×
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

width of pattern slots as datum

width of pattern slots as datum

width of pattern slots as datum

(OP)
Hi,

A simplified sketch attached. My question is, how do I call out the widths of the two rows of slots as datum feature B, which establishes the center plane of the distance 30 as datum. I looked through the '09 standard and could not find similar case. I guess I should not attach the datum feature symbol B to the basic dim 30, so is the datum feature B callout shown right way to go?

Thanks

RE: width of pattern slots as datum

Quote:

I guess I should not attach the datum feature symbol B to the basic dim 30

Why not?

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

RE: width of pattern slots as datum

You can attach datum feature symbol to Position FCF to indicate that all 6 slots form datum (Feature pattern datum)

You can attach it to basic dimension 30 as ewh suggested.

You can also do it the way shown on the picture.

All three will have slightly different meaning, but will refer to “centroid” of the pattern.


RE: width of pattern slots as datum

(OP)
Because the basic dim 30 is not a touchable feature.

RE: width of pattern slots as datum

(OP)
ewh, checkerhater,
Attaching a datum feature symbol to basic dim 30 is like attaching a datum feature symbol to a basic dia. of bolt circle. I don't see it is supported by para 3.3.2 in '09 std.

checkerhater,
what is the difference between the first and second case as you suggested?

RE: width of pattern slots as datum

@bxbzq:

I see both as example of Patern of features, which isn't exactly "touchable feature".

The 1 is more conventional, but doesn't make it clear, what is the direction of datum.

The 2 gives the sense of direction, but looks "unusual".

About "bolt circle": when dealing with pattern of touchable features it is not explicitly forbidden to refer to line, connecting said features. Look at Fig. 4-23 in '09. So why not bolt circle?

RE: width of pattern slots as datum

Fig 4-23 is still clearly addressing physical features, so it passes muster with paragraph 3.3.2 (although that doesn't explicitly say "phantom line").
A bolt circle through the axes of holes, however, doesn't seem to comply with 3.3.2.

For the OP's sketch, I suppose what you have already does what you want. Grabbing the inner edges of the slots is not the same as making a datum from their widths.

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

RE: width of pattern slots as datum

Under what functional scenario is it beneficial to make the pattern of slots a single datum? For that matter, when would it be beneficial to make a pattern of holes into a single datum? Where would the origins of those datums be? Sorry, but I've never fully understood the how and the why of these "pattern" datums.

Tunalover

RE: width of pattern slots as datum

When I look at multiple features acting as a single datum I think of the fixture that would simulate that datum. If it's a pattern of holes, the fixture will have a pattern of pins. It isn't necessary to have any particular location or orientation derived from the holes; as long as the reference to the datums can be seen as related to the datum simulator, that is good enough. The confusion is that the datums don't move, the part does; it only looks like datums follow the parts around.

For a clear example of deriving, look at the figure where there is a sloped feature that is met with a sloped datum simulator, but the datum itself is not sloped.

The problem that comes from multiple features are from two sides.

First, if the features are referred to as RFS, it used to be indistinct if they are to be simulated with exactly simultaneously expanding pins that stop expanding once location and orientation are set or if some other condition should happen. I dislike the use of this case because I haven't seen a real application where multiple simultaneous expanding features would mate with a part.

Second, if they are MMC or MMB or whatever the new terms are, then the location and orientation of the part relative to the datum simulator are not unique, which presents a problem with CMM software looking for a single answer from which to derive an exact reference frame. This case is similar to the case when only a single hole is used, but CMM software can be written to handle the special cases of a single hole or a single slot; randomly located and shaped features requires a more sophisticated approach.

RE: width of pattern slots as datum

Hi All,

Several interesting issues brought up here. Here are some thoughts:

First, I would say that the first drawing is at least well defined. The simulators would be four sets of parallel planes that grow and shrink simultaneously, and whose centerplanes are basically located. This would be difficult to accomplish physically, and it seems unlikely that the mating part would interface in this way. The datum isn't exactly the centerplane of the basic 30 distance - it's a centerplane derived from the four simulators.

I agree that the datum feature symbol should not be attached to the basic 30 dimension. When I think of situations like that, or like the bolt circle example, I try to think of what would be done if the basic dimension was not present (as in the case of an annotated model in which the CAD data is basic). The datum feature symbol would have to be associated with particular features. This is why the original drawing works - the pattern of four width features is clearly defined. For a bolt circle example, the datum feature symbol would be associated with a pattern of holes or pins.

Evan Janeshewski

Axymetrix Quality Engineering Inc.
www.axymetrix.ca

RE: width of pattern slots as datum

(OP)
Glad I'm not alone.

RE: width of pattern slots as datum

tunalover,
Anytime a pattern of clearance holes is actually the sole locator of a part in an assembly, I feel it truly represents the "functional" requirement to state the pattern as a datum (usually a secondary, at MMB). However, I am not saying it is easier for manufacturing or inspection. It has, therefore, been been a very traditional practice to compromise function for manufacturing/inspection convenience, particularly due to the effect of "the datum virtual condition rule" and the "simultaneous requirement".
Frank

RE: width of pattern slots as datum

Frank,
Thanks for shedding light on that! I'll stick to using surfaces, edges, and the occasional hole as datum simulators for hole patterns.
TL

Tunalover

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