To begin, I am using PC DMIS 2016 SP 7 with LEGACY DIMENSIONING.
On this part, items 1,2, & 3 (see attached picture) pertain to what we call ISOfix wires. Basically another component latches onto these features and it is supposed to engage simultaneously, hence the composite FCF.
In item # 1,2 & 3 above, I need some additional opinions on how this FCF should be interpreted. The way I have been instructed by our gage engineer to understand this is that each one of these 'wires' individually (measured each as cylindrical features) is allowed to move within a positional Ø zone of 4.0 WITH respect to |A|B|C|. Then, a continuous feature is to be constructed using all of the points from both features and evaluated to itself, regardless of |A|B|C|. This I find hard to understand since I have always thought of the lower portion of a composite FCF as a refinement.
My interpretation of the drawing would be that both of these wires, based on the FCF having one position symbol, would be tied together in essence. Once each cylinder is measured, then the individual points on each feature would be extrac ted and combined into a constructed cylinder and evaluated to |A|B|C|, NOT as individual cylinders. As a refinement, the same cylinder would be evaluated again to fulfill the secondary segment of the FCF.
If I am correct, how am I to evaluate the lower portion of the FCF Ø2.2 on the CMM? In other words, how do I actually accomplish this in the software?
In the past, I have simply set my origin to one of the wires, and then dimensioned the other wire using the 2.2 positional tolerance. I have been informed that this is incorrect, so I have to come up with a different way that would be understandable to all involved.
Please offer any suggestions if this is something you might do regularly.
![Click image for larger version
Name: Image 15.jpg
Views: 1
Size: 19.1 KB
ID: 427263]()
On this part, items 1,2, & 3 (see attached picture) pertain to what we call ISOfix wires. Basically another component latches onto these features and it is supposed to engage simultaneously, hence the composite FCF.
In item # 1,2 & 3 above, I need some additional opinions on how this FCF should be interpreted. The way I have been instructed by our gage engineer to understand this is that each one of these 'wires' individually (measured each as cylindrical features) is allowed to move within a positional Ø zone of 4.0 WITH respect to |A|B|C|. Then, a continuous feature is to be constructed using all of the points from both features and evaluated to itself, regardless of |A|B|C|. This I find hard to understand since I have always thought of the lower portion of a composite FCF as a refinement.
My interpretation of the drawing would be that both of these wires, based on the FCF having one position symbol, would be tied together in essence. Once each cylinder is measured, then the individual points on each feature would be extrac ted and combined into a constructed cylinder and evaluated to |A|B|C|, NOT as individual cylinders. As a refinement, the same cylinder would be evaluated again to fulfill the secondary segment of the FCF.
If I am correct, how am I to evaluate the lower portion of the FCF Ø2.2 on the CMM? In other words, how do I actually accomplish this in the software?
In the past, I have simply set my origin to one of the wires, and then dimensioned the other wire using the 2.2 positional tolerance. I have been informed that this is incorrect, so I have to come up with a different way that would be understandable to all involved.
Please offer any suggestions if this is something you might do regularly.