Ok....bear with me as this has probably been addressed before but I could not find anything really definative in past posts to answer this.
Our little QA group is in a deadlock in the approach to the best way to address measuring and dimensioning spherical radii in PCDMIS. The question arose over a part that has a spherical "divot" in it of .320 radial basic with basic dimensions defining the location of the vertex from other datums. Yeah...you know know what's coming up next...the radial swing in the part is defined with a .001 profile callout which now brings us back to using a scanned set of points and looking at this .320 basic spherical radius. We created the point set off of the CAD model and now we're arguing amongst ourselves on what to do with them. The engineer whose prototype part this is wants a .005 profile callout back to datums A,B, and C which locate the vertex and a .001 callout on the form of the swing. (The radial divot is only about .120 deep into the surface as the vertex is above the plane datum by .200.) To help expedite this issue quickly and not drag us into a technique battle I bring this to all of you as I bet his has been an issue to some of you before....Thanx....B
Our little QA group is in a deadlock in the approach to the best way to address measuring and dimensioning spherical radii in PCDMIS. The question arose over a part that has a spherical "divot" in it of .320 radial basic with basic dimensions defining the location of the vertex from other datums. Yeah...you know know what's coming up next...the radial swing in the part is defined with a .001 profile callout which now brings us back to using a scanned set of points and looking at this .320 basic spherical radius. We created the point set off of the CAD model and now we're arguing amongst ourselves on what to do with them. The engineer whose prototype part this is wants a .005 profile callout back to datums A,B, and C which locate the vertex and a .001 callout on the form of the swing. (The radial divot is only about .120 deep into the surface as the vertex is above the plane datum by .200.) To help expedite this issue quickly and not drag us into a technique battle I bring this to all of you as I bet his has been an issue to some of you before....Thanx....B
Comment