I've used this method successfully for over a decade. The third feature will have X, Y, Z and Diameter (Radius) values for use. Recall the diameter (radius) from the second feature. You can then create a third Theoretical feature and assign X to X, Y to Y and Z to Z from the first feature. This will give you your true radius value. You can test that out - I believe it will be close to what you were doing with PCDMIS.Įdit to restrain the Radius value (Always nominal)Ĭopy the feature and recall the original feature but uncheck 'Re-calculate Nominal geometry'.Įdit the new feature and select X,Y and Z as restrained allowing Radius to be active. There is also a radius measurement Characteristic that I've had some luck with. You can try just locking the XYZ as is, and see what kind of results you get, but the issue will be is that if the radius is indeed far away from where it should be the results will be far off. We've verified that the radii in question are in fact good by other methods, so I know it's not the part that's the problem.Ĭurve is the best tool then to give you an alignment. the results did improve, but they're still checking out of tolerance. I've already tried switching the feature to where it's taking five individual points instead of a scan. Would locking the XYZ still work if I'm still in the part alignment? Or would it only work if it's a more localized alignment? These are actually radii on the outside profile of a cylindrical part, so there's no 'corner' I can align to. Like Roberto said though, just take a few single data points instead of scanning. If you are reporting linear distances, lock the radius.Īdvanced settings: I've also used Curves or Free-Form surfaces to create the alignment to measure the arc to.

When you report the radius, change the evaluation parameters to lock the XYZ coordinates. Then when you measure the circle, measure it to that alignment. If it is a corner, use two points on the surface before and after to set the XY.

Arc xt pro forum