line profile & diameter tolerance

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

  • line profile & diameter tolerance

    Hello,
    I am a new member seeking for help as I can't figure out how to go about this, please refer to the screen shot attached. both of the flag note and the line profile tolerance applied to the bottom groove, between a and b. the flagnote is to omit prime and paint


    it's my first time running into a line profile with the diametrical tolerance together. I can create a Xactmeasure, but I can't find anywhere to input the diameter symbol. please excuse my lack of knowledge, but any help on this subject is greatly appreciated.

    the software I am using is PC-Dmis CAD++ V2017 SP5 for Romer Arm.

    thank you,
    Joseph
    Capture.JPG
    Last edited by josephM; 01-06-2021, 08:12 PM.

  • #2
    Does your blueprint call out a specific GDT Interpretation spec (Y14.5 or ISO XXXX)?

    If Y14.5, I'm pretty sure the feature control frame you're showing us is invalid. My interpretation what your print is trying to say (you'd ultimately have to verify with your customer to be 100%) is:

    Capture.JPG
    Symbol means line profile, number after symbol is overall amount of tolerance. The "UNILATERAL OUTWARD" not on your print makes me think they want to use the unequal tol zone symbol and for it to go OUTWARD...since they didn't specify an amount outward I assume they want the full 0.015.

    If my above logic was approved by whomever needs to sign off on it, I would then either:
    A) Do a scan from A-B and then do a Line Profile Dim as I did above.

    B) If you use legacy you could do a scan and then tolerance it with line profile command +0.015/-0.000.... OR.. use autovectorpoints and check their "T Values" using the +0.015/-0.000.
    Last edited by DAN_M; 01-07-2021, 10:39 AM.
    Beep beep beep..

    Comment


    • #3
      Dan,
      thank you for the response!, it is MBD, but the part list called out ANSI Y14.5M-1982

      Comment


      • #4
        josephM YW!
        Thanks for telling us the spec, with that input I feel confident in my interpretation (something we have to do a lot at my company. I legit have a print from 1967 on my desk right now lol).
        How you go about setting up your program? IDK, thats another ball game, you mentioned you're new..would be happy to help if you need it. LMK.
        Last edited by DAN_M; 01-07-2021, 10:54 AM.
        Beep beep beep..

        Comment


        • #5
          Dan,
          the screenshot is the cut-section, the groove is all around like a pocket at the bottom of the part.

          what I did is select the active working plane as Yplus, insert a new scan, select all the faces of the groove and taking hit all around
          I was able to create a FCF with the unilateral tolerance to one side, like you have it.
          can you shed some light if this one way to approach it?

          Thanks!

          Comment


          • DAN_M
            DAN_M commented
            Editing a comment
            sounds legit on the probing approach!

            make sure the alignment you're using to report the scan back to makes sense for what you're doing! this FCF doesn't call out datums for you to use, so where you PUT the alignment will directly effect how the software calculates your GDT output!

            also, would like to comment on the MMC symbol.. I don't like it there because it is pointing at area A-B (which is 6 surfaces not including the radial edge breaks at the sharp corners)...how do you quantify what the MMC of an irregular surface such as that would be? IDK lol​​​​​​​. I believe their intent was to tie the MMC to a particular diameter and use that in the FCF (which could be legit) but since everything is all up in the air, I still stick by what I said above until your customer could provide further clarification

        • #6
          A material modifier is not valid on a profile control unless applied to a datum feature.

          Comment


          • #7
            The diameter symbol and material condition callout are invalid, at least from -94 and beyond. I cannot speak for -82.
            "This is my word... and as such is beyond contestation."

            Comment

            Related Topics

            Collapse

            Working...
            X