[Ma...] Posted September 4, 2020 Share Posted September 4, 2020 What is the best way to analyze profile of a surface. See att file,Profile of a surface.PNG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[SH...] Posted September 4, 2020 Share Posted September 4, 2020 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Er...] Posted September 4, 2020 Share Posted September 4, 2020 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 😉 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[SH...] Posted September 4, 2020 Share Posted September 4, 2020 Ohh goodness, did not keep an eye on that 274. 😮 😮 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ma...] Posted September 4, 2020 Share Posted September 4, 2020 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ri...] Posted September 4, 2020 Share Posted September 4, 2020 Free-Form all the way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Jo...] Posted September 10, 2020 Share Posted September 10, 2020 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[No...] Posted September 10, 2020 Share Posted September 10, 2020 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! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Da...] Posted September 14, 2020 Share Posted September 14, 2020 The total deviation from a plane for that radius is .032 , so make it a plane and save some time 🙂 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