Vane Airfoil inspection

[[Du...]]

Hello GOM users,

i was working on AIRFOIL inspection in GOM 2020 on vane. When i was about to inspect the leading and trailing edge thicknesses i realized that GOM automatically defines which edge is leading and which is trailing. This is good but when checking ACTUAL values i found that it flips the leading for trailing.

 

Please see the picture below:

 

In this section CAD defines that upper edge as LEADING - LE - but when referencing this to ACTUAL it flips the nature of it and put the LEADING edge to TRAILING edge - at the bottom.

This is a struggle because when i am defyning the offset - for LEADING ... its creating offset from the TRAILING (but the value is for leading)

 

 

Is there a chance how to control which edge is prefered to be LEADING? --- there is a variation in the casted parts.. and i see that in some sections for certain scan it is flipping the LEADING for TRAILING in STAGES, but for other scans its OK.

I am not able to edit individual stage because it flows throuhg the whole STAGE.

 

Really appreciate quick reply! 

 

Regads

 

Dusan

[[Du...]]

Hi, my fault! didnt spot the option in defining in flow direction!

 

seems like problem solved.

 

Thanx Dusan

[[Se...]]

Hi Dušan,

Regarding the second post: Yes, by setting a system direction as inflow direction both nominal and actual camber line will use it to determine Leading and Trailing edge.

Regarding the first post: Up to 2021, if the option was not active, each camber line would estimate the direction separately. This problem was however solved in 2021. Now, the actual camber line (created by referenced construction) respects the direction estimated by the nominal.

It can still happen that for some geometries the heuristics to estimate the direction for the nominal do not provide the expected results: therefore we still provide the parameter you found ?

Just a last hint: If an User Defined Inspection Principle will be later defined, please keep in mind that then a local direction that is part of the UDIP would be a better choice than a global direction, if a later generic use of the principle is required.

Hope this helps. 
Cheers,
Sergio