Ah, I was completely neglecting that LMB includes the position tolerance of datum E, so now I see how RMB is the right choice. Thank you for that.
The follow on question then, is there any way of taking advantage of the size of Datum E when it's not at LMC? I could theoretically allow a larger...
I feel like I must be missing something here. If I specify RMB and my parts are at LMC, isn't my alignment the same as if I specify LMB and my parts are at LMC (no datum shift)? And then similarly, if I specify LMB, isn't my alignment the same between LMC with no datum shift vs MMC with a datum...
Burunduk,
If I choose RMB, won't my worst case alignment (when my parts are at LMC) be the same as if I used an LMB modifier? For all parts other than the ones that end up at LMC, I agree I would get better alignment. But if I must be prepared to accept parts at LMC why would I not allow the...
Hi all,
I'm looking for some guidance on a proposed tolerance scheme that uses a 2 hole pattern as a single datum and is referenced at LMB. As for as I can tell, this is legal per the 2009 standard, though maybe inadvisable for high volume production since it requires a CMM instead of a...
