Composite Profile

[[Lu...]]

My blueprint has composite profile (per ASME y14.5...not single segment). The callout is as such (same feature):

 

                 .020|A|B|C|

|PROFILE|

                 .010|A|B|C|

 

Any ideas how to program the lower portion in Calypso?

[[Cl...]]

Is what is shown here displayed exactly the same way on the drawing?

[[To...]]

Pic of actual position callout, minus any part details?

Edited 22 hours ago

[[Cl...]]

 

Did some searching and found this.

The upper segment locates the overall profile to datums A B C.  The lower segment is the PLTZF (pattern locating tolerance zone framework - See ASME Y14.5 - 2018 sections 10.5 to 10.5.1.1 and fig 10.39).  PTLZF must always repeat the same datums in the same order as the upper segment but behave differently in that, they can only control orientation but must still fit within the upper segment's tolerance zone.

[[Dr...]]

Please sign in to view this quote.

Going off the Y14.5-2018 standard (see below), the PLTZF explicitly needs to be the uppermost segment and the uppermost segment alone; I think you meant the FRTZF.

"PLTZF: When composite controls are used, the uppermost segment is the pattern-locating control.” […] “FRTZF: Each lower segment is a feature-relating control that governs the smaller positional tolerance for each feature of size within the pattern (feature-to-feature relationship).”

I’ve never seen a first and second segment with exactly the same datum reference frame – or for that matter, a fully constrained second segment in any form. The same datums may be present in the FRTZF as in the PLTZF, just not all of them.

[[To...]]

Please sign in to view this quote.

My thoughts exactly

[[Cl...]]

Composite profile using the same two datums. - PC-DMIS for CMMs - PC-DMIS - Nexus Community

This example specifies only two datum's, but should apply the same for three?

[[Ky...]]

Strictly there isn't anything wrong with that callout. Usually you do see a smaller datum structure, but so long as it is a subset of the previous one, it is legal. The important thing to remember is that the FRTZF cannot control location, only orientation, so you are going to have to best fit it. Are you on Calypso 2025 and using the new GD&T engine? If so, the easiest way would be to make a secondary alignment based on ABC, set the profile to the "Loose" standard, use the alignment as the datum structure and then allow it to best fit the X, Y and Z.

 

If not, then you'll probably have to go into the evaluation menu of the feature in the profile (I am assuming either curve or freeform) and then create a best fit alignment based off of it (again, allowing X, Y and Z to move) and use that as your alignment in the profile.

[[Dr...]]

Please sign in to view this username.

 Your explanation lined everything up for me and I think I understand it better now. My hangup was that I imagined two datums were sufficient to control all degrees of rotation, but if the datum features for A, B, and C are something like a plane, pin, and pin respectively, all three datums might still be needed for orienting the FRTZF (even if orienting is all it does). To that end, I think Clarke's link is also apt here.

Though I’m unfamiliar with the new GD&T engine, the approach you outlined sounds reasonable.

[[Lu...]]

Ahh shoot I totally forgot to mention in my original post: I watched a video by GT&T Basics, and I determined that the “C” Datum in the FRTZF is invalid. I am totally in agreeance about that. The lower segment should only control orientation relative to A and B. Other than orientation, the profile should be free to move about the larger tolerance zone. How can I replicate this in Calypso? Only option is installing 2025? I’m running 2023. We run into composite profiles and true positions all the time so maybe it’s worth checking out 2025.

 

However, we just got planner/simulation up and running…hopefully updating doesn’t mess all of that up…

Edited 12 hours ago