[To...] Posted August 4 Share Posted August 4 (edited) This is the first time I've seen a dynamic profile this and need a little help with setting this up in Calypso 2023. This a marked up drawing so excuse the lack of exactness on the profile callout. I think I'm all set with the upper tier but not sure about the lower tier, especially with the unequal distribution. Any feedback would be greatly appreciated. Edited August 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Jo...] Posted August 4 Share Posted August 4 Hello, maybe you find what you need here: 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[To...] Posted August 4 Author Share Posted August 4 (edited) Please sign in to view this username. Thank you for the link. Unfortunately, it doesn't quite address my situation. I actually have a copy of ASME Y14.5-2018 and it doesn't cover my specific situation either. I think the engineer that marked up the drawing might be taking some liberties with the interpretation of the standard. Edited August 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Jo...] Posted August 5 Share Posted August 5 I even have the supplemental ASME publication (Which is AWESOME and I cannot recommend enough! "Applications, Analysis, Gauging & Measurement" by James D Meadows) and i still barely understand it. When our engineers specified it, I pushed back and it turns out they didn't understand it either and actually wanted form. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Ed...] Posted Friday at 05:48 PM Share Posted Friday at 05:48 PM I am also trying to understand dynamic profile, but here are my thoughts: Based on the description of dynamic profile tolerance zone on page 244, I don't think it makes sense to have an unequal disposed tolerance zone. To get the result, i would use Profile with Bilateral-two results. Then report the difference between the min and max. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Di...] Posted 5 hours ago Share Posted 5 hours ago (edited) Regarding the comment of the OP I think here we have kind of a problem in the specification. 0,05 U0 tells us that the toleranced shape is not allowed to be larger than nominal (limiting size and form as well). So the tolerance zone expands entirely into the material. In contrast to this the triangle symbol allows an offset zone where the size is no longer to be considered for the profile and must be otherwise limited e.g. by a dimension. So the question arising out of this: What is the intention of the designer? Shall the size be limited by the U0 or completely be opened in terms of size (not form) with the triangle symbol? Of course in both cases the distance between the boundaries remains the same but the location of the resulting zone can be something completely different. In my opinion we see here a contradiction in the specification which should be clarified to get rid of the ambiguity. By the way this is not supported in CALYPSO and we are happy to add the dynamic profile as a software request. The dynamic zone is called Offset Zone in ISO and used with the OZ modifier Edited 5 hours ago 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