In a lot of instances an operator or Inspector wants a simple classification if a part is either good or Bad. Currently we can add the code to test for any out of tolerance features and display a report label programatically but this can be complex to a user. In most cases they wish to know of the part is any good or not, by having a PASS/FAIL label the inspector / operator does not have to review the report in all its detail. For Example

Would like to see a graceful default way to handle Find Hole failures.  

For example the operator puts the probe in the approximate middle of the feature and lets PC DMIS try again and/or quick minimal manual feature measurement to temporarily reset the theoriticals. Probably would have to have a surface touch as part of the solution in case the surface isn't quite where it's expected.

Add another parameter to appropriate Auto Features that sets the size of the Find Hole search area.  I know it can be done other ways but having your commonly used tools right at hand makes for a good work flow. 

Often there are tools in auto features that are quite useful.  Often enough I spend time manually converting the coordinates of a measured feature into an autofeature to get the benefits it prescribes.

We can control the angles of the hits for the circle, it would be nice to independently control the angle of the sample hits

I've seen competing software that has no problem with edges I have problems with in PC°DMIS.

Whenever I'm on a vision project, I always struggle to get edge parameters correct until lots of trial.

Nearest Nominal and Matching Edge are sometimes very amazing and work quite well, but often there are program parameters and changes that are not feasible with those tools (at least not with out lots of work, meaning if I quote for the struggle I lose the work anyway).

Can we develop a plan for implementing better algorithms?  I can, and possibly the rest of the community, can submit difficult tasks to measure and submit them for review.

Change the ICON of a program in the explorer window depending on the version it is saved in.

Example:

-2018 R1 & 2 Icon would be the number 18

-2017 R1 & 2 icon would be the number 17

etc..

We have multiple customers that require different versions of PCDMIS - before we send the program we have to verify that it is in the correct format.  This would be a quick visual to verify that it has been saved correctly.

PC°Dmis has a group command.

It would be nice if it were possible to check conditions inside of the group command and then the group command would output a conditional variable.

Example:

I place all of my critical feature dimensions inside of a group command.  I then set the conditional statement for:

-any out of tolerance condition inside group = to 1

-any % of tolerance condition inside group = to -1

This condition is written to an external record (comma separated)

I can now program an external system to fetch these results and use it to control process signals i.e. stop production/quality alert (Andon Signaling) etc. 

I'd like the ability to change the contents of a probe file without having to reconstruct the entire probe build. We have 15 production machines and are trying to simplify the process of changing a broken stylus. An under trained person won't know that a 4 x 67mm custom stylus is ITP part number STHM504011069.

If I could just edit the stylus names in the existing probe files in a text file format it would be much easier than having to create all new probe files.

Hi,

Many user change the open GL tesselation value to 1 -> 0,1.

It would be great some possibilities that the Probe ball and shaft tesselation also can to improve...

Thanks in advance!