[Cl...] Posted June 18, 2021 Share Posted June 18, 2021 We have a program written by someone else The print calls out a .003 surface profile to -A-. There are two basic dimensions (.0505 & .0140) that control the profile in X & Z. We report the basic actuals as reference to the operator to make adjustments. We ran two parts, one showed .0506 & .0136. The second part was .0506 & .0135, but the profile actuals reported at .0024 & .0028 & .0013 & .0005 respectively. I would think that all things being equal, both (parts) profile actuals would be within .0001. Can anyone explain this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Mi...] Posted June 18, 2021 Share Posted June 18, 2021 The basic dimensions say nothing about the form of the surface, so it's possible the features' LSQ evaluations made them look the same, even though one was rougher/wavier/whateverer than the other. It's hard to say without seeing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ri...] Posted June 18, 2021 Share Posted June 18, 2021 This is why trying to report basic dimensions for a Profile characteristic can be dangerous. Even something as simple as a linear dimension can show "weird" results because the Profile is measured to a DRF and not a single datum/feature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ma...] Posted June 19, 2021 Share Posted June 19, 2021 It all depends on purpose of profile check and constrains. It's not bad if you have only one base for profile, but it's bad if purpose of check looks like you need more bases than one ( bad drawing ). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[SH...] Posted June 19, 2021 Share Posted June 19, 2021 Please sign in to view this quote. I think additional printout information,can help you.It gives the co ordinate value Zeiss used to calculate profile. 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