Measuring Internal Angles
Close
Login to Your Account
Results 1 to 20 of 20
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Florida
    Posts
    5
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    7
    Likes (Received)
    0

    Question Measuring Internal Angles

    Hello Everyone,

    I'm looking for a new method of measuring internal angles like the one in this picture. (The 12° ±3)

    deep-hole-inside-angle.jpg

    Right now we're using a molding putty to take an impression and make this inside feature into an outside feature. Then we toss that on a comparator and take our measurements. While this works, it's a lot of time wasted waiting for the putty to set, and it really doesn't seem like it produces the most accurate results. This is a deep hole measurement, not a through hole.

    Is there some type of gauge that might make our putty process obsolete?

    btw
    I'm fairly new to QA, and entirely hopelessly lost when it comes to machining and manufacturing, so please keep the engineer jargon to an understandable level. Lol.

    Thanks in advance.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Temecula, Ca
    Posts
    2,522
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1167
    Likes (Received)
    3316

    Default

    what do you have to work with? CMM?

    You can check the angle with a sine plate. The diameter you could check by calculating a gage point and use a tooling ball

  3. Likes J Skeleman, Derek Smalls liked this post
  4. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Florida
    Posts
    5
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    7
    Likes (Received)
    0

    Default

    We have three very ancient manual optical comparators, and a Keyence IM-6010, which is one of the older models, it might have been cutting-edge about 15 years ago.

    I'm unfamiliar with sine plates and tooling balls, I will have to do some research on how to work with them. These measurements will be taken for first and last article inspection.

    Thank you for the suggestion.

  5. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    IL/WI border
    Posts
    3,042
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    945
    Likes (Received)
    861

    Default

    An ID taper micrometer (if you had one) would work here.

    EDIT: O-ops! Sorry, I missed the diameter of the hole.

  6. Likes J Skeleman liked this post
  7. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Michigan
    Posts
    9,289
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3159
    Likes (Received)
    3341

    Default

    If you have repeat angles I think best to make a Go/nogo gauge..that is a quick and easy check once the gauge is in hand.

    optical comparator with a straight pin held to the angle often gets 1/2 degree and better a quick as a wink.

    For a mile like 3* a hand protractor should be OK.

    Small bevel protractor is handy for +- 1*

    Precise Universal Bevel Protractors - BP-301 - Penn Tool Co., Inc

    loop is handy to set such.

  8. Likes J Skeleman liked this post
  9. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Florida
    Posts
    5
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    7
    Likes (Received)
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by michiganbuck View Post
    If you have repeat angles I think best to make a Go/nogo gauge..that is a quick and easy check once the gauge is in hand.

    optical comparator with a straight pin held to the angle often gets 1/2 degree and better a quick as a wink.

    For a mile like 3* a hand protractor should be OK.

    Small bevel protractor is handy for +- 1*

    Precise Universal Bevel Protractors - BP-301 - Penn Tool Co., Inc

    loop is handy to set such.
    I've thought about getting a series of go/nogo gauges made, but we have so many different parts and sizes that it might end up being more trouble than it's worth.

    Thank you for the link, once I figure out *how* to use something like that with my parts (Like I said in the OP, my experience is near zero for this sort of thing) I might have to pick one up.

  10. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Texas
    Posts
    45
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    I would also use a Sine Bar

  11. Likes michiganbuck, J Skeleman liked this post
  12. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    IL/WI border
    Posts
    3,042
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    945
    Likes (Received)
    861

    Default

    I'm trying to think how to use a sine bar to measure a taper of a .152"dia hole.

  13. Likes J Skeleman liked this post
  14. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Florida
    Posts
    5
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    7
    Likes (Received)
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelP View Post
    I'm trying to think how to use a sine bar to measure a taper of a .152"dia hole.
    I'm glad it's not just me. Lol

  15. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Michigan
    Posts
    9,289
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3159
    Likes (Received)
    3341

    Default

    The part set on a surface plate perhaps in a V block at the specification angle as assured with a sine bar under the V block and strike the angle with an indicator perhaps held with a surface gauge or height gauge is a common method. looking for zero-zero in this case.
    Receiving inspection very likely to use the method..

    Set a surface gauge or a indicator holder on a sine bar and strike the part angle with the part held horizontal in a V block. (not so common method.)
    Yes, just checking the angle not the size with both methods.

    .152/ .162 likely checked with a digital caliper.
    Last edited by michiganbuck; 03-26-2019 at 05:11 PM.

  16. Likes J Skeleman liked this post
  17. #11
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Canandaigua, NY, USA
    Posts
    2,705
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    127
    Likes (Received)
    1158

    Default

    Two balls, one sized to fit near the top of the taper, one sized to fit near the bottom. Measure heights one at a time and calc the angle. Should be quite accurate.

  18. Likes Mud, RJT, michiganbuck, MichaelP, J Skeleman and 4 others liked this post
  19. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    greensboro,northcarolina
    Posts
    2,293
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    130
    Likes (Received)
    513

    Default

    Yep, Conrad beat me to it.

  20. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Florida
    Posts
    5
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    7
    Likes (Received)
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Conrad Hoffman View Post
    Two balls, one sized to fit near the top of the taper, one sized to fit near the bottom. Measure heights one at a time and calc the angle. Should be quite accurate.
    Is there somewhere I could find an example of this being done, or a formula?

    And the other problem is that I need this to work for many different sizes, so something less specific would be preferable. This is a nice fall back though.

    Thanks again!

  21. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Sussex, England
    Posts
    3,274
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    12
    Likes (Received)
    686

    Default

    With that wide open tolerance you don't have to use balls a rod with a very short 12° taper on the end would do OK.

    I'd be thinking in terms of having two caps to sit on the end of a depth micrometer. Part tight against one side of a suitably thick plate, depth micrometer on the other. Measure how far down your small end test cap, a ball or rod slightly larger diameter than the internal bore, goes down. Swop for the large end test cap, slightly smaller than the exit end, and measure how far that goes down. Subtract second reading from first and refer to a pre-calculated table of values to see if its in tolerance.

    A spring loaded electronic probe would be way faster. I made something of that ilk about 35 years ago using an Heidenhain nanometre reading probe.

    You will need to dig out the CAD program and do some grunt work drawing out the effect that tolerances on the internal bore and end hole have on the measured size of the angle as well as the variation in angle itself so you know what sizes to make your caps. You will need more than one pair of caps, select according to the outer diameter.

    If you are sure your process produces a straight hole one measurement somewhere on the slope will suffice.

    Clive

  22. #15
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Country
    DENMARK
    Posts
    2,352
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3875
    Likes (Received)
    13341

    Default

    Had a quick look to see if anybody has mentioned this but if so haven't seen it.

    Do you really have to measure (it's a large tolerance) or do you really just want to know if it's OK? What I'm suggesting should have been done before even starting to machine parts.

    1. Measure the angle on whatever is making the angle.

    2. Have a bushing (or similar) made for the operator to stop at the depth giving the correct finished "diameter".

    3. Have a machinist try that out on a piece of softish material, cut in half and measure, if you really have to measure.

    I'm getting the impression you are trying to shoot sparrows with guided missiles and giving it too much thought.

    If what you have is made by a supplier then as QA ask how it's done. I'm in fact surprised that you haven't asked someone at your place of work.

  23. #16
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Michigan
    Posts
    9,289
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3159
    Likes (Received)
    3341

    Default

    Gordon's pretty much nailed it for the angle in #15.
    Check perhaps the fixture or what ever holds the part and makes the angle, angle is a given (has to be that angle).

    Simple hand slip gauge, or a go and no go gauge for the .152- .162, or a caliper.

    Still: Receiving inspection very likely to check the part as mentioned in #10 to be sure you checked when making the part..

    QT Gordon: [to know if it's OK?] One should not get so close .00002 to such a wide tolerance as that part has.

  24. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Flushing/Flint, Michigan
    Posts
    7,111
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    341
    Likes (Received)
    6017

    Default

    The drawing shows me a max of .002 error front to back blows the tolerance.
    Sort of rules out protractors.
    Checking very short tapers suck, I'm in the use two balls camp.
    Problem with that being the very open dia. tolerance so more than one set would be needed.
    Sine bar/plate also sounds good but you have to kind of search for the low reading which is frustrating in a dia. this size if using a dti/surface gage.

    Don't let the drawing fool you , this is not a big feature.
    Bob

  25. #18
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    near Cleveland
    Posts
    793
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    49
    Likes (Received)
    101

    Default

    If the only objection to your current method is the time involved in making the casting, then switch to a low temp casting alloy like cerrosafe, the casting is ready in seconds. I used this stuff when working in a header die shop, easy and quick to do.

  26. #19
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Country
    UNITED KINGDOM
    Posts
    87
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    13

    Default

    If all the parts have the same angle with different diameters you could get a tapered gauge made with a range that covers all required parts and simply blue out the part and test with the gauge.
    Not the easiest way but it’s one of many solutions

  27. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Florida
    Posts
    2,597
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1262
    Likes (Received)
    1261

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CarbideBob View Post
    The drawing shows me a max of .002 error front to back blows the tolerance.
    Sort of rules out protractors.
    Checking very short tapers suck, I'm in the use two balls camp.
    Problem with that being the very open dia. tolerance so more than one set would be needed.
    Sine bar/plate also sounds good but you have to kind of search for the low reading which is frustrating in a dia. this size if using a dti/surface gage.

    Don't let the drawing fool you , this is not a big feature.
    Bob
    Nothing to really add here, just wanted to note this. I often program parts that are less than 2" square, often times 1" and under. Sometimes I am taken aback when I go to machine to look at a part I programmed and see just how small it is! Especially when I zoom in on a .015" endmill during verify and it is taking up the whole monitor.


Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •