[K...] Posted December 2, 2020 Share Posted December 2, 2020 I defined a plain 50 x50 mm as datum A, datum B is constructed from cylinder / 3-d line by using 3 circles. cylinder / 3-d line length is 17 mm. When I called perpendicularity of 3-d line w.r.t datum A is 0.101mm, if I called perpendicularity of plain (datum A) w.r.t. cylinder (3-d line) line is higher (0.181mm) then perpendicularity of 3-d line w.r.t datum A. I will appreciate if anyone can explain its theoretically justification. Thank you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ja...] Posted December 2, 2020 Share Posted December 2, 2020 See attachmentsPerp_datum_feature.pdfPerpendicularity.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Da...] Posted December 2, 2020 Share Posted December 2, 2020 Yep, the feature size is the difference. To keep it simple, if feature 1 is 100mm long, while feature 2 is 50mm long, for the same measured part, if you create 2 measures, the first using feature #1 as the datum, and the second measure using feature #2 as the datum, the second measure will be twice as bad because the feature is longer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Me...] Posted December 4, 2020 Share Posted December 4, 2020 Please sign in to view this quote. That’s not entirely correct. If the considered feature is planar, then the form error (flatness) of the plane will be included in the perpendicularity result. 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