×
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

Tertiary Modifier is B(MMC)- C(MMC)?

Tertiary Modifier is B(MMC)- C(MMC)?

Tertiary Modifier is B(MMC)- C(MMC)?

(OP)
I've come across a feature control frame for positional tolerance, where the tertiary modififier shows B(MMC)- C(MMC).

What does this imply? If more info is needed, please specify what.

Thanks!

RE: Tertiary Modifier is B(MMC)- C(MMC)?

You may need to post it to help us interpret.  Sometimes a datum is derived from 2 datum features.  However, this is also sometimes mis used so without seeing your application it's difficult to know.  Also, what GD&T standard?

Posting guidelines FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm? (probably not aimed specifically at you)
What is Engineering anyway: FAQ1088-1484: In layman terms, what is "engineering"?

RE: Tertiary Modifier is B(MMC)- C(MMC)?

(OP)
Yes fcsuper, you are correct. I will provide a snapshot of the feature control frame when I get the chance.

RE: Tertiary Modifier is B(MMC)- C(MMC)?

I would wonder about a compound datum for a tertiary reference. You should only be removing the last degree of freedom, the need to reference two featurs of the part should not be needed for that.

Peter Stockhausen
Senior Design Analyst (Checker)
Infotech Aerospace Services
www.infotechpr.net

RE: Tertiary Modifier is B(MMC)- C(MMC)?

rvenzon,

   The datums B and C are (ought to be?) features of size.  The tolerance applies when datums B and C are at MMC.  

   Compound datums allow you to use two or more features to define a face, a centre, or an edge.  This makes sense for primary and secondary datums.  I do not reject the possibiliy that this could be a valid callup, but I would want to see the drawing.

   I am trying to visualize how this might work.  The primary datum could be a face.  The secondary datum could be a centre.  The tertiary datum could be an axis used for clocking?  

               JHG

RE: Tertiary Modifier is B(MMC)- C(MMC)?

(OP)
Working on getting a visual for you guys to go by. Thanks for the input so far.

RE: Tertiary Modifier is B(MMC)- C(MMC)?

(OP)
Here is a snap shot of the feature frame. It occurs several times, all in reference to a hole or bore.

Some additional information:

Datum [A] is 3 surfaces on the same plane.
Datum [B] is a hole with a perpendicularity tolerance to [A]
Datum [C] is a hole with a positional tolerance to [A] & [B]

Sorry I have to be a bit vauge with providing visuals for you guys as I have customer proprietary MBD.

RE: Tertiary Modifier is B(MMC)- C(MMC)?

(OP)
Primary Datum [G] is the face that sits perpendicular to the .6247 hole, and Secondary Datum [F] is the face of a surface which sits perpendicular to a separate bore on a different axis than the Datum [G] face.

RE: Tertiary Modifier is B(MMC)- C(MMC)?

rvenzon,

   Is there any chance you can show us the datum features?  

   I would say that the FCF is valid, but this is meaningless.  Your datums should retain your part in all six degress of freedom, and there should not be redundant constraints.

               JHG

RE: Tertiary Modifier is B(MMC)- C(MMC)?

(OP)
My apologies... I really can't send captures of the actual model showing the datum features. Liability and legality reasons, that I'm sure most of you can understand.

If I still have trouble resolving this, I will mock up a model/drawing to show the locations and concept of whats in question and post to this thread.

Thanks again for the input.

RE: Tertiary Modifier is B(MMC)- C(MMC)?

rvenzon,

   I think you have provided enough to work with.

   Datum A is irrelevant, because you are not calling it up.

   By the sound of it, Datums G and F are non-parallel surfaces.  These locate your part in two orthogonal displacement axes, and three rotational axes.  You need positional reference for your tertiary datum.  

   The compound datum B and C does not make sense.  Your tertiary locator would be a diamond pin picking up either B or C.  Picking up both of them controls side to side displacement and rotation.  Your datum F already controls rotation.

   You could use B-C as a secondary datum and F as your tertiary.  That would make sense to me, although it is a horrible fixturing procedure.

   GD&T datums are fixturing specifications, not dimensioning references.  Most of your FCFs should specify the same datums.  Is is the drafter using different datums for each face of the part?

   Also, I think the MMC on the Ø.007" positional tolerance is hardly worth the trouble.  I do MMC on features with sizes that are sloppy in comparison to the positional tolerance.

     

               JHG

RE: Tertiary Modifier is B(MMC)- C(MMC)?

The FCF doesn't look illegal to me.  If B and C are holes, then the tertiary simulator will be a pattern of fixed-size pins.  This could constrain the last degree of freedom.

Whether the datum scheme captures the functional requirement is another question entirely.

Evan Janeshewski

Axymetrix Quality Engineering Inc.
www.axymetrix.ca

RE: Tertiary Modifier is B(MMC)- C(MMC)?

Axym, that's where I was losing myself.  I could see how you might be able to simulate a plane, even taking acount of the MMC, using pins.  

However, I was concerned about the theoretical plane.  Usually when you have a plane from a hole it's based on the axis.  This is fine for one hole.  However, for two holes to form the plane both axis have to be on the plane.  I suppose the for the theoretically perfect part this will be true.

So I suppose it is legit, though as you say, whether it reflects function is another matter.

Posting guidelines FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm? (probably not aimed specifically at you)
What is Engineering anyway: FAQ1088-1484: In layman terms, what is "engineering"?

RE: Tertiary Modifier is B(MMC)- C(MMC)?

KENAT,

Keep in mind that the theoretical planes are in the simulators, and the simulators are perfect.  So the two pins for our tertiary datum feature will have perfect spacing and perfect orientation and location to the higher precedence datums.

Evan Janeshewski

Axymetrix Quality Engineering Inc.
www.axymetrix.ca

RE: Tertiary Modifier is B(MMC)- C(MMC)?

axym,

   The only plane that is any use for fixturing is a real one that can be picked up by a pin.  A simulated plane may have some meaning on a drawing, but it is useless on an real part.  The FCF does not violate ASME Y14.5, but it is not a good specification.   

               JHG

RE: Tertiary Modifier is B(MMC)- C(MMC)?

drawoh,

On one of your posts you suggest that a line may be used for clocking.  Is that possible?  I thought clocking (orientation) properly expressed should be to a point.

   

RE: Tertiary Modifier is B(MMC)- C(MMC)?

"On one of your posts you suggest that a line may be used for clocking.  Is that possible?  I thought clocking (orientation) properly expressed should be to a point. "

Just pick a point on the line.

Peter Stockhausen
Senior Design Analyst (Checker)
Infotech Aerospace Services
www.infotechpr.net

RE: Tertiary Modifier is B(MMC)- C(MMC)?

Quote (ringman1):

On one of your posts you suggest that a line may be used for clocking.  Is that possible?  I thought clocking (orientation) properly expressed should be to a point.  

   I was speculating that the FCF could conceivably be valid.  I was not saying it is a good idea.

   How about this.  Datum_A is the bottom face.  Datum_B is a point at one end.  Datums_C and_D are holes, and are called up as a compound datum.  Holes_C and_D would be picked up in the fixture by diamond pins which would restrict side to side movement and rotation, but allow wiggling to and from datum_B.

   Another possibility is that datum_A is the bottom, datum_B is a radius at one end, and datums_C and_D are holes.  Datum_B locates the part in X and Y.  Compound datum_C-D is a pair of diamond pins on a slider such that the two holes are located to a specified angle.

   I think these are valid applications of datums as per ASME Y14.5M-1994, and I think this is horrible practise.   

               JHG

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