agree with measuring parts on the machine, but your next one makes it sound like you do.

[underthetire]

I did

Sent from my G-Tab Quantum using Tapatalk

[Probe Guy]

While I would gladly debate (on the For side) the capability of our modern machines ability to preform both in-process and final inspection (post ISO-accepted calibration); to answer your question about generating reports from the machine, this is a resounding YES, absolutely you can, its not difficult and it not expensive. The ability to do this ranges from the basic Renishaw txt report, which all machines equipped with a Renishaw probe have the capability of producing, including Haas with WIPS, to the full-on Formal SPC of QC-CALC or PCDMIS. There's allot of money involved when you get to that level. If you just want a simple txt report, all you'll need is an RS232 cable connected to your PC with a USB-to-RS232 adapter and some communication software (usually your CAM txt editor will suffice). Its really not difficult at all, especially on an Haas. If you want to go more advanced and generate a simple sequential report where you can compare feature-to-feature, you can simply add a product like CNC Reporter, Again, very easy and inexpensive. If your interested in Health Checking and in-process checks, this is a great option. If you want to go all the way with Formal SPC, then your looking at the two solutions mentioned above. Examples of companies doing this abound in every manufacturing sector. This being a forum, I can't get too specific however, as I've posted many times, if you'd like more detail, send me a private message and I'll be happy to get into the specifics. The point is that probing data collection (not MDC) is very mainstream manufacturing now and not the mystical magic it once was.

[haastec]

While I would gladly debate (on the For side) the capability of our modern machines ability to preform both in-process and final inspection (post ISO-accepted calibration); to answer your question about generating reports from the machine, this is a resounding YES, absolutely you can, its not difficult and it not expensive. The ability to do this ranges from the basic Renishaw txt report, which all machines equipped with a Renishaw probe have the capability of producing, including Haas with WIPS, to the full-on Formal SPC of QC-CALC or PCDMIS. There's allot of money involved when you get to that level. If you just want a simple txt report, all you'll need is an RS232 cable connected to your PC with a USB-to-RS232 adapter and some communication software (usually your CAM txt editor will suffice). Its really not difficult at all, especially on an Haas. If you want to go more advanced and generate a simple sequential report where you can compare feature-to-feature, you can simply add a product like CNC Reporter, Again, very easy and inexpensive. If your interested in Health Checking and in-process checks, this is a great option. If you want to go all the way with Formal SPC, then your looking at the two solutions mentioned above. Examples of companies doing this abound in every manufacturing sector. This being a forum, I can't get too specific however, as I've posted many times, if you'd like more detail, send me a private message and I'll be happy to get into the specifics. The point is that probing data collection (not MDC) is very mainstream manufacturing now and not the mystical magic it once was.

Thanks for the reply Guy.

We messaged a few times at the end of last year and I was already planning to reach out to Brent later today regarding my needs.
As always, thanks for the insight!

[guypb]

Thanks for the reply Guy.

We messaged a few times at the end of last year and I was already planning to reach out to Brent later today regarding my needs.
As always, thanks for the insight!

Actually that was Brent! I'd like to say our parents can't tell us apart but he's the healthier looking one.

[haastec]

Actually that was Brent! I'd like to say our parents can't tell us apart but he's the healthier looking one.

Opps! Sorry about that. You to Brent!

I guess if I was paying attention to the location, I could have figured that out.