That topic will hurt your head, that guy would not admit he was wrong even though everyone disagreed with him. I bet he would even say our border is secure.
ISO1101 defines the tolerance zones, not the way to measure or to give a result (IMO).
The profile tolerance is defined by the diameter of a sphere which goes along the theo profile, so the radius on each side. In this way, I think it's logical to give the result as a radius (of the worst point) and compare it to the tolerance, so multiply by 2 to get a diameter... I don't remember where this spec comes from, but I don't think it's in ISO1101 (I thought about old NFE02-204 about conformity, can't find it !)
Ok yall. help me understand. I thought i had this figured out. IM going to post some snippets of the Y14-45_2021. The is the newest standard for Measurement Data Reporting regarding profiles.
They are monkeying up the standard so that even when your software won't calculate it 'right' you can make it appear to be right....
They added the 'dynamic' profile to try to mimic ISO (and IMO are failing)
"Dynamic Profile" reported value is MAX-MIN
Smallest individual deviation of all points is -0.12
Largest individual deviation of all points is +0.50
Result Profile is 0.62
"Profile" reported is the smallest zone all points will fit within, centered about nominal.
Smallest individual deviation of all points is -0.12
Largest individual deviation of all points is +0.50
Result Profile is 1.00
Profile result BY ITSELF has always been a useless number, it needs MORE information or it is just pizz in the wind.
Notice, they didn't include ANYTHING for unequal tolerance zones, which makes it even MORE useless. If your profile is 1.0 | (U) .25, your individual point tolerance is +0.25/-0.75, where is the calculations/examples for that that don't confuse the issue even more?
Based on "Profile" if you have +0.21 to -0.69 for individual points, the "profile" result will be 1.38, BUT it is IN tolerance, but 'should' show out, but it's in.
They are monkeying up the standard so that even when your software won't calculate it 'right' you can make it appear to be right.... They added the 'dynamic' profile to try to mimic ISO (and IMO are failing)
"Dynamic Profile" reported value is MAX-MIN Smallest individual deviation of all points is -0.12 Largest individual deviation of all points is +0.50 Result Profile is 0.62
"Profile" reported is the smallest zone all points will fit within, centered about nominal. Smallest individual deviation of all points is -0.12 Largest individual deviation of all points is +0.50 Result Profile is 1.00
Profile result BY ITSELF has always been a useless number, it needs MORE information or it is just pizz in the wind.
Notice, they didn't include ANYTHING for unequal tolerance zones, which makes it even MORE useless. If your profile is 1.0 | (U) .25, your individual point tolerance is +0.25/-0.75, where is the calculations/examples for that that don't confuse the issue even more?
Based on "Profile" if you have +0.21 to -0.69 for individual points, the "profile" result will be 1.38, BUT it is IN tolerance, but 'should' show out, but it's in.
There is a section about unequal tolerance zones i just didnt include it. I can post it if youd like
