×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Datum Shift ?

Datum Shift ?

Datum Shift ?

(OP)
I have one dwg which has 3 holes on the plate.
In a dwg, they defined a

datum point A1, A2,A3 as the centre point of the hole.

datum B is defined as centre plane of one of the hole
In a feature controlled frame for datum B

   block 1 has 0.5 positional tolerance with 0.5 MMC
   block 2 has mentioned datum A

Datum C defined as centre plane of one of the hole & there is attached Featured controlled frame
     blcok 1 (In feature control frame) has 0.5 MMC of     positional tolerance
     In block 2 there is only mentioned datum A
     block 3 has datume B with MMC condition

Now my question is

1, There is nothing like datum A defined but only the datum points A1, A2, A3  so how could i define the datum B& datum C using reference from datum A?

2. While defining the datum C ; what does the mean of block 3 in feature controlled frame " datume B with MMC condition" ( I think it is a datum shift - but not sure about the understanding or how to calculate tolerance stack)

could you explain me in detail.

Thank you very much in advance,




RE: Datum Shift ?

  Datums B and C do not appear to be correctly defined.  What exactly is "the center plane" of a hole.  How is it oriented?  How is it inspected?  The part may be acceptably dimensioned if it weren't refering to those center planes.  Datums B and C should be the hole features, not some arbitrary planes along their centerlines.
  If your part consisted of irregular surfaces (as opposed to a flat plate), then datums B and C need to reflect flat planes.  Datum A is correct in as it defines the primary datum plane consisting of three points.  Datum B should be the secondary datum consisting of two points, and should be perpendiculat to datum A.  Datum C should be the tertiary datum, consisting of one point and mutually perpendicular to datums A and B.
  As to your second question, datum C is being defined as having 0.5 MMC relative to datum A (regardless of the material condition of datum A) and datum B (at MMC of datum B).  This allows additional tolerance to be added to the positional tolerance of datum C as datum B approaches LMC.
   Here is how I would approach it (others may have better suggestions).  If your part is a flat plate, and you are only trying to control the hole pattern and aren't concerned with its location relative to the part edges, I would define datum A as one of the surfaces.  Make one hole datum B and control its perpendicularity to datum A.  Make the second hole datum C, true position relative to datums A and B.  The third hole would be true position to datums A, B and C.

RE: Datum Shift ?

  A couple of additional comments...
  Datum A would have no modifiers as it is a plane.
  Datums B and C can be defined using the points that established datum A because those points in and of themselves are not datums.  Datums B and C are relative to the plane established by those points, not the points themselves.

RE: Datum Shift ?

Having datums A1, A2, A3 is confusing. I have never seen that before. Which one is the primary datum?

Chris
Sr. Mechanical Designer, CAD
SolidWorks 2005 SP0.1

RE: Datum Shift ?

Pts A1, A2, and A3 are not datums.  They define datum plane A.

RE: Datum Shift ?

thanks for clarifying

Chris
Sr. Mechanical Designer, CAD
SolidWorks 2005 SP0.1

RE: Datum Shift ?

(OP)
Thank you very much for your post,

Let me define datum again as I did little bit mistake last time:

Datum points A1, A2 & A3 are the centre point of Hole
But, all the holes are at different level (means at different height)


datum B is attached the hole dia of one of the hole   
   block 1 has perpendicular toelrance
   block 2 has diametric symbol, 0.5 with MMC
   block 3 has mentioned datum A

Datum C is attched to the one of the hold dia
     block 1 has positional tolerance symbol
     blcok 1 (In feature control frame) has 0.5 MMC     
     block 3 there is only mentioned datum A
     block 3 has datume B with MMC condition

1. Now, my question is as you mentioned that datum B is perpendicular to the datum A which is not the case b'coz all datum points A1, A2 & A3 are at different height ?

2. Generally, I didn't see modifier with Primary datum plane - does any reason for that?

3. Also, if you able to understand the datum B & C  - could u explain & also let me know if they are appropriate?

4. I understand primary, secondary & tertiary datum plane, but when I see the product its difficult to say anything so if you could give info about how to recognize datum & how to define datums while designing?



