Alternatives to MIC 360 and Large Diameter Measurement

Hi,

2 questions

What size diameters are you measuring?

The MIC 360 can measure internal and external - do you need to measure internal diameters?

J.

Yes, internal measurement would be required, if possible.

And as for size of the parts, anything from 10-15 inches for a small shaft or pipe mold up to 70-75 inches in some of our large pipe molds and now, wind shafts we began making. We make parts of just about every size for varying things on our lathes and bores.

I have found a few others along with the intern assigned to this and will check them out today. But all 3 other companies appear to have instruments rivaling that of the Pro-Mic I showed, but we will see.

And thank you for the Mapross... I will look into this one.

When i think of in-process diamtrical measurement, i think of Marposs

Hope this helps

I think you could do the O.D. with a PI tape they can be had in just about any diameter you want. Starret can make any size I.D. mikes with standards you want although price might be a draw back.

You may find an articulating arm CMM or a laser system that works for your application.

Try these:

http://www.metris.com/

http://www.hexagonmetrology.net/

what is the required accuracy?

Gagemaker products have served me well over the years. Oilfield and piping applications.

We are looking into a larger CMM (also my job), and have looked at both of those places and have been in touch with them. The goal of my employer is to try and save the CMM though for our newer wind shafts we have started making and other products as they have tighter tolerances than the pipe molds we make.

For the gagemaker, I know they have a tolerance up .0001 and we are trying to find a replacement to match that or better. Essentially the most accurate device we can find. My employers goal is to take a part off the line and when it goes to the CMM, we already know it will pass, but will check it as our clients force us to. He wants to do this with ANY thing we can measure while in-process.

As we discuss this issue I want to drift off to QA practices but as I have not been so well educated on these matters of recent. I will refrain.

A CMM purchase is a huge investment in money, time and training as well as revised quality procedures. It is not difficult to overutilize such a piece of equipment either. Having to move large parts can also be problematic when a good tool could be moved to the workpiece prior to removal from its set up.

I would rather have good inspection tooling that allowed my 85%-90% assurance in process with a cycle time reduction than an expensive tool that allowed me 87%-90% post process. But I am a bit old school.