×
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

True position

True position

True position

(OP)
I need help interpreting a true position tolerence. It is a laser cut and formed part It is formed in the shape of an L with one leg being shorter than the other. It calls for 3 holes thru the short leg.( I hope you can picture this.) Now my question. The shorter leg is labeled as datum A and the tolerance on the hole says I have .014 true position to datum A. How do I measure true position of a hole if it is thru the datum? It doens't reference any other datums in the tolerance.

RE: True position

(OP)
I think I need to clarify. Datum A is the face of the short leg...not an edge.

RE: True position

It seems to be only controlling perpendicularity to A.

“Know the rules well, so you can break them effectively.”
-Dalai Lama XIV

RE: True position

SpecialtyMFG,

Does the specification apply to one hole, or to all three?

--
JHG

RE: True position

I get the same idea as drawoh. If the face of the short leg is datum feature A and the holes through that leg are positioned to datum A then all you're getting is a perpendicularity control.

In order for the control to apply to all three holes, the feature control frame has to be placed underneath the hole size callout AND the hole size has to be preceded by 3X or something indicating the size applies three times. There has to be some way that those holes are located from edges or from a center plane. How do you know where to put the holes on the short leg?

John Acosta, GDTP S-0731
Engineering Technician
Inventor 2013
Mastercam X6
Smartcam 11.1
SSG, U.S. Army
Taji, Iraq OIF II

RE: True position

You need to get rid of the comma in your link.

John Acosta, GDTP S-0731
Engineering Technician
Inventor 2013
Mastercam X6
Smartcam 11.1
SSG, U.S. Army
Taji, Iraq OIF II

RE: True position

(OP)
Anyone else having trouble viewing it? When I click on it it seems to work.

RE: True position

That worked.

This print is not correct in how it is calling out the hole diameters. The holes should be located from datum features using basic dimensions and they are not. If you want to locate the holes from the lower edge (1.6 basic dimension) then it needs to be specified as a datum feature. The feature control frame should then reference the holes with respect to A and whatever datum letter you assign to that edge.

John Acosta, GDTP S-0731
Engineering Technician
Inventor 2013
Mastercam X6
Smartcam 11.1
SSG, U.S. Army
Taji, Iraq OIF II

RE: True position

That goes for the .250 basic dimension from the left edge too.

John Acosta, GDTP S-0731
Engineering Technician
Inventor 2013
Mastercam X6
Smartcam 11.1
SSG, U.S. Army
Taji, Iraq OIF II

RE: True position

OK, so the position FCF of the holes is controlling perpendicularity to -A- and their relative location to each other.

The pattern of 3 holes then forms datum B.

However, unless I'm missing something I don't believe the 1.600 & .551 dimensions should be basic. The edge of the part is located from the hole pattern, not vice versa. This general concept applies elsewhere too.

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: True position

If that were the case then there should be a profile tolerance to locate the edge of the part from the holes. What am I not thinking about?ponder

John Acosta, GDTP S-0731
Engineering Technician
Inventor 2013
Mastercam X6
Smartcam 11.1
SSG, U.S. Army
Taji, Iraq OIF II

RE: True position

(OP)
Thanks. Now I don't know what to do. This is a hot job from a customer and its through production and waiting in quality and this particular customer doesn't like to hear they have bad prints.

RE: True position

No customer likes to hear that.

Production probably made the part as it was intended to be made but you checked the part per print, and you have found the problem. There is no reference to horizontal or vertical location via the feature control frame. Position callouts must be referenced back to datum features. All is this clearly stated in the standard so they really don't have a legitimate argument other than "We've never had a problem before." and that's not a legitimate argument.

An alternative is one that KENAT alluded to. You can reference the edges from the holes instead but that would require something else.

John Acosta, GDTP S-0731
Engineering Technician
Inventor 2013
Mastercam X6
Smartcam 11.1
SSG, U.S. Army
Taji, Iraq OIF II

RE: True position

powerhound - yeah you could go either way keep the dims basic & add profile control or I was thinking just lose the basic and invoke block tols however I have no idea of functionality etc. so who knows.

SpecialtyMFG, sorry this probably isn't much help to you. On the bright side a bad print can make it difficult for them to reject the parts too (at least from a strict legal point of view).

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: True position

While this is controlling perpendicularity, that's not the ONLY thing this position tolerance does. It is also controlling the position of the three holes to each other!

Since the 1.600 and .250 are basic, they should have other datums on there too. But just don't forget that a position tolerance -- when applied to two or more like features -- does not control only perpendicularity.

John-Paul Belanger
Certified Sr. GD&T Professional
Geometric Learning Systems

RE: True position

I initially refrained from saying that because I hadn't seen the print and wasn't sure if the 3X was there or not. Once I saw the print, I got sidetracked on the other issues and forgot to address this one. Thanks for clarifying it. It's definitely an important point.

John Acosta, GDTP S-0731
Engineering Technician
Inventor 2013
Mastercam X6
Smartcam 11.1
SSG, U.S. Army
Taji, Iraq OIF II

RE: True position

Actually Ken, you're usually right. A star for you my friend.

John Acosta, GDTP S-0731
Engineering Technician
Inventor 2013
Mastercam X6
Smartcam 11.1
SSG, U.S. Army
Taji, Iraq OIF II

RE: True position

My bad Kenat. I skimmed too fast over things :)

John-Paul Belanger
Certified Sr. GD&T Professional
Geometric Learning Systems

RE: True position

To me it looks like one of the set-ups that may be legal, but not very practical.
Lay part down on flat A. This is primary.
Add datum B; the part is going nowhere, it is fully constrained.
Basic .551 locates 4 holes pattern to datum A (left-right)
Basic 1.600 and basic .218 create a chain locating 4 hole pattern to datum B (up-down)
Everything is dimensioned and constrained in space.
It is possible to create a check fixture, it is possible to CMM 4 hole pattern in relation to A and B (correct me if I am wrong)
It is quite possible, that it is the correct “functional” requirement where positioning holes to each other is more important than how edges are related to the rest of the part.
Essentially only basic .25 looks out of place, it could be regular dimension.
The real question still (as usual) is it REALLY what the customer wants?

RE: True position

The 4 hole pattern must be centered on B. The .218 is irrelevant to the vertical location of the pattern. The horizontal location looks okay to me.

The 3 hole pattern is shown with a basic 1.600 from the bottom edge but that edge is not defined as a datum feature. The position callout only references datum A. There is no correct location of the 3 hole pattern, vertically or horizontally. The basic 1.600 means nothing per this print. In order for it to be relevant the bottom edge needs to be a datum feature and then the position callout needs to reference it. That goes for the left edge and the .250 basic as well.

John Acosta, GDTP S-0731
Engineering Technician
Inventor 2013
Mastercam X6
Smartcam 11.1
SSG, U.S. Army
Taji, Iraq OIF II

RE: True position

JP,
Sorry please, specifically recant that statement we need to be very clear on this as we have all been though this before!
The ISO made a similar statement and then we hear it was recanted!
Frank

RE: True position

Again, Frank, I would like to hear a clarification on what you want to recant. What J-P said is absolutely correct - I mean his comment about position callout controlling not only perpendicularity of holes to primary datum but also their mutual spacing.

RE: True position

JP and pmarc and all,
I MUST APOLOGIZE!, it thougHt it was the perpendicularity controls position debate, again
Frank

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