Jump to content

Profiles


---
 Share

Recommended Posts

Please sign in to view this quote.

It depend upon your geometry ,standard geometry no need of curve and free form, if it's complicated contour then it is must.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It depends what you are checking.

If you are checking cylinders and planes and they have a fully defined datum reference frame, you can check them without needing curve or freeform. With an incomplete Datum reference frame it is still possible though admittedly it takes extra steps.

If you are checking profile of a line, or need to check profile of a complex 3D surface then you will likely need curve or freeform.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I will highly suggest you use free form for 3d surfaces, or curve in the event you are validating a profile line, the general surface and general curve feature in Calypso will give you accurate and repeatable results.

Free form is worth its cost as long as you are checking parts with contours often.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to view this quote.

That is the way I always have used General Surface Put it looks at points so if you have a point table you could maybe just put in the point data
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to view this quote.

Curious to know why you wouldn't just use the profile characteristic set to "bilateral - one result" even though both methods will produce the same result.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am getting an out of tolerance result, and when I select -A- primary, -B- secondary and -C- tertiary the bar turns to the purple color.
The part is probably out of spec and wanted to make sure it was reading accurately with out the Free Form or Curve option.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steven, for surface profile, I always use and get very reliable results
recalling 2d curves into a Free Form Surface. Can't live without them!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to view this quote.

I don't even know if I'd agree with that. For one, you can have a Plane to Plane Profile. It would control the form, location, and orientation of the Plane. Position cannot do that for you.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to view this quote.

ISO allows for a position control on planar surfaces (17.13.5). The control is equivalent to a bilateral profile control within ASME.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to view this quote.

I understand that. I'm just saying that you can have a Plane to Plane Profile callout as well. Which is a different evaluation than just Position.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to view this quote.

Forgive my ignorance, but does "Plane to Plane" profile mean the something along the lines of coplanarity and / or a profile control applied to stepped surfaces, without datum references?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to view this quote.

Not so.

A profile FCF controls form. If you apply a "True Position" characteristic in Calypso, form is not taken into account.

Y14.5 does not define a position tolerance for a planar feature, only for features "of size".
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to view this quote.

Actually when you do true position of a plane (which is not supported in ASME but it is in ISO) it will take the form into account.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...