PC-DMISPlease share your ideas and suggestions to help us ensure we add features that will benefit the majority of users.
Thanks for your assistance in helping us shape the future...
Hexagon should have a library of example programs for all of there programming products.
This would give programmers some examples of the recommended programming methods from Hexagon.
PC-DMIS Protect - should have more "user" level access compared to current only 2 - programmer and operator
This is VOC from APAC PC-DMIS User's seminar which I want to strongly support.
Actually, The user’s are looking for 3 different roles or assignment’s or may be more in some case's . Always, It cannot be ONLY 2 roles in the companies like Protect support as now -
There are many companies who have multiple level of access for "programming the part" and "approval". They have clear distinguished flow chart or process that guide's the entire work flow before a MR is approved or passed to approved or "certify" status.
The typical work flow in a company is as below:-
- When I work for a company for 12 years, we do have similar approval systems.
1 – Programmer role – “Administrator” who will program the part and won’t certify - He should not press certify button or should not have access to do Certify or press Certify button. The Certify button must be greyed out for him.
2- Certification “”authorizer”” or Metrology Manager – This is “High level administrator” who wont normally program, but who will have the power to "Certify" the program after revisions and of course make revision approval' s -
He should have both "Program creation" and "Certify authorization" permissions. He is the Big Boss of certification in one word. He will be in a position to press Certify Button after Programmer finished programming the part. This is the very normal in many companies where the programmer is sitting somewhere and just pass the program after initial draft or just modify it after 1st or 2nd revision. During FAIR qualification or PPAP approval there are so many changes that can happen in a program which must be approved ONLY by certify authorizer or Big boss of Metrology. This scenario is not designed in current Protect model.
3 – Operator – Executor of the MR - Just he has the permission to open the program and run it. Operator mode as now.
After the programmer or low level admin is done with creating MR – the next level administrator or high level manager should be notified about the creation task and should be in a position to Certify. The first level programmer who himself is a admin, but should not have authorization to certify expect MR creation. The 2nd level certification authorizer should be the one who should certify the program. This was very widely asked by many company manager’s.
A button that would convert the programming code from English to Metric or vice versa. If it can be done in the reporting, why can't it be done for the program itself?
Now PC-DMIS remembers only measurements made on the last part. A lot of time I need a complete data of part that was measured in past. It could be set to remember last xx measured parts. I know that Calypso has this feature.
Autosave/Automatically save a Measurement Routine at timed intervals. Reminder pop-up to save. Default on.
Believe this was a setting in PC-DMIS at one time. If PC-DMIS 2019 R1 crashes unexpectedly while programming, any work not manually saved is lost. Better would be a default AutoSave set as on, and when the reminder pops up the enter or return should commit the action/save it. There should be an option on the popup to change the timing to a different interval or turn to off. That way any change to a more careless/negative possibility is at the user's responsibility. This is sort of like the automatic enrollment in a 401k plan begun with the Pension Protection Act, which has been hugely successful in permitting employees to accidentally save for the future vs accidentally not save for the future. This is related to an existing Idea:
similar to opening a word doc or protected pdf or cad file, where an instance of that file is already open at another pc or workstation, and a warning pops up that it can only be viewed not edited since it is open somewhere else. This would come in handy when, programmer needs to make edits, but in another facility the routine is open and running at a cmm. Rather than messaging folks or emailing and waiting for a response and someone to physically go verify it is not open anywhere, to just have a warning message pop up instead.
As the Manufacturing Industry heads towards automation and more CMM demand, companies like Boeing are asking for a formal Program Change Control Process such as Siemens Team Center. PC-DMIS should be able to accommodate this need.
When a CMM program is released, it should have an associated revision. When changed/updated for any reason, the prior revision program should be archived, documented change history recorded, and the new revision program released for use.
it helps when the same program run on different machine that i can know which machine they run on my report and able to make some adjustment per machine type.
one of the most frequent complaints is about changing nominals. There have been many different things listed to reduce that having to do with F5 settings and how Alignments are created etc, amounting to many things to seek and tie them down so they dont change. Perhaps pcdmis authors consider this a 'feature' but most users consider it the bain of their existence. It makes them HATE using pcdmis. Why not have 1 simple parameter the user can set that permanently locks the nominals of features and moves etc so that they can not change?
Customer support service by UserEcho