×
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

Reference datum on position and profile callout
2

Reference datum on position and profile callout

Reference datum on position and profile callout

(OP)
Please ref to the attached sketch, there is no doubt a reference datum should be on the perpendicularity callout, my questions :

1. Are there any problems on the 2nd hole referenced datum? Why not include the planar datum B?
2. Can we call out the profile with referenced datum A and C as shown?

Thanks for your assists.

Season

RE: Reference datum on position and profile callout

Since we do not know the function it is hard to second guess. If we assume the person knew what they wanted, then, I suspect only small portions of B are used in the assembly so a primary reference to B would be more for manufacturing purposes. That leads me to the same question I always grapple with in these situations; do I do it anyway just because, well, it is actually made that way?

The perpendicularity on the bores it seems to indicate they are already leading in that direction, otherwise why not just do a parallel to A on the second hole.
Frank

RE: Reference datum on position and profile callout

Doesn’t make much sense to me.
It looks almost like creator of the drawing was afraid to invoke unnecessary simultaneous requirements.
I would reference everything to [B] (perpendicularity), and [A|B|C] (the rest), and apply SEP REQ if needed. Possibly added perpendicularity of feature C to B.

RE: Reference datum on position and profile callout

Am I missing a point?? How can you have a PERPENDICULAR (or any angular) call-out without any datum?? Perpendicular to what??
The GD&T scheme to me is not very "repeatable" either. I wouldn't choose that surface as Datum C to constrain the rotation. Again, hard to assume without knowing the function of the part.

RE: Reference datum on position and profile callout

CH,
Calling "B" out as a secondary datum, in this case, means is just for show then, does it not? I am interested to see what others generally do in a situation like this, if we assume, the majority of surface "B" is just clearance.
Frank

RE: Reference datum on position and profile callout

The drawing looks messed up a little.

My feeling is that B should be referenced as primary datum feature in positional FCF for the 2nd hole. It should also be used as a datum feature reference in both perpendicularity callouts, like you already mentioned.

As for controlling entire contour of the part with profile tolerance wrt |A|C|, I also have some doubts. One of them is: why is A referenced at MMB in positional callout on the 2nd hole and in the same time is referenced at RMB in the profile callouts? That looks at least strange.

There are a couple of ways to dimension this part. Mentioning just two:
1. Use datum features B and A only and tie the 2nd hole with part outline through simultaneous requirements, so that the tertiary datum feature is not needed at all. The hole would be controlled by position FCF wrt |B|A|, and the contour by two profile FCFs wrt |B|A|. A could be referenced at MMB, if it was functionally justified. (This is my favorite here).
2. Use datum features B, A and C, control the contour with two profile FCFs wrt |B|A| and the 2nd hole by position FCF wrt |B|A|C|. Similar to #1, but not exacly equivalent.

At the end of the day, the proper choice of datum features selection and dimensioning approach should be based on part's functionality. To me it looks like the author of the drawing did not take this factor into account.

RE: Reference datum on position and profile callout

Tarator,
I agree that the perpendicularity must imply "B", I am just taking that as given!
Frank

RE: Reference datum on position and profile callout

Frank,

B is not "for show", B arrests degrees of freedom.

A and B (or B and A) together arrest 5 out of 6.

RE: Reference datum on position and profile callout

If you define Datum B, but don't use it in any FCF, it basically is useless, aka does not arrest anything.

RE: Reference datum on position and profile callout

CH,
Not as a secondary datum, it better not! It stops translation along one axis, it is a high point of a surface.
Frank

RE: Reference datum on position and profile callout

Sorry, I guess if "A" (primary) is referenced MMB it is not as clear.
Frank

RE: Reference datum on position and profile callout

Do you have a pic/sketch of the assembly (mating components)? What version are you using, 1994 or 2009?
Does datum feature B mate/touch with any component?

RE: Reference datum on position and profile callout

(OP)
They are using 1994 std. As Frank said only a small portion on both sides of pivot hole used for assembly and function, sorry for no picture or sketch provide.

Season

RE: Reference datum on position and profile callout

Quote (fsincox)

Not as a secondary datum, it better not!

Judging from A being called perpendicular, it's definitely primary. [A|C] frames should become [B|A|C] (did you notice "B and A" option in my post from 16:09?)

Also Frank, I don't see datum targets or any other symbology proving your theory that "only a small portion on both sides of pivot hole used for assembly and function".

RE: Reference datum on position and profile callout

CH,
I said it looked like they wanted to use "B", but didn't and "SPECULATED" that that is because the whole surface is mosty clearance. Then, I was asking if others use "B" as a primary, do mostly then to it's importance as a manufacturing datum in making the part.
Frank

RE: Reference datum on position and profile callout

Well, they demanded the entire surface of B to be flat, so I “speculated” that entire surface of B is equally important.
Perpendicularity of A could only be wrt B, everybody agreed.
Now, could you imagine functional requirement that A is perpendicular to B, and second hole is parallel to A but NOT perpendicular to B?
Same logic applies to profile callout. If functional requirement actually was for profile NOT to be square to B, I would explicitly specify it somehow.
I am not implying you are wrong; just my chain of speculations is going in slightly different direction, smile

RE: Reference datum on position and profile callout

(OP)
CH

Thanks for you comments and agree what you said.
One more question : will you use planar feature B or the pivot hole datum feature A as primary datum on both position and profile callout FCF?

Season

RE: Reference datum on position and profile callout

I would use B.
I mentioned order A-B-C in my first post in the hurry, but I take it back. sad
B-A-C like in post from 6:18

RE: Reference datum on position and profile callout

I agree on B/A/C GD&T scheme. However, I wouldn't use the whole planar surface as datum feature B. I would use target areas around the datum feature A (both sides!!!), so the datum B would be the center plane. According to what I get regarding the function of this part, that seems to be the best approcah to me.

RE: Reference datum on position and profile callout

Please re-think your + .005/ -.000 lower tolerance for the .190 dia DATUM A. If you wish to keep it, you should add MMB in the FCF.

RE: Reference datum on position and profile callout

Slipstream -- do you mean MMC, rather than MMB?
(Datum A, where referenced, already has MMB. And the perpendicularity of that hole can't use MMB because datum B is a plane.)

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

RE: Reference datum on position and profile callout

(OP)
We all agreed the DRF would be B|A(M)|C, and I am trying to talk with our customer to accept it, if our customer says they prefer to use the hole as primary datum, i.e. A(M)|B|C, then how will you convince the customer to accept our scenario B|A(M)|C (based on the function of the part as I posted at 10-16-13). Thanks for the inputs.

Season

RE: Reference datum on position and profile callout

What are you "selling" to your customer? Your design or you manufacture the part for them?

RE: Reference datum on position and profile callout

(OP)
We are an OEM supplier in Los Angeles California, the part manufactured in Asia, the original design with plus and minus toleranced was made at 1990, now they are trying to convert it to a GD&T toleranced part, from the earlier posts you will agree the customer encountered some problems on the print converting, I am just trying to help them to do it correctly.

Season

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