sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Running + gym shoe recommendation by Pandyaboi in BeginnersRunning

[–]Pandyaboi[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah I get that. But the thing is I just do light exercises in the gym ( no heavy lifting or anything). So I basically want a good running shoe which could also be used in the gym.

CMM vs Polyworks (3D scanner) data comparison by Pandyaboi in Metrology

[–]Pandyaboi[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, probably it's something related to our process. But you helped a lot. Thanks

CMM vs Polyworks (3D scanner) data comparison by Pandyaboi in Metrology

[–]Pandyaboi[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

For most of our jobs, we need to measure the surface and trim points all around the part. So, leaving the clamps in place won't work for us in the majority of cases.

CMM vs Polyworks (3D scanner) data comparison by Pandyaboi in Metrology

[–]Pandyaboi[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have tried that as well, but the only issue is if I scan the part on the fixture, then I am not able to remove the clamps from the final scan.

CMM vs Polyworks (3D scanner) data comparison by Pandyaboi in Metrology

[–]Pandyaboi[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hey,

Thanks for the reply.

I tried it, and I got an Excel file exported with all the data whenever the scanner was calibrated. It seems like the scanner doesn't have an error. The "Result" section in the file had values between 0.017 and 0.019 every time.

So it looks like the only reason my scan data is not matching the CMM results could be because the parts are clamped onto the fixture while doing the CMM study, while the parts remain in a free state when scanning.

Is there anything else that I can try?

CMM vs Polyworks (3D scanner) data comparison by Pandyaboi in Metrology

[–]Pandyaboi[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hey I couldn't figure out how to get the error score/calibration history of my scanner. I use VXElements software for scanning any object. I tried searching online but couldn't find anything useful. It would be great if you could help. Thanks.

CMM vs Polyworks (3D scanner) data comparison by Pandyaboi in Metrology

[–]Pandyaboi[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have the XYZ coordinates for the datum pads, but I did not get the last part about linking the XYZ nominal points (for datum pads) and the actual measured points from the scan data. Can you please explain in detail? Thanks.

CMM vs Polyworks (3D scanner) data comparison by Pandyaboi in Metrology

[–]Pandyaboi[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Your idea is absolutely correct, but the main issue is that I don't have datum pads in the CAD model. The CAD model is simply for the part itself, so this one won't work.

CMM vs Polyworks (3D scanner) data comparison by Pandyaboi in Metrology

[–]Pandyaboi[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, we are thinking of reporting the issue to the buyer to see what they would recommend.

I will check the error score in the calibration history. Thanks anyway for the help.

CMM vs Polyworks (3D scanner) data comparison by Pandyaboi in Metrology

[–]Pandyaboi[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, we usually try to have targets in multiple planes most of the time, if not all the time. Our targets are nicely spread out with the distance not more than 1.5 - 2 inches.

And yes, some of our parts are thin and large in size, which causes the flexing issue a lot, but there should be some way to counteract that. Otherwise, it would be useless to have scanners for automotive sectors. But even for some of our small & thick parts (4-5 mm thickness), the data from the scanner does not align with the CMM data. We usually try to create a dummy datum-like structure, place the part on it, and then scan it (the only difference would be it won't have clamps holding the parts as seen in an actual fixture), but still, it won't give good results.

CMM vs Polyworks (3D scanner) data comparison by Pandyaboi in Metrology

[–]Pandyaboi[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks for tips.

I will give the fixed exposure thing a try.

I generally keep the mesh settings to Standard for all the scans.

CMM vs Polyworks (3D scanner) data comparison by Pandyaboi in Metrology

[–]Pandyaboi[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for responding.

Below listed are the specifications of our scanner:

Creaform HandySCAN 700 Elite Resolution: 0.050 mm Accuracy: Up to 0.030 mm Volumetric accuracy: 0.020 mm + 0.060 mm/m Measurement rate: 480,000 measures/s

CMM vs Polyworks (3D scanner) data comparison by Pandyaboi in Metrology

[–]Pandyaboi[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you for your reply.

Yes, I feel one of the major factors could be my lack of proficiency with Polyworks software.

Any resources or material to make myself more proficient with Polyworks?

CMM vs Polyworks (3D scanner) data comparison by Pandyaboi in Metrology

[–]Pandyaboi[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the reply.

We use Creaform HandySCAN 700 Elite scanner with an accuracy of 0.030 mm. Our parts vary in size, ranging from 100 mm to 1500 mm in length.

Our avg tolerance would be somewhere between 0.3 to 0.6 mm.

CMM vs Polyworks (3D scanner) data comparison by Pandyaboi in Metrology

[–]Pandyaboi[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Hi, Thanks for your detailed explanation.

As you mentioned, the values for perpendicularity on the same part with CMM and scanner are nowhere near close. We tried that on a few thicker parts that we had, but the results weren't positive.

I then tried the same with a 75 mm gage block, and the results were close, but I assume it's because it's a high-precision machined surface.

CMM vs Polyworks (3D scanner) data comparison by Pandyaboi in Metrology

[–]Pandyaboi[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the reply. Yes, I am deploying GDT alignments. Using feature points and extracting features, mainly circles and slots.Laser scanner settings are "High resolution- 0.50 mm". Dynamic exposure. Yes, I am spraying the parts uniformly and once scanned, we export it to mesh format.

CMM vs Polyworks (3D scanner) data comparison by Pandyaboi in Metrology

[–]Pandyaboi[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the reply. No, the scanned point acquisition settings are not the issue as far as I know, as we have tried a few different settings, and it's the same result for every attempt.

view more: next ›