hexagon logo
Register Sign in
  • Replies 11 replies
  • Subscribers 221 subscribers
  • Views 209 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related

Slot Width/Length Bonus?

blind829
I've attached a print and code of my program on v3.5MR2.

First question is why is PC-Dmis adding both bonus tolerances, width & length, together to calculate the true position bonus? I'm looking at a old CMM report of v3.7MR3 and it is only using bonus tolerance of the width to calculate the true position bonus...Is this a known problem in v3.5MR2?

Second, I don't fully understand boundary and if it's possible to dimension correctly in v3.5MR2...

Thanks for your help.
Attached Files
Parents
  • Based on that print, I wouldn't even report TP, only the scan results, but I am sure that would confuses your customer.

    Since it has a different tolerance for the length than it does for the width, it's gonna be a beech no matter how you try to report the scan. This is one of those cases where you are pretty much screwed no matter what you do. Personally, I would ignore the BOUNDARY callout since I seriously doubt your customer "gets it" and it was put on there by an engineer who didn't really know what it meant either. V3.7 does not have the "BOUNDARY" option for a dimension, don't know if they people at Wilcox have added it in the newer versions.

    IF you just have to report BOUNDARY, generate the scan from the cad data and give profile tolerance a -0.9 tolerance (from TP and size) and give it a +0.9 tolerance (from TP and SIZE). That's the best (I think) that you will be able to do given that you do not have a BOUNDARY dimension option. Not exactly correct since you have different size tolerances, but the best you can do with what you have.

    You're good Matt, last couple questions.

    What "Hit Type" would the linear closed scan be? Edge, Vector, Surface, ect..

    Correct me if I'm wrong but you calculated your ±0.9 tolerance by splitting the 1.0mm positional tolerance in half, makes sense, and adding the tightest hole size tolerance, just to be on the safe side...Is that right?
Reply
  • Based on that print, I wouldn't even report TP, only the scan results, but I am sure that would confuses your customer.

    Since it has a different tolerance for the length than it does for the width, it's gonna be a beech no matter how you try to report the scan. This is one of those cases where you are pretty much screwed no matter what you do. Personally, I would ignore the BOUNDARY callout since I seriously doubt your customer "gets it" and it was put on there by an engineer who didn't really know what it meant either. V3.7 does not have the "BOUNDARY" option for a dimension, don't know if they people at Wilcox have added it in the newer versions.

    IF you just have to report BOUNDARY, generate the scan from the cad data and give profile tolerance a -0.9 tolerance (from TP and size) and give it a +0.9 tolerance (from TP and SIZE). That's the best (I think) that you will be able to do given that you do not have a BOUNDARY dimension option. Not exactly correct since you have different size tolerances, but the best you can do with what you have.

    You're good Matt, last couple questions.

    What "Hit Type" would the linear closed scan be? Edge, Vector, Surface, ect..

    Correct me if I'm wrong but you calculated your ±0.9 tolerance by splitting the 1.0mm positional tolerance in half, makes sense, and adding the tightest hole size tolerance, just to be on the safe side...Is that right?
Children
No Data
© 2024 Hexagon AB and/or its subsidiaries. Privacy Policy | Cloud Services Agreement