Ideas
+3
Declined
LRA corrections
rtomsu 7 years ago
in Metrology Software / TubeShaper
•
updated by Lasse Viinikainen 3 years ago •
6
We would like to have a possibility to see corrections of measured LRA in report. That means opposite values of deviations. For example when your nominal value of a bend is 90 and you measured that the reality is 91.5, the deviation is 1.5. But we would like to see the value of -1.5. We dont use automatic corrections for benders because our benders are not capable of this. We need to write corrections manually so we need values in this form.
Customer support service by UserEcho
Hi RTomsu-
Thank you for your submission.
When you say LRA above, do you really mean the CLRA values? These CLRA (Corrected LRA) values shown in the report are already the corrected values that you would need. To do the correction process manually, is more complex than simply negating the deviations. You would also need to take into account elongation, springback, difftags, etc. But, you should be able to simply key-in the CLRA values already provided in the report.
Hope this helps...
-The TubeShaper team.
As I described in my other topic we use your software like most of the customers dont. I know there are CLRA values but we dont use this values. We just use the corrections which we write to our CNC bender after measuring and the machine will count the CLRA automatically. I should mention that our benders are quite old so we dont use modern features.
Is there any progress on my request?
This would be useful. Quite often there are short straights and obtuse bends that are very difficult to both manufacture and to measure. Sometimes the users best guess is more accurate than the incorrect measurement, according to our experience.
These would only be cosmetical manual adjustments, since these have no effect on the actual production piece itself. It would just make the report look more accurate.
Unfrotunately time and resources have not allowed us to add this to TubeShaper. However there is now the ability to EDIT the CLRA values, which would give you the ability to input the 'best guess' of the operator. Could this work?
It isn't an aesthetical solution. We might go with slightly innaccurate reports instead.