[wi...] Posted November 18, 2020 Share Posted November 18, 2020 How would you evaluate this characteristic? It seems we are getting some odd results and we don't often use this position callout on our Zeiss. As far as alignment I believe the operator made a trace between the top and bottom and created a 3d line for the planar.Position.JPG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ja...] Posted November 18, 2020 Share Posted November 18, 2020 I would measure a circle on each 8.3 hole and recall feature points of both circles into a cylinder1, measure two circles on the 48 hole and "recall" (not "recall feature points") into a 3D line, and measure plane B how ever you need to(single points/circle path?) Open a position characteristic, select the cylinder as a feature, 3D line as primary, plane B as secondary and if it makes a difference, the cylinder as tertiary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[wi...] Posted November 18, 2020 Author Share Posted November 18, 2020 This is what we did. Turns out the (Y) location is acceptable but the holes are rotated and tapered. Just making sure I wasn't missing something. Appreciate the reply. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ri...] Posted November 18, 2020 Share Posted November 18, 2020 Measure the two Ø8.3 holes as Cylinders. Measure Datum A as a Cylinder (minimum of 3 circle paths). Measure Datum B as a Plane. Drop in a Position - Change it to a Bore Pattern. Datum A as the Primary Datum, Datum B as the Secondary Datum, and there is no need to fill in the Tertiary Datum. Inside of the Bore Pattern, select your two Ø8.3 Cylinders, and turn off Translation (keep only Rotation checked). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ri...] Posted November 18, 2020 Share Posted November 18, 2020 Please sign in to view this quote. The holes create a Pattern, they are not one feature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Da...] Posted November 19, 2020 Share Posted November 19, 2020 Will, about pattern/no pattern, we would need additional info. Are you following ISO or ASME? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[SH...] Posted November 19, 2020 Share Posted November 19, 2020 Please sign in to view this quote. In ISO standards, it is not pattern?. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Da...] Posted November 19, 2020 Share Posted November 19, 2020 Please sign in to view this quote. No, not without combined zone modifier (CZ). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ma...] Posted November 19, 2020 Share Posted November 19, 2020 As Dane mentioned - it's not same element nor pattern. So theoretically if it's not mentioned on drawing, they don't worry if they are lined up. So each hole individually rotated around axis of A. If i am not mistaken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Se...] Posted November 19, 2020 Share Posted November 19, 2020 Please sign in to view this quote. You´re right 😉 According to the drawing, you will only have to consider the theoretical distance 9.5 but not the angular position of the bore. As we don´t know the fonction of this part, I cannot say if it make sense or not. My experience would rather say that the (CZ) modifier is missing... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ma...] Posted November 19, 2020 Share Posted November 19, 2020 I don't know purpose of those two holes, but there should fit one through-all pin with CZ on drawing or 2 short pins. Machining it will be difficult to keep them lined-up, but it will depend on rod which comes in ( 2 separate holes? or one ) Discuss with customer if you don't know what's comes in d48 G3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ja...] Posted November 19, 2020 Share Posted November 19, 2020 [/quote] The holes create a Pattern, they are not one feature. [/quote] I would listen to Richard. Now that he mentioned pattern, it makes sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[wi...] Posted November 25, 2020 Author Share Posted November 25, 2020 Please sign in to view this quote. We are remaking this part and I evaluated this part how you stated above. I know have a difference between the two styles of evaluation. If i evaluate with default settings and don't select bore pattern i have a deviation of .060 microns If i evaluate with the bore pattern selected and turning the translation off i have a deviation of .021-.030" depending on which hole. How is calypso evaluating each hole between the two evaluation methods. I'm trying to explain this to the President and im unsure of the difference between the two. Also how do i give the operator feedback about correction when i'm unsure of which direction the hole is off? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Da...] Posted November 25, 2020 Share Posted November 25, 2020 Please sign in to view this quote. Well, the President should first take Aukom course 🙂 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[wi...] Posted November 25, 2020 Author Share Posted November 25, 2020 Please sign in to view this quote. I should probably take it first 🤣 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