perpendicularity to A & B

[[ni...]]

Hello,

I need to mesure a perpendicularity to A&B




when I select the second datum (B) in calypso it's like it is not valide, there is a red cross on it and the result don't change.





Forgot I something ? what is the good way to mesure it ?

[[Ju...]]

Have you tried constraining Datum A to Datum B in the Ref 1 feature selection?

[[ni...]]

Hi Justin,

no, and I don't know how to constraining Datum A to Datum B in the Ref 1 feature, could you explain how to do ?

[[To...]]

Create a Perpendicularity characteristic.

Enter tolerance.

Select Plane C for your feature.

Select Plane_Datum A for your Primary Datum Feature

Select Plane_Datum B for your Secondary Datum Feature.

Perp of C to AB.JPG

[[ni...]]

ok, it's what i can't do, the second datum seems to be invalide : red cross on the button, and value don't change.

perpen.JPG

[[Ju...]]

Click the plane icon where you select Plan1 Ref A in Ref 1. From here, you can constrain Plan1 Ref A to Plan1 Ref B.

DatumConstraint.jpgDatumConstraint2.jpg

[[ni...]]

Hi,

I try to mesure an test part to see if it's work.
perpendicularity from C to A is 0.01mm
perpendicularity from C to B is 23mm


perpendicularity From C to A with constrain is 0.031 mm, so it's not the perpendicularity from C to A&B i'm looking for.

perhaps i couldn't mesure this on calypso 5.2.14 (2011) !?

contrainte.JPG

[[Da...]]

Please sign in to view this quote.

It is important, that the nominals of the elements you use are perpendicular to each other. The nominals must be perfect. If you are having trouble with that, post the dialog boxes of the elements A, B and C here. Also, I strongly suspect, that you need the ISO 5459 option activated for that.

[[ni...]]

ok,

this is a test part to be sure that calyspo return the right value when I mesure C perpen to A&B like ISO want it.
I've :
C 0.01mm perpen to A
C 23mm perpen to B (that is right)

so I guess C perpen to A&B should be at least 23mm Calyspo return me 0.004mm !! ??

[[Je...]]

.

In this example, for a perpendicularity callout, I don't believe there are any degrees of freedom remaining for Datum B to constrain when Datum A is the primary datum. The tolerance zone is wholly defined already by Datum A.

.

[[An...]]

Please sign in to view this quote.

That's right!

[[Da...]]

Please sign in to view this quote.

Of course it's not right:

Please sign in to view this quote.

The perpendicularity tolerance zone is oriented to one or more datums by the same rules by which any other tolerance zone is defined to a datum simulator (ASME) or situation elements (ISO).

A hint should have been that Calypso offers more than one datum element in the perpendicularity dialog, don't you think?

[[ni...]]

I read again ISO 1101, the exemple with surface is with only one datum. In case of line (cylinder...) there is an exemple with two datum


so I try to program a perpendicularity from a cylinder to two datum like the ISO's exemple, and Calypso still doesn't want it ...
(ISO1101 give also exemple of parrallelism and inclinaison with two datum, I'll try later to test them)

so I'll follow my new rule : if you can't do what you want, do what you can 😃 😃 😃 😃

TEST.JPG

[[Da...]]

Please sign in to view this quote.

Still, in this example, the nominals of datum C are not perpendicular to datum B, so C can't be used as a second datum or as the first of two datums.

Your original drawing didn't show a plane at 45°, or did I miss something there?

[[Je...]]

Please sign in to view this quote.

.

Thanks, Nicolas.

The example you shared from ISO 1101 describes a situation where a secondary datum can be used to constrain rotation of the tolerance zone to be parallel to the secondary datum. This works because the axis of the controlled feature is parallel to the secondary datum. The setup you show in your original post does not allow this same type of clocking to occur, because the controlled feature is a plane and is also perpendicular to the secondary datum.

.

[[Ow...]]

Not exactly applicable to this situation but, when using a Cylinder, Cone, Step Cylinder or 3D line as the feature and primary datum, you can choose to evaluate perpendicularity with the Cartesian evaluation and basically choose which direction you want the feature constrained to the primary and secondary datum's. I can't say for sure but, I believe if you have additional result turned on for the characteristic, it will show both results. The Parallelism characteristic can be used the same way.

[[ni...]]

Hi,
@Jeff Frodermann.3

Now it's clear, the original draft which ask a plane perpen to two other plane is not OK.

@Daniel Nutka.2

You're right, the original draft is about 3 plan at 90°. And to test Justin Johnson method, I've tried to measure it on a part with obvious deviation : on my clamping vise 😃
I Am not used to program without CAD, but for me in general the default of perpendicularity is not link to the nominals of the elements (if you don't ask it). Maybe I'll try to test this later if I found time.

@Owen Long
Yes, that's work, a line (cylinder) on first datum, and cartesian evaluation,

Now I've just to explain to our customer how to draw 😃 metrolog's humor 😃 🤣

Thanks to you all

[[To...]]

just a little clarity

thumbnail_IMG_5700.jpg

[[ni...]]

@ Tom Oakes
OK, back to home.

In this case: tolerance zone perpendicularity to primary datum and parallel to secondary datum is close to the first draft of this post : tolerance zone perpendicularity to primary datum and perpendicularity to secondary datum.

First question: where does this explanation come from ? Is it a norm or an explanation of a norm
Second question: how to program this in calypso ? Cause when I try Calypso seems to refuse a secondary datum in case of interrogation of perpendicularity of a plane !!

Does a conversion on a double interogation 100% fit the draft : Surface perpendicularity of Datum A & Surface parrallel to datum B ?

[[Ma...]]

Hi Nicolas,

if you place a 3D line instead of the "Datum A" plane, does the second reference open? If so, I would make two theoretical 3D lines that will have the same A1 and A2 (angles).

On Calypso 2018, it may have both references as planes, as others have suggested. Perhaps 5.2 can not

[[Ja...]]

How did you get the Perpendicularity to be ISO Perpendicularity?

Capture.JPG

[[To...]]

Please sign in to view this quote.

1.) This comes from ASME Y14.5-2009, which is a standard in the US. The picture is from the standard which also includes an interpretation of the norm.
2.) I assume the problem may be due to what version of Calypso you are using????
3.) I believe so. If surface was not parallel, then use Angularity.

Perp of C to AB 2.JPG

[[ni...]]

@Jason Barry
it's defaut setting, and I found nothing to change this, so it may be defined at purshase, in my french compagny we work about 99.999% on ISO.

@Tom Oakes
thanks, you can do it on your Calypso's version, so my 2012 version could be the problem, or may be my version is parametric for ISO and yours for ASME,but I don't think so.

I've see with this post basic knowledge sometimes good to dig 🙂

thanks to you all
have a good day