Mr. Odell, I'm sure you already know what I am about to say but I'm posting this for your audience. The problem with your process is when you do a 2nd hole that shares the same DRF with MMB modifiers, the 2nd hole may need to shift a different direction than the 1st hole. ASME Y14.5 states that all features sharing the same DRF, must be evaluated simultaneously. In other words, you cannot create an independent position characteristic for each hole. Instead of using position in it's default state, you should use the Best Fit Bore Pattern option in the position characteristic. Here you can select ALL of the features that share the same DRF. Make sure to set best fit to View Tolerances (with MMC/LMC of the references) In your example, you would un-tick Rotation and Translation checkboxes since your DRF is fully constrained, even with MMB modifiers.
Easy enough for one hole, but if there were multiple features with the same boundary conditions, how do you enforce “simultaneous” requirements. You don’t want to shift north for some features and south for others.
What about pattern position tolerance.. Any specific conditions needed to apply this option? I normally choose individual position tolerance for multiple holes (not cylinders).
Can you please make a video demonstrating how to set up a simultaneous requirement in Calypso, for multiple surface profiles referenced to 2 datums? Thanks!
SPC is not able to use MMC because of the variableness of the tolerance. The (M) value is the percentage of the tolerance used which creates a value useable in SPC
I'm a little bit disappointed, or maybe i am the one who is wrong. In the drawing in the beginning, we have a pattern of hole, positioned by the plane A and the two axis B and C. That means (I will simplify not taking into account the MMB modifier) Our reference frame, is a plane adjacent to the skin of the real plane, an axis derivated from a best fit cylinder adjacent to the wall of the hole and perpendicular to the frame A, same for B. Those are the references and only them we need to use to position the 8 holes. Than means that the theorical position of the tolerance zone of each hole must be build referring to the references. However, my man in the video position them with the middle plane from the four hole extremity of the part. That doesn't make any sense, even if the reference holes B and C are toleranced by those walls, the axis B and C derivated should have been in a tolerance zone generated but the reference frame of the two middle plane, thus the axis B and C, will have random position in that tolerance zone, And it is that particular position that is needed to position our hole pattern. We lose information about our hole using the middle plane. Hope i got my self understood.
@@RDeanOdell oh i'll give that a shot. i ended up using cone additions and setting the height to the desired diameter. i'll try your method as well. Thanks Dean! and good morning
@@RDeanOdell In the tool bar there is plan option...if we click the plan....in that there is a navigation option which is used for programming control...In navigation option there are more options...so please briefly explain about all methods in navigation
@@thiruramesh4181 our trainer told me to checkmark the middle boxes in Block Edges to force the stylus system to move up and over the part in between features instead of moving around the part. (To avoid crashing into other set-ups on the table.) So far it's been working!
Mr. Odell, I'm sure you already know what I am about to say but I'm posting this for your audience. The problem with your process is when you do a 2nd hole that shares the same DRF with MMB modifiers, the 2nd hole may need to shift a different direction than the 1st hole. ASME Y14.5 states that all features sharing the same DRF, must be evaluated simultaneously. In other words, you cannot create an independent position characteristic for each hole. Instead of using position in it's default state, you should use the Best Fit Bore Pattern option in the position characteristic. Here you can select ALL of the features that share the same DRF. Make sure to set best fit to View Tolerances (with MMC/LMC of the references) In your example, you would un-tick Rotation and Translation checkboxes since your DRF is fully constrained, even with MMB modifiers.
Sir, hope to see video about the bore pattern soon, also, how CMM calculate MMB if feature holes are in a square or rectangle pattern ?
Easy enough for one hole, but if there were multiple features with the same boundary conditions, how do you enforce “simultaneous” requirements. You don’t want to shift north for some features and south for others.
What about pattern position tolerance.. Any specific conditions needed to apply this option? I normally choose individual position tolerance for multiple holes (not cylinders).
Can you please make a video demonstrating how to set up a simultaneous requirement in Calypso, for multiple surface profiles referenced to 2 datums? Thanks!
Hi, calypso is going to default to simultaneous requirements for anything related to the same datum reference frame.
SPC is not able to use MMC because of the variableness of the tolerance. The (M) value is the percentage of the tolerance used which creates a value useable in SPC
Thanks for the input!
I'm a little bit disappointed, or maybe i am the one who is wrong. In the drawing in the beginning, we have a pattern of hole, positioned by the plane A and the two axis B and C. That means (I will simplify not taking into account the MMB modifier) Our reference frame, is a plane adjacent to the skin of the real plane, an axis derivated from a best fit cylinder adjacent to the wall of the hole and perpendicular to the frame A, same for B. Those are the references and only them we need to use to position the 8 holes. Than means that the theorical position of the tolerance zone of each hole must be build referring to the references.
However, my man in the video position them with the middle plane from the four hole extremity of the part. That doesn't make any sense, even if the reference holes B and C are toleranced by those walls, the axis B and C derivated should have been in a tolerance zone generated but the reference frame of the two middle plane, thus the axis B and C, will have random position in that tolerance zone, And it is that particular position that is needed to position our hole pattern. We lose information about our hole using the middle plane.
Hope i got my self understood.
Im working with a molded part with draft. so all my holes are cones. whats the work around?
I’d use circle features and use a 3d line recall to get an axis from a cone
@@RDeanOdell oh i'll give that a shot. i ended up using cone additions and setting the height to the desired diameter. i'll try your method as well. Thanks Dean! and good morning
Can you explain about block edges sir ..
What do you mean? Can you be more specific?
@@RDeanOdell In the tool bar there is plan option...if we click the plan....in that there is a navigation option which is used for programming control...In navigation option there are more options...so please briefly explain about all methods in navigation
@@thiruramesh4181 our trainer told me to checkmark the middle boxes in Block Edges to force the stylus system to move up and over the part in between features instead of moving around the part. (To avoid crashing into other set-ups on the table.) So far it's been working!
Audio is missing, only i can here the background music. thanks
Thanks for letting me know! I'll fix it soon.