For those who do the ID, I know you come up with all kind of fancy shapes - the question is: how you inspect the real part from your 3d model? We depend much on overseas vendors for their inspection and have no equipment for this task?
Some local shops offer service of scanning the part which can be used to compare to 3D model. Has anyone used this service, please share how it goes
Thanks
I would say it really depends on the need. How important are these surfaces? Do they interact with other surfaces? Usually those types of geometry don't have drawing dimensional values so you need to hold the geometry to solid model shape based on Profile of surface (GD&T) with a value you can live with. Different materials behave in certain ways, so this can be tough. Kyle's suggestion of probing the 3D surface is straight forward if you have the equipment, just pick the locations based on your needs by defining inspection points or similar techniques.
Scanning can give you an overall good picture, but the will cost you time and money sending it out. Also, depending on the physical part, you may not be able to send it or scan it fully due to limitations.
Good Luck Christian! Let us know what you end up doing!
JM
Kyle and John,
One of my duties is to do the ID for the machine covers as you can see from the below image
Basically, I only use GD&T for outer surfaces and dimension values for other mating features such as mtg. holes or snap features
We don't have any inhouse inspection equipment for outer surfaces and just eyeball after putting the covers together.
it works for the look but sometimes we have issue with snap features caused by plastic warping which we can't inspect it
As usual, all finger pointing to the engineers for quality issue so I started searching for a way to inspect the machine covers
I want to learn how others inspect the surfacing design parts
Christian Chu wrote:
it works for the look but sometimes we have issue with snap features caused by plastic warping which we can't inspect it
Your options for inspection are pretty endless from scans, CMM to model, Vision, Functional and on and on.
If you're making/Using alot of the same product and getting them in from outside vendors why not look into a functional gage of some sort? This is probably not an option if you're dealing with small quantities and many different sizes, shapes etc. There is also the option to have functional gage for only certain features. For instance if the connecting portion is similar among many different parts you could gage just that portion with the same gage on the parts.
If you're looking at low quantity and many different parts then your bet bet is probably some sort of inspection service. A decent inspection house should be able to inspect to your model. They should be able to pick up the part, align it and hit points on the surfaces and tell you where they are from the model reference. Doing this in house is also an option depending on how often you may be doing this. There's just a ton of options out there for doing this so you really need to do some investigation on what would work best for you.
Look into CMM's, Faro Arms, Vision Systems etc etc
..there are a host of different conditions and variables. (low or mass production.. size of parts, consumer/commercial.)
-Cosmetics/Visual (color, texture, marks, imperfections,.. provide examples pass/fail)
-Fit/Function (mounting/fastening... seams/gaps/alignments... )
..inspection jigs (go-no-go)
..scanning (could be dimensional, color or flaws (not Frederick))
..manual inspection... all of the above.
If the parts are low volume, most of this can be achieved at the molding stage (where you really/they need to focus on issues,.. flash, ghost, burns... )... or course random inspections along the way (shrink/warpage/... color change,.. post superficial issues?)
btw,,.. visual issues can sometimes give clues... so.. if you have a list of what to watchout for.. they can be forthcoming.
Good short breakdown of some of the heavy hitters Paul! So many variables!
Some other advice I can think of is to have a close working relationship with your MFG group or company that is doing the work. That can help you focus on the areas that may cause the most trouble, saving you time and money not chasing the wrong thing.
JM
John Matrishon wrote:
Good short breakdown of some of the heavy hitters Paul! So many variables!
Some other advice I can think of is to have a close working relationship with your MFG group or company that is doing the work. That can help you focus on the areas that may cause the most trouble, saving you time and money not chasing the wrong thing.
JM
Hello John,.. yes... absolutely!... having the right people looking out for your needs/wants (the mold operators!)... is key! For instance.. simply bring in the parts which will interface with the molded parts... it's a great way to communicate any concerns upfront,... help them to understand your level of tolerance with fit/function, inserts, gaps and any cosmetic issues (leave flash/splay/ghosting.. where you won't see it or what is really important to your application... or maybe what can/cannot be reworked or salvaged... it all helps!
Paul Salvador wrote:
John Matrishon wrote:
Good short breakdown of some of the heavy hitters Paul! So many variables!
