Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Another Datum Question

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    • Additional Information
      • Years CMM Experience:
      • Hard to say
      • Software Version:
      • V3.5 -> V2011
      • Machine Type:
      • DEA, B&S
      • Location:
      • LINY
      • Job Function:
      • Training/Programming/Troubleshooting

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    LINY
    Posts
    226

    Default Another Datum Question

    We have a part.
    Hole is toleranced true position to D, E & F
    Where Datum D is the surface the hole penetrates (about 2" X 2")
    Datum E is the centerline of the hole being toleranced along with nine other holes (A hinge centerline about 60" long), we best fit the ten holes to define E
    F is a surface perpendiclar to the Datum D surface, rotated about the hinge centerline (D - 90 degrees).
    D & E are theoretically normal, but when leveling to a 2" X 2" surface, the hinge line (E) can be out considerably over a 60" length.
    They already have a separate perpendicularity call out from D to E.
    They basically want the hinge holes in line and the surface perperndicular to it for the head of a bushing.
    I suggested asking the customer to make E the primary Datum, this will more than likely never happen though.
    How would you align this part?

  2. #2
    Ultra Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    906

    Default

    Can you put a picture of it up so we can see better what your asking.

  3. #3
    Ultra Senior Member
    • Additional Information
      • Years CMM Experience:
      • Since 1986. Using PC-DMIS since late 2005.
      • Software Version:
      • Using 2010MR3
      • Machine Type:
      • Several Mitsui Seiki's with FANUC (mostly 15i/MA and 16i/MA) and MP700/OMP400
      • Location:
      • Orlando, FL
      • Job Function:
      • Mfg Engineer
    Jan d.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    997

    Default

    Russ, what version of the software do you run (do you mind filling out the User profile)? This is not difficult to do using V4.1.

    You'd level to D and then just measure E (as you do) and then measure F. Just create a dimension using the V4.1 XactMeasure GD&T and it will give you the right answer. No more leveling required.


    Jan.
    ***************************
    PC-DMIS/NC 2010MR3; 15 December 2010; running on 18 machine tools.
    Romer Infinite; PC-DMIS 2010 MR3; 15 December 2010.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    • Additional Information
      • Years CMM Experience:
      • Hard to say
      • Software Version:
      • V3.5 -> V2011
      • Machine Type:
      • DEA, B&S
      • Location:
      • LINY
      • Job Function:
      • Training/Programming/Troubleshooting

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    LINY
    Posts
    226

    Default

    I'm hoping I attached a .jpg correctly.
    We use V3.7 MR-2 - XP SP2
    We had leveled to E and inspected each individual hole to E
    We used the individual perpendicularity call outs (not shown on sketch) for perpendicularity of D to E.
    Problem is, again, we are not inspecting to print (model).
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails SCAN8997_000.JPG  

  5. #5
    Ultra Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    906

    Default

    Russ,
    I'm sure that they think they know what they want, but have little idea of how to explane it. I would agree with you that leveling on -D- is not going to work unless every thing is so perfect as to be ground. If your able to get a good part I truly believe it will be a fluk and nothing that you can repeat on a regular bases. I don't think you can run the same part twice and hold any kind of repeatability. What you have done is correct, and what you would ask for would help very much. It looks as if you already knew the answer.

  6. #6
    Ultra Senior Member
    • Additional Information
      • Years CMM Experience:
      • Since 1986. Using PC-DMIS since late 2005.
      • Software Version:
      • Using 2010MR3
      • Machine Type:
      • Several Mitsui Seiki's with FANUC (mostly 15i/MA and 16i/MA) and MP700/OMP400
      • Location:
      • Orlando, FL
      • Job Function:
      • Mfg Engineer
    Jan d.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    997

    Default

    I agree. Poor choice of datums. E ought to be the main datum. This part will be real hard to bring in tolerance. They better make D absolutely perfect. Any small deviation may have a huge effect over 60".

    Also, make sure you take many points on D. The more points on D, the less effect 1 bad point can have on the orientation of your plane. Therefore giving E a better chance to be within toerance.


    Jan.
    ***************************
    PC-DMIS/NC 2010MR3; 15 December 2010; running on 18 machine tools.
    Romer Infinite; PC-DMIS 2010 MR3; 15 December 2010.

Similar Threads

  1. Help....Datum Error
    By Flipper in forum PC-DMIS for CMMs
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 05-30-2007, 10:13 AM
  2. Datum Question
    By RussL in forum PC-DMIS for CMMs
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 03-13-2007, 10:01 AM
  3. Question about Leveling to a Primary Datum -A-
    By Mike Johnston in forum PC-DMIS for CMMs
    Replies: 48
    Last Post: 03-12-2007, 02:33 PM
  4. Datum Targets
    By phil george in forum PC-DMIS for CMMs
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 12-13-2006, 08:22 AM
  5. Red Datum
    By Slimvinn in forum PC-DMIS for CMMs
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 07-13-2006, 03:27 PM

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
  •