Thank you,



RE: Datum Shift ?

That person has used their imagination of how the GD&T works instead of being actually knowledgable and fluent. I see this silly stuff all the time. Found the best approach is ask them to point out the relevant sections of the ASME Y14.5-1994 book that justifies their technique of application, which they can't do. Usually I find if they even have a copy of the ASME book it's sitting on a bookshelf collecting dust but otherwise in pristine condition from never having been opened. Unfortunately applying it poorly is apt to be more confusing then not using the GD&T system at all.
-Keith

RE: Datum Shift ?

  I have to agree with type26owner that this tolerancing scheme is apt to add confusion.
  If datum hole B is to be perpendicular to datum A, and the points defining datum A are at differing heights on your part, then it cannot be normal (perpendicular) to the part surface.  This means that your holes are angled relative to the part surface.
  Primary datum planes do not require a modifier.  Modifiers are limited to features of size, such as your datums B and C.  Your datum A is not a feature of size, but a perfect plane through 3 points.
  If the intent is to have the holes skewed, then datums B and C are called out properly.
  The best approach to defining datums while designing is to use the primary, secondary and tertiary scheme, while considering how the part will be made and inspected.  It is also very important to recognize the function of the part itself.  If you establish A, B and C using features that are easily made and inspected, you can always add additional datums to control features which are critical to the parts function (such as controlling runout on a drive shaft or the position of mounting holes relative to a pattern center).
  I hope this helps you to understand GD&T a little better.  The best way to understand it is to use it, either with hands-on machining experience or inspection experience.  Design experience is also a good way to learn it, as we don't all have the opportunity to get our hands dirty.

RE: Datum Shift ?

I don't know if you folks are aware of the Appendix E section of the ASME book. There is an extremely handy condensed tool there that's called the 'Decision Diagrams for Geometric Control'. It should help here somewhat. Suggest you peruse Fig E-7 for the essence of Datum Selections.

I've copied those seven pages and have them hung up above my monitor because I got tired of opening up the book.
-Keith

RE: Datum Shift ?

par1,

   Let's see if I can interpret this datum scheme properly and work out an inspection fixture.

   Datum A is a plane defined by the three datum targets.  A1, A2 and A3 are called datum targets. These would be modeled by three pins, slightly bigger than your holes,  sticking up out of a base, each with its own elevation apparently.  Your part would sit on top of them, oriented to the same orthogonal coordinates as your drawing.

   Datum B is the hole.  Since it is inclined with respect to datum A, the actual datum point is the intersection of the hole's cylinder with the datum plane.  This is actually not an issue, since a vertical pin models it correctly.  This locates your part in X and Y.

   Datum C is the other hole, which keeps your part from rotating.  This would be modeled by a vertical diamond pin.

   The only deficiency of your drawing is that the datum targets ought to be specified with a diameter.   The actual contact point, the centre of your hole, does not exist, at least, not in the sense of possessing material.  Your drafter needs to define the diamter of the A1, A2 and A3 pins.

                        JHG

RE: Datum Shift ?

drawoh,
  How can a vertical pins at differing heights be used to inspect datums B and C when those datums are to be perpendicular to datum A?  The datum point is not the feature, only a defining point of datum A and the centerpoint of datum B (or C).

RE: Datum Shift ?

ewh,

   ASME Y14.5M-1994 explicitly describes non-orthogonal datums.  You project the angled features to the points or lines where they intersect the higher level datums.

   Orthogonal datums certainly are desirable, but they are not absolutely necessary.

   I am guessing that par1's datum surfaces and holes are orthogonal to each other, making the fabriation of a fixture fairly simple.  If the datum surfaces are not orthogonal, the fixture is more complicated, but still manageable.  Datum_A is a surface located at some weird 3D angle from your orthogonal drawing coordinates, but you do not care, as long as you can locate to it.

   This part may be the product of very bad drafting, or it may be a casting.  One of the advantages of a casting is that you can produce a very complex form for almost no additional effort, once you have your tooling.  Now you have to machine it.  You have to inspect the casting, and you have to inspect the final machined part.  You want datums that will be present throughout the process.  You plan to machine flat the bottom surface of the casting, which otherwise, would be a good datum.

