×
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!

*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

Value of secondary B in the circular runout

Value of secondary B in the circular runout

Value of secondary B in the circular runout

(OP)



I had a dispute with the author few days ago on about the value added of secondary datum feature B in the circular runout in the unless otherwise specified note.

Do you think B is provided any value as a secondary datum feature in the circular runout?

I would love to hear your opinions.
Thank you very much.

Disclaimer: do not focus on the other mishaps on the embedded drawing nor on the comments shown on the face of the print. Just strictly on the circular runot note.

RE: Value of secondary B in the circular runout

greenimi,

Theoretically the constraint provided by datum feature B of the translational DOF along the axis of datum feature A shouldn't have an impact, however in reality it depends on what exactly datum feature A is meant to be as currently it is (as noted) applied incorrectly to the axis as well as what the assembly condition is. If it is meant to be the stubby diameter (40 -.025/-.064) to the right of the flange face (datum feature B) I think you'll find that the reality of the high diameter to length ratio will cause some issues during measurement if only datum feature A is utilized.

Furthermore it is highly likely that the assembly condition would dictate that the flat flange face datum feature B should be primary - if you note in Y14.5-2009 pretty much all of the examples utilizing a flat face as a datum feature have it as primary for this reason. Take a look at fig 9-7 for what seems to be a similar case with a flat mating face and what looks to be bolt holes.

RE: Value of secondary B in the circular runout

(OP)
My point then and now was/is, if in theory B, as a secondary does nothing then in practice someone shouldn't put use it as such in the first place.
We have to understand the theory first before we can have any hope to apply such of said theory in any sort of practical way.

All the examples for runout in 2009 standard show the plannar surface used primary and NOT secondary (as it is in my picture).
I wouldn't have any problem with B being used primary.

RE: Value of secondary B in the circular runout

greenimi,

With such a short length of engagement, I think it would probably be difficult to reliably simulate datum feature A without some amount of contact on datum feature B even if it doesn't change the outcome. I don't know if I would say theres anything inherently wrong with adding it though, even if its extraneous - and especially if it reflects part function/assembly. For example, additional datum feature references can be added to the lower frames of a composite tolerance even if they don't constrain any additional rotational DOF and have no impact on the behavior of the tolerance zone - I wouldn't call this wrong though. A restraint note to restrain the part to B could be added that would no longer make datum feature B extraneous, however that would probably be bad practice as it would fight the primary datum feature A for constraint of DOF - B should probably be primary in this case.

Quote (greenimi, 30 Aug 19 09:04)

All the examples for runout in 2009 standard show the plannar surface used primary and NOT secondary (as it is in my picture).
I wouldn't have any problem with B being used primary.

Right, I was trying to suggest that although B is shown as secondary in the print you have provided, changing it to primary might better reflect part function and assembly condition as well as mitigate some of the issues with trying to simulate a feature with such a high *diameter/length ratio at RMB.

RE: Value of secondary B in the circular runout

I was the same ignoramus that put the datum on the centerline,

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! Already a Member? Login


Resources

Solutions Brief - Protecting and Rescuing On-Ground Personnel
Keeping our warfighters safe and delivering them a competitive advantage is a key goal of departments of defense around the world. It’s a goal shared by embedded computing manufacturers like Abaco: we never forget who we serve.This case study describes how a major international contractor integrated an Abaco single board computer at the heart of its CAS/CSAR solution. Download Now
Datasheet - Top Enhancements Creo 7.0
PTC's Creo 7.0 has breakthrough innovations in the areas of generative design, real-time simulation, multibody design, additive manufacturing, and more! With Creo 7.0, you will be able to design the most innovative products faster than ever before, keeping you on the cutting edge of product design and ahead of your competition. Download Now

Close Box

Join Eng-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close