hexagon logo
Register Sign in
  • Replies 84 replies
  • Subscribers 223 subscribers
  • Views 798 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related

True Position in 3 axis???

1CMM4ME
Ok, I have read the post regarding this so called argument that my boss and I got into today. He told me that you cannot measure true position in 3 axis, as I told him he was wrong. I know it depends on the way the FCF calls it out, but I tried to explain to him that it is possible to measure TP in 3 axis.
I have seen the formulas, so I know it's possible. I just wish I could get one of you gurus to reply back explaining that it is possible and why. I see the picture but he does not. I do not like to get into pissing matches with upper management, but I have learned a h**ll of alot from you guys, and I know this is possible. So if one of you fine gentleman can back me up on this, I would very much appreciate it. Thank you very much.
Now I am going to get a cold beer.Smiley
Parents
  • Actually I posted an example where the tolerance zone is not spherical even though three axis are used. Guys, tolerance zone shape is not dictated by the number of axis constraining the feature's location/orientation. Tolerance zone shape is dictated by the shape of the feature. Axial features have an axial tolerance zone not a spherical one.

    BTW you can not TP a surface a surface is not a FOS so that is actually an illegal callout.

    Bill, here is another example where a cylindrical feature is adequately constrained using one basic dimension and a FCF.







    Yes, BUT, there are TWO Axis thare are reportable. The IMPLIED ZERO is the second Axis. Also, the SHAPE of the feature does NOT necessarily dictate the shape of the tolerance zone. You do NOT have to use a Diametric tolerance zone for a hole if you do not want to. You CAN use spherical for a point if you want to.

    BTW, that is NOT a diametric True Position. That is an AXIAL true position called out Craig. If it were Diametric then the Diametric Symbol would be in front of the TP tolerance and it is not.

    Sorry about the pic that I did not include. I will try to add it.
Reply
  • Actually I posted an example where the tolerance zone is not spherical even though three axis are used. Guys, tolerance zone shape is not dictated by the number of axis constraining the feature's location/orientation. Tolerance zone shape is dictated by the shape of the feature. Axial features have an axial tolerance zone not a spherical one.

    BTW you can not TP a surface a surface is not a FOS so that is actually an illegal callout.

    Bill, here is another example where a cylindrical feature is adequately constrained using one basic dimension and a FCF.







    Yes, BUT, there are TWO Axis thare are reportable. The IMPLIED ZERO is the second Axis. Also, the SHAPE of the feature does NOT necessarily dictate the shape of the tolerance zone. You do NOT have to use a Diametric tolerance zone for a hole if you do not want to. You CAN use spherical for a point if you want to.

    BTW, that is NOT a diametric True Position. That is an AXIAL true position called out Craig. If it were Diametric then the Diametric Symbol would be in front of the TP tolerance and it is not.

    Sorry about the pic that I did not include. I will try to add it.
Children
No Data
© 2024 Hexagon AB and/or its subsidiaries. Privacy Policy | Cloud Services Agreement