   Your datums become whatever features are available to be jigged to.  Foundries recommend designing in datum points, but my boss would not let me do this the last time I prepared a casting drawing.  The worst case is that your convenient jigging points are not in a plane, which brings us to the point of this discussion.

   A complex weldment could get you here too.  

                     JHG

RE: Datum Shift ?

My best guess (experienced and educated) is that the drafter intended to use tooling balls to locate the holes which would be used in the establishing of Datum plane A. I believe this would be quite doable in compliance with Y14.5.  From there, the datum features B and C should serve to complete the reference frame necessary for the inspection of the specifiied dimensions.

I DO NOT believe pins of any sort would work to establish A as previously suggested.  Also there are some misleading statements concerning the establishment of datum reference frame.

RE: Datum Shift ?

drawoh,
  I understand your scheme for jigging datum A.  Datum A though is not a surface of the part, but the combination of datum points.  What confuses me is how do you inspect datums B and C, which are defined as perpendicular to datum A, using vertical pins at varying heights?  Your jig only locates the center points of those features, but does not allow for the inspection of the features themselves.
  I agree with you as to castings.  On complex parts, it is common to have orthogonol spotfaces machined into raw castings to establish these datums.

ringman,
  Please elaborate on the misleading statements concerning the establishment of datum reference frame.

RE: Datum Shift ?

Misleading statement/s for one:  'Primary datum planes do not require modifiers.' (part of ewh post) Datums, whether planes, points or lines are assumed perfect and are not subject to modifiers.  It is the Datum FEATURE of size that requires addition of a modifiier.

RE: Datum Shift ?

(OP)
Thank you very much for your valuable post, & sorry for late reply,

The part was under the development & i didn't have information but now i could explain little bit batter way as getting some info!

1. The part i am talking is Automotive part under the hood - Injection molded plastic part

2. The A1, A2 & A3 is mounting datum points & the reason for different elevation due to the limited space.

Now,

1. I think i can hear  better information about datum planes, & rectify if necessary

2, As Ringman stated that datum which is any plane, point, line doesn't require any modifiers but in my case datum B & datum C which is attched to the hole dia has modifiers in their Feature controlled frame. why?


&

RE: Datum Shift ?

Datum features B and C are features of size.  Therefore they require modifiers.  They are not the same and the A1, A2 and A3. Again, as I understand your problem, A1,A2 and 3 are intended to be points ONLY.  Whichever one of them is B, differs in that it is the axis of the circle, which has a size associated with it. Therefore it requires a modifier

RE: Datum Shift ?

ringman,
  I still do not understand how my statement "primary datum planes do not require modifiers" is misleading, as you seem to concur with your statement "datums, whether planes, points or lines are assumed perfect and are not subject to modifiers."  We seem to be saying the same thing.  Granted, I was only addressing primary datum planes, but the statement still stands.  Perhaps you felt it misleading because I said that they do not require modifiers, as opposed to not being subject to modifiers?  This seems a small point to quibble about, but I agree that not only do they not require modifiers, modifiers would be incorrect in that useage.
  I do take issue with your statement that datums B and C, because they are features of size, require modifiers.  They do not, as it is to be assumed that RFS applies if no modifiers are present.  Granted, RFS is a modifier, but it does not need to be noted in the feature control frame.
  Please do not feel as if I am being obstinate.  I am trying to better understand the correct application of GD&T myself, and may sometimes seem arguementative.  I do appreciate and look forward to your comments.

RE: Datum Shift ?

EWH,

Perhaps, as you say it is a small point, but Y14.5 contains numerous small points. "Primary Datum planes do not require modifiiers" might better have been worded "Datum planes do not require modifiers". Or Datum features not associated with size do not require modifiers".

I will agree that it is difficult to understand, apply and/or interpret much of the standard. As to B and C they require modifiers. They require consideration as to wshich should apply.  I believe that 'assumed" should have read 'defaults to' in your previous statement.

Hope this is of some benefit and not just argumentative.

RE: Datum Shift ?

ewh,

   The datum features do not have to be orthogonal to the primary datum plane.  The holes have centres which pass through the datum plane, and define the datum points.  

