"inspection software doesn't follow the standard"

[ptruitt]

In another thread, Jim said "... inspection software doesn't follow the standard in most cases." I also heard this from an instructor and another individual who leads 'Quality' for a large medical instrument company. They both agreed that one brand of software does the best job meeting ASME Y14.5-2009. A major issue seemed to be with RAME and UAME. Do others agree that RAME and UAME are the major issues with the software and, if not, what are other the major issues?

Peter Truitt
Minnesota

 

[ctopher]

I have not used inspection software.
Which thread is the comment from?
I read this one quickly, not sure if it.
thread1103-304751

Chris
SolidWorks 11
ctopher's home
SolidWorks Legion

 

[fsincox]

What brand is that?

 

[ptruitt]

Referenced thread : "Y14.5.1 Standard - Mathematical Definitions"
Software: Smart Profile

Peter Truitt
Minnesota

 

[axym]

Peter,

I would agree that the treatment of RAME's is a major issue with many softwares. Most or all softwares can find the UAME of a feature reasonably well - it's a relatively simple algorithm. But many softwares are not able to calculate a RAME (Related Actual Mating Envelope) properly. This is critical for the proper treatment of secondary and tertiary datum features, to allow the software to arrive at the same result that a functional gage would.

There are other issues as well, perhaps in another post.

Evan Janeshewski

Axymetrix Quality Engineering Inc.

http://www.axymetrix.ca