Profile of a surface

[[Ma...]]

What is the best way to analyze profile of a surface. See att file,

Profile of a surface.PNG

[[SH...]]

Please sign in to view this quote.

You have to maintain the 3.96 dimension within plus or minus point 1 tolerance and parallelism between two should be within point 2.
No need of freeform and curve , just a plane needed.

[[Er...]]

Please sign in to view this quote.

So how do you create a plane with a radius of 274?

If you have freeform, use that.


How ever I think the symmetry call out is more intresting thing here 😉

[[SH...]]

Ohh goodness, did not keep an eye on that 274. 😮 😮

[[Ma...]]

You can use sphere. I wonder how precise will be calculation of that radius ( +/- 0,2 mm )

Datum A is a plane and surface profile is for part of sphere. Nothing unusual - just don't lock axis of part ( ie. cylinders ), just axis used for dimension 3.96

[[Ri...]]

Free-Form all the way.

[[Jo...]]

There's a couple of things wrong with this. First of all that radius MUST be basic if you are controlling it with profile of a surface. Second, how in the world does symmetry work here? As others have stated, Freeform is what you need but that's just the beginning.

[[No...]]

No freeform needed if the top plane was a plane. But it's not. First I thought it was a sphere. But it's a cylinder, since the top line in view F seems straight. Secondly, the radius of 274 doen't have an S in front of the R274. And thirdly: the symmetry doen't have a diameter symbol in front of the tolerance - as it would need if the tolerance zone for symmetry was a cylinder. So the symmetry call-out is just in one direction. From left to right in view A-A.

Since the top cylinder is a prismatic feature, I guess you can indeed have Calypso calculating the a surface profile of the top cylinder. Without the free form option.

And since you have to use a cylinder for the symmetry, I would measure the top as a cylinder, not as a free form. To answer the original post.

That symmetry is something else... The center of such a large radius THAT close to the centerline?! Almost impossible - even with the best CM in the world. I guess the engineer who wrote that on the print doesn't have too much hands-on experience on a CMM. I would get rid of the +/- 0.2 on the radius and getbrid of the symmetry. Then put a rectangle around the R274 and just have the surface profile.

That surface roughness line is sweet! Took a while before I understood what Rmr is. And before I knew how to configure the roughness tester properly.

And that R0.3 and R0.5... How you're gonna inspect that?!

To Mattias: Lycka till, kompis!

[[Da...]]

The total deviation from a plane for that radius is .032 , so make it a plane and save some time 🙂