Re: digitizing

From: Pierre Bertrand (bertrand@francomedia.qc.ca)
Date: Tue Jun 04 1996 - 03:48:57 EEST


Steve_Farentinos wrote:
>
> Derek_Smith-EDS014@email.mot.com wrote:
> >
> > Bert,
> >
> > I found your post interesting, and would appreciate if you could elaborate
> > on one point you made. You said you measure the resulting shape of the cast
> > part. I would think you would need many measurement points in order to
> > apply selective shrink correction factors in the next step of you process.
> > This would imply to me that you are probably not measuring the cast parts
> > with hand metrology equipment or a contact CMM. This leaves one with
>
> Derek,
>
> I'm wondering why you believe a contact CMM is insufficient for gathering point data. In my
> experience, this is still the most accurate digitizing tool and it allows you to take the
> points in a more "strategic" manner, with higher density in more convoluted areas. At the same
> time, you can measure features (form and position), a necessity if you're comapring to known
> dimensions.
>
> Steve
>
> --
> Steve Farentinos
> PML, Inc.
> 201 W. Beach Ave.
> Inglewood, CA 90302
> 310 671-4345
> 310 671-0858 Fax
> 310 671-1862 BBS
> steve@pmli.com

Have you had experience with both CMM and lasers? How did time and costs compare? Were
there more problems with creating the model with either? We are considering buying a
laser and are not currently using a CMM.

Pierre Bertrand

Kaiplast Inc.
Montreal



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jun 05 2001 - 22:37:22 EEST