hexagon logo
Register Sign in
  • Replies 33 replies
  • Subscribers 221 subscribers
  • Views 484 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related

Xact Measure problem

slesholdofthreep
Has anyone had problems with Xact Measure TP dims? I have various parts with MMC on the DF as well as the Datums. As may be expected the DF and the datums all have different size tolerances. When setting up the dimension I tolerance them correctly, but once created the datum tolerances default to the DF tolerance. I have assigned variables for tolerances with little success. In fact I can type in the correct tolerance right into the dimension in the edit window and.. pfft... it reverts back to the DF tol. I am attempting to use this "improved" method because the hexagoon's say that legacy TP dims don't account for MMC on the datums correctly. WTF!

I am running V4.2mr2, but I have seen this in 4.1 and 4.2mr1.
Parents
  • Another point, If you have multiple holes to report from the same TP callout, do not do them al in the same FCF for TP!!

    If you do and you want stats from all the holes, goodluck. I don't know which single TP it sends to stats (worst, best, average?), but all you get is 1 stat for a FCF that has more than 1 hole reported in it.

    Workaround? Just dimension each one individually. I like it better that way anyways.

    Also, when you work with VC's on datums, don't forget to look at simultaneous requirements (see ASME standard). PC-DMIS allows you to account for that too.

    James, this is only a problem when you need stats for multiple holes right? I ask because doesn't this method solve for simultaneous requirement Jan mentioned?

    Jan, in light of James' statement could one use PCDMIS silmultaneous evaluation function?
Reply
  • Another point, If you have multiple holes to report from the same TP callout, do not do them al in the same FCF for TP!!

    If you do and you want stats from all the holes, goodluck. I don't know which single TP it sends to stats (worst, best, average?), but all you get is 1 stat for a FCF that has more than 1 hole reported in it.

    Workaround? Just dimension each one individually. I like it better that way anyways.

    Also, when you work with VC's on datums, don't forget to look at simultaneous requirements (see ASME standard). PC-DMIS allows you to account for that too.

    James, this is only a problem when you need stats for multiple holes right? I ask because doesn't this method solve for simultaneous requirement Jan mentioned?

    Jan, in light of James' statement could one use PCDMIS silmultaneous evaluation function?
Children
No Data
© 2024 Hexagon AB and/or its subsidiaries. Privacy Policy | Cloud Services Agreement