Scan results different from keyed-in points

I have only just taken a look at this post and I have a number of concerns.

The first is the datum setup on the drawing it is very confusing and in ISO land ilegal, datum ' B ' is about the only one that could be taken as correct, 'A' and 'C' are a joke. You need to have the engineer/customer state what feature are to be used for the datum setup before you can obtain any meaningful results.

You have stated that the part has a curved edge with a constant 0.470 radius along it. From looking at the posted drawing that is not what I see.

The part starts as a cylinder of 0.333 for a length of 0.652" ( with 2 angled flats 11.000 deg ) then transitions into constantly changing radius curve ( or is it a set of tapper cones hard to tell from drawing )
the only place where the radius is 0.470 is at the parallel section A - A.

You have a CAD model was this generated in-house or supplied by the customer as it might help in working out what is required.

I have only just taken a look at this post and I have a number of concerns.

The first is the datum setup on the drawing it is very confusing and in ISO land ilegal, datum ' B ' is about the only one that could be taken as correct, 'A' and 'C' are a joke. You need to have the engineer/customer state what feature are to be used for the datum setup before you can obtain any meaningful results.

You have stated that the part has a curved edge with a constant 0.470 radius along it. From looking at the posted drawing that is not what I see.

The part starts as a cylinder of 0.333 for a length of 0.652" ( with 2 angled flats 11.000 deg ) then transitions into constantly changing radius curve ( or is it a set of tapper cones hard to tell from drawing )
the only place where the radius is 0.470 is at the parallel section A - A.

You have a CAD model was this generated in-house or supplied by the customer as it might help in working out what is required.