Best-Fit Alignment Versus Hard-Point Alignment - Revision history

Mcone: /* Why Use Hard Point Alignment Methods At All? */

2012-04-10T00:17:01Z

‎Why Use Hard Point Alignment Methods At All?

Mcone: /* Why Use Hard Point Alignment Methods At All? */

2012-04-10T00:16:42Z

‎Why Use Hard Point Alignment Methods At All?

Mcone: /* Why Use Hard Point Alignment Methods At All? */

2012-04-10T00:16:18Z

‎Why Use Hard Point Alignment Methods At All?

Mcone: /* Why Use Hard Point Alignment Methods At All? */

2012-04-10T00:15:04Z

‎Why Use Hard Point Alignment Methods At All?

Mcone: /* The Problem of Exaggerating Deviations */

2012-04-10T00:14:42Z

‎The Problem of Exaggerating Deviations

Mcone: /* About Hard-Point Alignment */

2012-04-10T00:13:27Z

‎About Hard-Point Alignment

Mcone: /* About Best-Fit Alignment */

2012-04-10T00:13:17Z

‎About Best-Fit Alignment

Mcone: /* Best-Fit Alignment versus Hard-Point Alignment */

2012-04-10T00:12:55Z

‎Best-Fit Alignment versus Hard-Point Alignment

Mcone: /* Best-Fit Alignment versus Hard-Point Alignment */

2012-04-10T00:12:42Z

‎Best-Fit Alignment versus Hard-Point Alignment

Mcone: /* About Best-Fit Alignment */

2012-04-10T00:12:12Z

‎About Best-Fit Alignment

@@ Line 85: / Line 85: @@
 Hard-point methods allow quality-control to lock a tube shape’s dimensions in order to emphasize a feature.  The problem is that this method comes at a cost.  As shown above, it tends to exaggerate deviation in the shape of the tube.
 <br><br>
-Another perceived benefit to hard-point alignment is that the alignment easy to replicate downstream in the inspection process.  The problem here is that there is not a real need to replicate an alignment once a qualification has been achieved.  If VTube-LASER can fit all parts of the straight along the center of the MASTER tube within tolerance, then the goal of qualification has been achieved.  If qualification can be achieved based on comparison of tangent points along aligned straights (measured and master), then the method used to arrive at the qualification is of little consequence.
+Another perceived benefit to hard-point alignment is that the alignment is easier to replicate downstream in the inspection process.  The problem here is that there is not a real need to replicate an alignment once a qualification has been achieved.  If VTube-LASER can fit all parts of the straight along the center of the MASTER tube within tolerance, then the goal of qualification has been achieved.  If qualification can be achieved based on comparison of tangent points along aligned straights (measured and master), then the method used to arrive at the qualification is of little consequence.
 <br><br>
 If validation is required, then as long as it can be proved that the aligned and non-aligned tubes have the same shape, then the qualification is validated.  The best way to compare tube shapes is to compare the bender data calculated from both sets of data.

@@ Line 83: / Line 83: @@
 <tr>
 <td width=400>
-Hard-point methods allow quality-control to lock a tube shape’s dimensions in order to emphasize a feature.  The problem is that this method comes at a cost.  It tends to exaggerate deviation in the shape of the tube.
+Hard-point methods allow quality-control to lock a tube shape’s dimensions in order to emphasize a feature.  The problem is that this method comes at a cost.  As shown above, it tends to exaggerate deviation in the shape of the tube.
 <br><br>
 Another perceived benefit to hard-point alignment is that the alignment easy to replicate downstream in the inspection process.  The problem here is that there is not a real need to replicate an alignment once a qualification has been achieved.  If VTube-LASER can fit all parts of the straight along the center of the MASTER tube within tolerance, then the goal of qualification has been achieved.  If qualification can be achieved based on comparison of tangent points along aligned straights (measured and master), then the method used to arrive at the qualification is of little consequence.

@@ Line 83: / Line 83: @@
 <tr>
 <td width=400>
-Hard-point methods allow qualify-control to lock a tube shape’s dimensions in order to emphasize a feature.  The problem is that this method comes at a cost.  It tends to exaggerate deviation in the shape of the tube.
+Hard-point methods allow quality-control to lock a tube shape’s dimensions in order to emphasize a feature.  The problem is that this method comes at a cost.  It tends to exaggerate deviation in the shape of the tube.
 <br><br>
 Another perceived benefit to hard-point alignment is that the alignment easy to replicate downstream in the inspection process.  The problem here is that there is not a real need to replicate an alignment once a qualification has been achieved.  If VTube-LASER can fit all parts of the straight along the center of the MASTER tube within tolerance, then the goal of qualification has been achieved.  If qualification can be achieved based on comparison of tangent points along aligned straights (measured and master), then the method used to arrive at the qualification is of little consequence.

@@ Line 80: / Line 80: @@
 == Why Use Hard Point Alignment Methods At All? ==
-<table>
+<table cellpadding=20>
 <tr>
 <td width=400>

@@ Line 67: / Line 67: @@
 == The Problem of Exaggerating Deviations ==
-<table>
+<table cellpadding=20>
 <tr>
 <td width=400>

@@ Line 24: / Line 24: @@
 == Best-Fit Alignment versus Hard-Point Alignment ==
-<table cellpadding=10>
+<table cellpadding=20>
 <tr>
 <td width=400>

@@ Line 48: / Line 48: @@
 </td>
 <td>
-[[image:best-fit-even-weight.jpg|300px]]
+[[image:best-fit-even-weight.jpg|300px]]<br><br>
 </td>
 </tr>