The ASME Y14.5 passage you quoted states that simultaneous evaluations do not apply to lower segments of composite feature control frames unless specifically invoked:
This principle does not apply to the lower segments of composite feature control frames. See para. 7.5.4.2. If a simultaneous requirement is desired for the lower segments of two or more composite feature control frames, a notation such as SIM REQT shall be placed adjacent to each applicable lower segment of the feature control frames.
That is why PC-DMIS does not support simultaneous evaluations for lower segments of composite FCFs.
Your screenshot looks like it comes from an XactMeasure report. I am not claiming that XactMeasure was 100% accurate and error free as I was not involved with PC-DMIS when XactMeasure was introduced and have no way of fixing any errors that may come to light (the code has been deprecated). I am solely focusing on the new Geometric Tolerance commands which completely replaced XactMeasure for PC-DMIS 2020 R2 onwards and for which I have been heavily involved. To the best of my knowledge, there are no problems with the geometric tolerance math and it performs simultaneous evaluations correctly. If you have evidence to the contrary then I would be happy to review it with you over a private call and, if validated will of course instruct my team to provide a fix as soon as humanly possible.
The ASME Y14.5 passage you quoted states that simultaneous evaluations do not apply to lower segments of composite feature control frames unless specifically invoked:
This principle does not apply to the lower segments of composite feature control frames. See para. 7.5.4.2. If a simultaneous requirement is desired for the lower segments of two or more composite feature control frames, a notation such as SIM REQT shall be placed adjacent to each applicable lower segment of the feature control frames.
That is why PC-DMIS does not support simultaneous evaluations for lower segments of composite FCFs.
Your screenshot looks like it comes from an XactMeasure report. I am not claiming that XactMeasure was 100% accurate and error free as I was not involved with PC-DMIS when XactMeasure was introduced and have no way of fixing any errors that may come to light (the code has been deprecated). I am solely focusing on the new Geometric Tolerance commands which completely replaced XactMeasure for PC-DMIS 2020 R2 onwards and for which I have been heavily involved. To the best of my knowledge, there are no problems with the geometric tolerance math and it performs simultaneous evaluations correctly. If you have evidence to the contrary then I would be happy to review it with you over a private call and, if validated will of course instruct my team to provide a fix as soon as humanly possible.
