[Cl...] Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 The drawing ask for Ø true position of a sphere to an ID, but only gives 1 basic dimension Z (0.5) There should be a X as well? Yes, thanks for catching that Jacob Y=0 Link to comment https://qualityforum.zeiss.com/topic/19622-3d-diametric-true-position/ Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ja...] Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 Is this a situation where distance from Y origin is equal to 0? Link to comment https://qualityforum.zeiss.com/topic/19622-3d-diametric-true-position/#findComment-110358 Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Cl...] Posted January 3, 2019 Author Share Posted January 3, 2019 Typing faster than my brain can think. Production says they are measuring this on a comparator? Link to comment https://qualityforum.zeiss.com/topic/19622-3d-diametric-true-position/#findComment-110360 Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ja...] Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 I can't see a basic dimension in X as X would represent the axis of the I.D., right? Link to comment https://qualityforum.zeiss.com/topic/19622-3d-diametric-true-position/#findComment-110362 Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Cl...] Posted January 3, 2019 Author Share Posted January 3, 2019 In this view, X would be from the Datum -A- face on the right. Y represents the axis of the ID. Link to comment https://qualityforum.zeiss.com/topic/19622-3d-diametric-true-position/#findComment-110364 Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ja...] Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 If that's the case, it appears that they're missing a basic dim. Is it not defined in another view? Link to comment https://qualityforum.zeiss.com/topic/19622-3d-diametric-true-position/#findComment-110366 Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Cl...] Posted January 3, 2019 Author Share Posted January 3, 2019 No other view. Link to comment https://qualityforum.zeiss.com/topic/19622-3d-diametric-true-position/#findComment-110368 Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ja...] Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 I could possibly see them measuring this on a comparator if they split their measurement into two steps. That being said, they would have to know this basic dim that you don't have and do the math themselves. The print should be updated, but for now is the dim in any of the paperwork? Link to comment https://qualityforum.zeiss.com/topic/19622-3d-diametric-true-position/#findComment-110370 Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Me...] Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 Does -A- and -B- fully constrain the feature? Maybe the missing dim is because there is an unconstrained DOF? Link to comment https://qualityforum.zeiss.com/topic/19622-3d-diametric-true-position/#findComment-110372 Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ja...] Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 Please sign in to view this quote. Rotation about X would be unconstrained but should have no bearing on the lack of dimension for this Position callout. Link to comment https://qualityforum.zeiss.com/topic/19622-3d-diametric-true-position/#findComment-110374 Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Cl...] Posted January 3, 2019 Author Share Posted January 3, 2019 I was just informed that there is a Red Lined drawing with a penciled in X basic, but there is still no Y basic. Link to comment https://qualityforum.zeiss.com/topic/19622-3d-diametric-true-position/#findComment-110376 Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ja...] Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 Basic in Y must be to I.D.. Would I be wrong to assume that you have a symmetric part and Y basic is equal to 0? Link to comment https://qualityforum.zeiss.com/topic/19622-3d-diametric-true-position/#findComment-110378 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