×
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

MMC on datums

MMC on datums

MMC on datums

(OP)
Here is the MMC problem!

The 2 tolerances are also shown as failing....but on closer inspection one tolerance does fail but the other tolerance fails BUT the deviations shown in qualify PASS the guage shown.

If these tolernaces are viewd in 'Insight then the same deviation are display and the guage fials but it shows the deviations as a PASS.

A component has the datums set up and tolerances applied.

The issue is arising where MMC is being applied to the datum. In this case datum B.

If this datum PASSED then there isn't a problem all gauges are reported as expected.

BUT

If datum B FAILS then any corresponding holes tolerances that contain MMC that are called out against this datum B FAIL.

Because the MMC against datum B has failed then the gauges applied to this are measured to RFS.

Some of the holes now measured to RFS are within tolerance but are still displayed as FAILED.

Is this what you would expect to happen?

The tolerances that are applied are as folllows

The two guages that the issue is being seen on are as follows.

Feature datum B has the following tolerances applied to it

POS|DIA0.0005(M)|A

DIA -0.000 +0.003

FEATURE 1 (hole Pattern)

POS|DIA0.016(M)|A|B(M)

DIA -0.000 +0.003

Both these tolerances fail

'Datum B' should fail as the tolerances have not been acheived'

'Feature 1 (hole Pattern)' also fails even though the position of the holes are shown as 'PASSED' (but this is now to RFS not MMC as datum B failed)

I Then carried out a couple of tests the results are as follows -

TEST 1
I ONLY removed the MMC callout from the 'FEATURE 1 (hole Pattern)'

original POS|DIA0.016(M)|A|B(M)

changed to       POS|DIA0.016(M)|A|B

The feature now PASSES

TEST 2

I ONLY changed the 'DATUM B' callout so that 'DATUM B' would pass.

original POS|DIA0.0005(M)|A

changed to       POS|DIA0.007(M)|A

Both 'DATUM B' and 'FEATURE 1' guages PASS.

Is this what you would expect to happen with an MMC call out?
If the Datum B fails and has an MMC callout, should ALL other tolerances that use this tolerance also FAIL?
 

RE: MMC on datums

Hello ja500

As my crystal ball is in for its annual service is there any chance you could upload a file which shows us what it is your talking about.

regards

desetfox

RE: MMC on datums

ja500,

There appears to be some jargon (code words or phrases) in your description of the problem that someone may recognize and therefore be able to respond...    

Quote:

...BUT the deviations shown in qualify PASS the guage shown.

Quote:

If these tolernaces are viewd in 'Insight then...

but for me your description is sort of muddy.

Are you using hard attribute gages?
Are you using software that simulates hard gages?
Are you comparing the results of hard and soft gage results?

One thing that I can tell you is that if you are using software to simulate hard gage results then there are often failure modes to the analysis routines that prevent erroneous results from propogating in the analysis i.e. when a datum feature size fails then its permissable contribution to "datum shift" will also fail.

As desertfox said, could you be more specific in describing the problem? What type of gages are you using? Can you describe or show the specification being measured?...  

paul

RE: MMC on datums

ja500,

For the benefit of those on the forum who are not coordinate metrologists, you need to explain the general situation and some of the terminology you're using.

By the sounds of it, you have some 3D point data collected with a laser tracker and you are analyzing it with different software packages.  By "insight" I assume you mean the SMX/Faro Insight software that comes with the laser tracker.  By "qualify" I assume you mean the Geomagic Qualify software, which is a post-processor that does soft gaging.

Your issue is that one or both of these software packages automatically fails any FCF that references a datum feature that fails one of its requirements?  Is that correct?

Evan Janeshewski

Axymetrix Quality Engineering Inc.
www.axymetrix.ca

RE: MMC on datums

(OP)
evan,

Yes my issue is that one or both of these software packages automatically fails any FCF that references a datum feature that fails one of its requirements MMC requirements. Is this what you would expect to happen?
 

RE: MMC on datums

ja500:

Yes. If the datum feature fails a requirement then one does not have a datum and any FCF that references that datum also fails.

Dave D.
www.qmsi.ca

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