Some other advice I can think of is to have a close working relationship with your MFG group or company that is doing the work. That can help you focus on the areas that may cause the most trouble, saving you time and money not chasing the wrong thing.
JM
Hello John,.. yes... absolutely!... having the right people looking out for your needs/wants (the mold operators!)... is key! For instance.. simply bring in the parts which will interface with the molded parts... it's a great way to communicate any concerns upfront,... help them to understand your level of tolerance with fit/function, inserts, gaps and any cosmetic issues (leave flash/splay/ghosting.. where you won't see it or what is really important to your application... or maybe what can/cannot be reworked or salvaged... it all helps!
Dealing with overseas vendors is not easy like its sound. Dimensional values on the 2D dwg is very much telling the vendor the feature is critical and needs more attention. The final cut on the tooling was done by EDM based on the 3D model so the overall dim is well controlled. However, the final dim on the part is out of spec due to the warp or sink or whatever which caused the fitting issue with other parts. while flashing, sink marks can be visually inspected, other issue need some special equipment to inspect. and this is what I'm looking for
Christian Chu wrote:
Paul Salvador wrote:
John Matrishon wrote:
Good short breakdown of some of the heavy hitters Paul! So many variables!
Some other advice I can think of is to have a close working relationship with your MFG group or company that is doing the work. That can help you focus on the areas that may cause the most trouble, saving you time and money not chasing the wrong thing.
JM
Hello John,.. yes... absolutely!... having the right people looking out for your needs/wants (the mold operators!)... is key! For instance.. simply bring in the parts which will interface with the molded parts... it's a great way to communicate any concerns upfront,... help them to understand your level of tolerance with fit/function, inserts, gaps and any cosmetic issues (leave flash/splay/ghosting.. where you won't see it or what is really important to your application... or maybe what can/cannot be reworked or salvaged... it all helps!
Dealing with overseas vendors is not easy like its sound. Dimensional values on the 2D dwg is very much telling the vendor the feature is critical and needs more attention. The final cut on the tooling was done by EDM based on the 3D model so the overall dim is well controlled. However, the final dim on the part is out of spec due to the warp or sink or whatever which caused the fitting issue with other parts. while flashing, sink marks can be visually inspected, other issue need some special equipment to inspect. and this is what I'm looking for
...so, you're dealing with a mold shrink/warp issues.. and a group who should probably focus on the fundamental issues... wall thickness, material (drying), gate/fill locations, temp, venting, pressure, cycle time... ?
Ask your SW VAR. Many of them has solution for 3D scanning.
We have inhouse CMM and laser inspection for parts that won't fit the CMM.
For your example part, a laser scanner could be a good investment.
A few set of Go No Go fixtures will cost more then the scanner.
Frederick Law wrote:
Ask your SW VAR. Many of them has solution for 3D scanning.
We have inhouse CMM and laser inspection for parts that won't fit the CMM.
For your example part, a laser scanner could be a good investment.
A few set of Go No Go fixtures will cost more then the scanner.
I've been talking to GoEngineer for their 3D scanning service. just wanted to know for other alternative
How you compared the result from laser scanner to your 3D model?
I believe the scanning software does it.
I'll say similar to CMM.
We did some inspection on the CNC.
Christian,
The inspection software will align the point cloud data from the scan to the model, using an overall best fit algorithm or localised to more important areas.
The service provider should put this in to a report, or could export the aligned scan data as an stl and send you that. Then you could import in to SW and overlay it yourself and compare.
Kyle Mitchell wrote:
Christian,
The inspection software will align the point cloud data from the scan to the model, using an overall best fit algorithm or localised to more important areas.
The service provider should put this in to a report, or could export the aligned scan data as an stl and send you that. Then you could import in to SW and overlay it yourself and compare.
Any suggestion for a decent laser scanner?
Thx
Christian Chu wrote:
Kyle Mitchell wrote:
Christian,
The inspection software will align the point cloud data from the scan to the model, using an overall best fit algorithm or localised to more important areas.
The service provider should put this in to a report, or could export the aligned scan data as an stl and send you that. Then you could import in to SW and overlay it yourself and compare.
Any suggestion for a decent laser scanner?
Thx
..what accuracy do you want/need?
Paul Salvador wrote:
Christian Chu wrote:
Kyle Mitchell wrote:
Christian,
The inspection software will align the point cloud data from the scan to the model, using an overall best fit algorithm or localised to more important areas.
The service provider should put this in to a report, or could export the aligned scan data as an stl and send you that. Then you could import in to SW and overlay it yourself and compare.
Any suggestion for a decent laser scanner?
Thx
..what accuracy do you want/need?
up to 0.1mm
Christian Chu wrote:
Paul Salvador wrote:
Christian Chu wrote:
Kyle Mitchell wrote:
Christian,
The inspection software will align the point cloud data from the scan to the model, using an overall best fit algorithm or localised to more important areas.
The service provider should put this in to a report, or could export the aligned scan data as an stl and send you that. Then you could import in to SW and overlay it yourself and compare.
Any suggestion for a decent laser scanner?
Thx
..what accuracy do you want/need?
up to 0.1mm
.. a few which come up within 0.1mm and 0.05mm are...
https://www.amazon.com/EinScan-Desktop-Scanner-0-05mm-Accuracy/dp/B07RWMJY7X
..and ..
Paul Salvador wrote:
Christian Chu wrote:
Paul Salvador wrote:
Christian Chu wrote:
Kyle Mitchell wrote:
Christian,
The inspection software will align the point cloud data from the scan to the model, using an overall best fit algorithm or localised to more important areas.
The service provider should put this in to a report, or could export the aligned scan data as an stl and send you that. Then you could import in to SW and overlay it yourself and compare.
Any suggestion for a decent laser scanner?
Thx
..what accuracy do you want/need?
up to 0.1mm
.. a few which come up within 0.1mm and 0.05mm are...
https://www.amazon.com/EinScan-Desktop-Scanner-0-05mm-Accuracy/dp/B07RWMJY7X
..and ..
Once you get stl file from the scanner. How it can be used to compare the actual 3D model? Is there a software for it or you need to overlay it over the 3D model to see the diff?
You need an industrial scanner that come with or work with inspection software.
Here is one for inspection: https://www.3dsystems.com/software#inspection
Full list: https://www.3dsystems.com/software#reverse-engineering
The scanner is part of the story.
I'll say software is more important.
I have 3dSystem's Sense Scanner. The free software is only for scanner and some edit and clean up.
Scanning is tricky. It lost tracking often.
Frederick Law wrote:
You need an industrial scanner that come with or work with inspection software.
Here is one for inspection: https://www.3dsystems.com/software#inspection
Full list: https://www.3dsystems.com/software#reverse-engineering
The scanner is part of the story.
I'll say software is more important.
I have 3dSystem's Sense Scanner. The free software is only for scanner and some edit and clean up.
Scanning is tricky. It lost tracking often.
Thx for the info.
It's more sophisticated than I thought - need to create a proposal package for this.
Christian Chu wrote:
Frederick Law wrote:
You need an industrial scanner that come with or work with inspection software.
Here is one for inspection: https://www.3dsystems.com/software#inspection
Full list: https://www.3dsystems.com/software#reverse-engineering
The scanner is part of the story.
I'll say software is more important.
I have 3dSystem's Sense Scanner. The free software is only for scanner and some edit and clean up.
Scanning is tricky. It lost tracking often.
Thx for the info.
It's more sophisticated than I thought - need to create a proposal package for this.
..yes,.. it's a pita... and if you're doing lots of them and it's that critical,.. search for a 3D metrology service near you...
...otherwise.. for in house... would mean a setup/jig (ref datum features/targets) within a +- range which gives you a pass/fail to then move the rejects into a more rigorous scan? (or prep the surfaces matte white?)
...normally,.. if it's not cosmetic.. then there are only a few critical targets.. the areas which are interacting or mating rarely fall outside the range of error unless the tool, material, process changes?
Hi,
I prefer contact inspection using a probe on a CMM. Most inspection packages can probe 3D surfaces.
I use a portable arm with a probe, I do have the laser scanner too but prefer just the probe.
If the part is only 3D surfaces, I would take points across all of the part then best fit them to the original data to compare.
If the part has features (holes, bosses etc.) I would probe these features, align these features to the original CAD then go on to inspect the surfaces relative to the features.
Thanks, Kyle