Measured Dimension Exactly the Nominal is Showing up Red

Try displaying 6 decimal places.  I bet that it is actually a few millionths under tolerance.  The evaluation that turns the text red happens before the values are rounded and displayed on the report.  So, if it is even a tiny bit out of tolerance, even beyond your displayprecision value, it will still turn the text red.  

There may be a 'fix' for this by editing the report labels.  Here is a link to a thread in which NinjaBadger offers some code to do that: max-or-min-not-shown-in-red-only-if-meas-is-oot

Thanks for the response. I read through that thread and the code appears similar but looks like I would have to write my own code to do what I need. Would have to be some line of code that rounds the value before the evaluation. To tell you the truth figuring out what code to write for that and which cell to place it in is beyond me. 

It looks like my options are to display a silly number of unrepeatable decimals or just live with the report showing red when the measured value is acceptable.

The main problem now is that I am setting up 'inspect' on my computer and at the end of the routine it simply says pass or fail in big letters on the screen. And a part is failing because its OD is exactly at nominal (after rounding).

I normally just live with there being red numbers on reports like that.  It can be a nice alarm state that tells everyone that a feature is on the limit of the tolerance, or technically an insignificant amount out of tolerance.  It can be helpful since most people seem to just look for any red on the report rather than actually evaluate the numbers and plan accordingly.  Like, maybe they shouldn't continue to make parts that are at or near the edge of the tolerance.  

There is another workaround you may consider.  You can open up the tolerances just a bit such that they still round to the specified tolerance.  For example, the screenshot you provided could be programmed with a tolerance of +.000049/-.002049.  The report with 4 decimal places displayed would still show a tolerance of +.0000/-.0002, but parts that are a smidge out of that range would still evaluate to being in tolerance. 

I normally just live with there being red numbers on reports like that.  It can be a nice alarm state that tells everyone that a feature is on the limit of the tolerance, or technically an insignificant amount out of tolerance.  It can be helpful since most people seem to just look for any red on the report rather than actually evaluate the numbers and plan accordingly.  Like, maybe they shouldn't continue to make parts that are at or near the edge of the tolerance.  

There is another workaround you may consider.  You can open up the tolerances just a bit such that they still round to the specified tolerance.  For example, the screenshot you provided could be programmed with a tolerance of +.000049/-.002049.  The report with 4 decimal places displayed would still show a tolerance of +.0000/-.0002, but parts that are a smidge out of that range would still evaluate to being in tolerance. 

 Cris_C 's post: you could even wholesale implement the change by making a single assignment:

assign/RND=0.00049
then each dimensional tolerance, type in x tolerance value +RND for UTL, or x tolerance value -RND for LTL

that way the routine code shows you've implemented it for that feature.

Nifty idea!

That's a nice one! 

Its all fun and games until the auditor asks to see your code 

You guys have auditors? I'll count myself lucky for now that I don't have any.

If your internal instruction allows for rounding, and your customer authorizes it, rounding is permissible.  Now if you are qualifying governed product (defense, aerospace, etc), it's absolutely a forbidden act.

At one point, yah. And they were starting to get cheeky about stuff like that. It was all aerospace and defense stuff. 
Now I work at a place that makes big tractors, no auditors ever.