[To...] Posted March 3, 2022 Share Posted March 3, 2022 I'm planning on creating a Best Fit Bore Pattern Position for Datum C feature to A and Bm. Would I then be correct to use that BFBP alignment for the profile?punch.JPG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ro...] Posted March 3, 2022 Share Posted March 3, 2022 Hi Tom, Yes. But it won't allow for the MMB on the datums. Whether or not you can take advantage of the MMB is another thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[To...] Posted March 3, 2022 Author Share Posted March 3, 2022 Please sign in to view this quote. I understand that I won't get MMB on both B and C, but won't I get the result of MMB on Datum B from the Best Fit Bore Pattern?Screenshot 2022-03-03 131901.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ri...] Posted March 3, 2022 Share Posted March 3, 2022 Yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ro...] Posted March 3, 2022 Share Posted March 3, 2022 Please sign in to view this quote. You changed your ? on me. 🤣 Yes and no. You'll get the MMB from -B- but not from -C-. And the MMB calculation needs to consider both features, even though there is a datum precedence. So the fitting for -B- at MMB isn't necessarily the best for for B & C together at MMB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ch...] Posted March 3, 2022 Share Posted March 3, 2022 My thoughts : The Best Fit applies the MMC(B) of -B- but doesn't allow any additional rotation (MMC of -C- for FFS), it just adds the MMC(B) of -C- to the tolerance. You could try a Geometry best fit, or try using the best fit within the FFS evaluation. Also does Calypso really handle MMB or do you mean MMC from older Y14.5 ? Good luck ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Da...] Posted March 3, 2022 Share Posted March 3, 2022 The thing is, you can‘t have the MMC on C as a feature, because it’s not a Feature of Size (the feature would have to have a surface with opposing points to be a FOS), but you can use the MMB on C as a datum, since an MMB is fixed in perfect form, location and orientation anyway. By the way, it appears, you‘d be much better off functionally, if it wasn’t A|B|C, but B|A|C, because B is mainly functionally responsible for the orientation of the part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[To...] Posted March 4, 2022 Author Share Posted March 4, 2022 Please sign in to view this quote. Sorry. I have a bad habit of proofreading my posts after I've posted them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ro...] Posted March 4, 2022 Share Posted March 4, 2022 No apology needed, Tom. I do the same thing. I was laughing because I did exactly that and changed my post after I saw you changed your post, thinking that I didn't read your post carefully enough. 🤣 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[SH...] Posted March 4, 2022 Share Posted March 4, 2022 Please sign in to view this quote. Can't you create a second BFBP with respect to ABC and give MMB to B and C, then you can hide (mark) that true position from the report?? Calypso will not Support MMB on profile tolerance DRF? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[To...] Posted March 4, 2022 Author Share Posted March 4, 2022 Please sign in to view this quote. Unfortunately, you are not able to use MMB on Profiles. However, I have it from a reliable source that Zeiss has this high on their action item list. Link to comment 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