   If datums_B and_C are specified at MMC, a round and a diamond pin respectively should work fine.

   There is one problem here that I did not think of before.  My model works fine if the injection molded plastic has the holes cast in place.  If the holes have to be machined afterwards, then there is no way to inspect the raw casting.

Ringman,

   I cannot see how tooling balls would locate a part reliably.  If the holes are drilled, someone takes a larger drill or one of these dental tools, and they remove the burrs and sharp edges as per the note on almost all fabrication drawings.  It is difficult to predict the resulting chamfer or radius.  This affects how the part sits on a tooling ball.  A tooling ball of a given diameter works if it sits in a countersink with a controlled diameter and angle.   I cannot see an accurate contact with the edge of a drilled hole.  

   This is why I indicated that the datum points required a diameter.  We have to understand how the fixture is going to make contact with the part.

                       JHG

RE: Datum Shift ?

Well I can start making assumptions too just like you're not suppose to do. Guessing the three holes are mating and aligning features so they're probably the best choices of datums. Assuming this is a Free State Condition and some type of fasteners either fixed or floating go through these holes then likely this gets fastened to something else. Datum targets A1,A2 &A3 should have had the mating contacting surfaces described as some diameter of a circle, square or whatever the shape which represents the contact are of that something else. Since the pattern of holes are already been brought into play together directly to describe the primary datum then logically it's confusing to suddenly treat them as not being a pattern later on. Datum B should be all three holes as a pattern period. Datum planes B & C are then defined from the centroid of those holes. Deriving the dimensions from that centiod by way of a height gage or CMM is painful but with a functional guage it's not. They tried to skirt around the pattern of holes as a datum centroid complexity issue by the usual method but made a confusing mess of it instead.

RE: Datum Shift ?

Let's imagine three marbles in space.  Each is a specified distance from a given plane.  OK far?  The marbles are A1,A2, and A3.  The plane they are related to is A.  OK so far?

The perpendicular from one of these is labelled B and aother is labelled C.  Now we have a plane and two lines from which we are able to derive planes to make measurements.  If the part is restrained in a similar manner we could likewise perform inspection on it.

with mmc being appllied to the line of B, a shift as suggested would be permitted.

RE: Datum Shift ?

type26owner,

   Most of the figures in ASME Y14.5M-1994 show parts located by three surfaces.  The primary datum is the plane located by three points of the first datum.  The secondary plane is perpendicular to the first, and is located by two points of the secondary surface.  The tertiary plane is perpendicular to the first two planes, and is located by one point of the third datum.

   Our case here is less common.  The primary plane is located by datum targets_A1, A2 and_A3.  The secondary plane is perpendicular to the primary plane, and is located by the centre points where datums_B and_C intersect the primary plane.  The tertiary plane is perpendicular to the primary and secondary planes, and is located by the centre point where datum_B, not_C, intersects the primary plane.

   Labeling the planes A, B and_C is an awful mess, so I refrained from doing it.

   These planes are a theoretical concept, especially if the part's features are orthogonal to one another.  We can jig the part and do measurements.  

   I do not see how you can use a hole pattern as a datum.  Each hole is a separate feature.  The whole point of a diamond pin is that the distance between hole_B and hole_C is not known for certain.  You will need a positional tolerance to define where the holes ought to be.

Ringman,

   How are your marbles going to make contact with the part?

                         JHG

RE: Datum Shift ?

The hole pattern is simply represented by the virtual condition boundarys which are normally just pins on the functional gauge. My way has simple datum target landings (each one must contact the part at least at one point) and pins which are expanding if the holes are at RFS and if at MMC then go/no-go type. Points projected into the intersection of a hole centerline and the surface it penetrates is imaginary only. The theory seems plausible but they are not practical to use without more instructions. Appying marbles of any kind there may or may not meet the criteria to restrain the part okay. Your guess is as good as mine but if there was not a specifc mention of datum target spheres at a certain diameter then it's arbitrary and therefore poorly executed. I'm confused.

RE: Datum Shift ?

The marbles example was only for a visualization of what might be achieved by using the tooling balls.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources