Hello Huang, Torihara-San,

Please find attached the modified programs as requested.

I have rewritten the programs to allow for W axis moves instead of Z axis. This is controlled by a
switch in both master programs, #714=1(0=Z&W MOVES 1=W MOVES).
In the folder, W AXIS MOVES ONLY there are several Renishaw programs that will also have
to be loaded, these are the updated macros that will perform W axis moves instead of Z axis.
It should be noted that these programs are untested and should be run with extreme caution.
Although I have made considerable effort to ensure that the modified programs are bug-free, please
understand that there is no way for me to test them, attached is also a text document (READ ME)
specifying some of the problems you may encounter, and how to fix them. In case you decide not to
use these programs, there is another folder, UPDATED ORIGINALS, these have the two
measurement sub-programs O9061 & O9062. Please use these instead of the ones in the machine as
I have made some changes to the print data, in order that if you have difficulties I have as much
data as I need to help resolve them. The actual moves & calculations are unchanged.
I have also attached two excel documents.
One is calcs for Torihara, this is a tool for understanding the data from the print, the fields in
yellow are manual inputs, you must copy the print data as specified, the fields in red are the errors
between the expected results and the actual results. The expected results for the B,C Y & Z updates
should closely correlate, however for the expected points from compensation and final data, while
matching the data I have, should be read with care. They are only a broad indication of what I
expect.
I have been over the calculations as you requested and have not found a reason for the apparent mismatch between the compensation for the Y and the final data returned. All I can point out is that the
variation is under 0.04mm, and that this may be a result of the LSF macro finding the centreline
with the smallest errors from the new centreline position. In other words, just because you move the
position by a value, it does not mean that you will see this exact value change when measuring
again, as you would with a standard 4 point measure macro. This deviation may also be due to the
incorrect angle that was calculated, this in turn is caused by the suspect readings from the start of
the routine. This may be resolved by correctly calibrating the probe using the compensation you
requested.
The other excel sheet is called Roundness sieve, and will differentiate between out of
roundness and eccentricity errors, you will see that while the T.I.R error you found on slide 13 of

your report for A1 was 0.1376, the calculated out of roundness error is 0.011, closely matching the
actual dimension. Again the fields in yellow are user inputs.
Although I will be on vacation from the 18th, I will be available to support you if needed up till the
24th, and thereafter between the 26th & 31st. Please text me letting me know if you have sent an email.
Regards
Martin Summers
Applications Manager (Hong Kong)