[Jo...] Posted June 2, 2022 Share Posted June 2, 2022 OK, I thought I understood this but I'm confused. Refer to this video ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8CQynVR_Vg ) . At 15:40 he states the tertiary is not required, and all like FCF have implied simultaneous condition.. I don't understand how you control position and orientation without tertiary. Link to comment https://qualityforum.zeiss.com/topic/10284-simultaneous-requirement-implied/ Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ju...] Posted June 2, 2022 Share Posted June 2, 2022 My guess would be either it's being treated as two dimensional, or one datum controls multiple degrees of freedom. Link to comment https://qualityforum.zeiss.com/topic/10284-simultaneous-requirement-implied/#findComment-49208 Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ri...] Posted June 2, 2022 Share Posted June 2, 2022 Please sign in to view this quote. They act as a group/pattern. The orientation would be to themselves. Link to comment https://qualityforum.zeiss.com/topic/10284-simultaneous-requirement-implied/#findComment-49210 Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Da...] Posted June 2, 2022 Share Posted June 2, 2022 Please sign in to view this quote. If you have an FCF without a fully qualified datum (in this example without a tertiary datum), the standard calls for checking all possibilities the incomplete datum allows for. Of course, it's not possible to really check all of them, but you will have to find only one solution where the call-out is in tolerance for the feature to be in spec. Usually, you will do that by doing a best-fit for the undefined degree of freedom, but the method of finding a solution is totally up to you. Link to comment https://qualityforum.zeiss.com/topic/10284-simultaneous-requirement-implied/#findComment-49212 Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Jo...] Posted June 2, 2022 Author Share Posted June 2, 2022 Please sign in to view this quote. So apply an arbitrary tertiary, then allow rotation ? Link to comment https://qualityforum.zeiss.com/topic/10284-simultaneous-requirement-implied/#findComment-49214 Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ri...] Posted June 2, 2022 Share Posted June 2, 2022 Yep. Link to comment https://qualityforum.zeiss.com/topic/10284-simultaneous-requirement-implied/#findComment-49216 Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Jo...] Posted June 2, 2022 Author Share Posted June 2, 2022 Ok, that was my usual practice. I think I conflated a previous comment in his instruction. I misunderstood it to be, the fcf for keyway and fcf for bhc were a simultaneous requirement..simply because fcf had same datum structure. Link to comment https://qualityforum.zeiss.com/topic/10284-simultaneous-requirement-implied/#findComment-49218 Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Jo...] Posted June 7, 2022 Author Share Posted June 7, 2022 Please sign in to view this quote. I'm slow.. So ignore the SEP REQ note.. How would I apply a simultaneous requirement in Calypso ? The keys must be clocked nominally to each other, correct ?? Link to comment https://qualityforum.zeiss.com/topic/10284-simultaneous-requirement-implied/#findComment-49220 Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ri...] Posted June 7, 2022 Share Posted June 7, 2022 Slots are difficult, but you could either use a Geometry Best Fit with the (4) Planes, or a Free-Form Surface with the (4) Planes. The results "should" be similar. Link to comment https://qualityforum.zeiss.com/topic/10284-simultaneous-requirement-implied/#findComment-49222 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in