Spherical tolerance zone question

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Spherical tolerance zone question

    I have been with this latest company for just over a year. I have yet to see an "S" preceding Ø on a Position FCF. Many of the features that they are positioning are spherical. Am I being too hard on inspection by forcing parts to pass their tolerance in a spherical zone? It doesn't make sense to me why you would only control 2 components of position on something like a sphere.

  • #2
    A spherical tolerance zone controls x,y & z.


    B&S CHAMELEON/PCDMIS CAD++ V2011

    There are no bugs, only "UNDOCUMENTED ENHANCEMENTS!"

    sigpic

    Comment


    • JacobCheverie
      JacobCheverie commented
      Editing a comment
      I understand that. What I said was there will be a Position callout on a sphere, but the FCF only shows Ø, not SØ. Do I assume they want spherical tolerance zone or a diametrical tolerance zone as the print suggests? If diametrical, which two dimensions are being controlled and what is the justification?

  • #3
    Without seeing the print or a sketch it is impossible to say if a spherical zone is needed.

    At present we are running a part with a spherical end and all that is called out and needed for the function of the part
    is a 2d zone the 3rd axis is open tolerance. Going to a spherical zone would serve no functional purpose and only add to
    production cost and unnecessary scrap.

    Comment


    • #4
      UKCMM I have attached a sketch. The Position with the arrow is the one in question. Should the tolerance zone be spherical or diametrical as drawn?

      sketch.jpg

      Comment


      • Mike Ruff
        Mike Ruff commented
        Editing a comment
        X,Y, and Z are controlled by your DRF, so I would expect PC-DMIS to calculate it as spherical tolerance zone

    • #5
      No. You can control its size and form with a spherical diameter and tolerance above the FCF, but not its orientation or location because you don't all 6 DOF locked up yet. All you have is a plane and a sphere to reference off of so far.

      Comment


      • Mike Ruff
        Mike Ruff commented
        Editing a comment
        Datum A is a cylinder, so only rotation about the axis of datum A is unconstrained, which has no effect on a sphere. Orientation of a sphere does not matter

    • #6
      Is a Datum A a cylinder, or the flat side of the part? I can't tell. And yes, orientation doesn't matter, I was thinking location. It depends on whether A is cylinder or a plane whether you can even have a spherical tolerance zone.

      Comment


      • #7
        Mike Ruff is correct, -A- is a cylinder. I can determine -D- to -B- along X, and -D- to -A- along Y and Z, thus implying a spherical zone. But our prints have never shown spherical zones, only diametrical. I am beginning to believe that they just don't understand when/why to put SØ. I don't want to make that jump to conclusions myself though. What is the justification, can may must rule?

        Comment


        • #8
          Do you get different results in PC-DMIS with or without the "S"?

          Comment


          • #9
            Originally posted by JacobCheverie View Post
            Mike Ruff is correct, -A- is a cylinder. I can determine -D- to -B- along X, and -D- to -A- along Y and Z, thus implying a spherical zone. But our prints have never shown spherical zones, only diametrical. I am beginning to believe that they just don't understand when/why to put SØ. I don't want to make that jump to conclusions myself though. What is the justification, can may must rule?
            The way the leader line and feature identifier are drawn, I believe you are correct in assuming that they're implying a spherical zone. I personally try to make a habit out of not dimensioning to an implied or assumed guess. Contact the engineer in charge of that print and get a determination in writing in my opinion.
            Systems Integrator
            Hexagon Manufacturing Intelligence

            Comment


            • JacobCheverie
              JacobCheverie commented
              Editing a comment
              Thanks Peter, I'll get in touch with the engineers when I run into the issue.

          Related Topics

          Collapse

          Working...
          X