几何尺寸与公差论坛------致力于产品几何量公差标准GD&T (GDT:ASME)|New GPS(ISO)研究/CAD设计/CAM加工/CMM测量  


返回   几何尺寸与公差论坛------致力于产品几何量公差标准GD&T (GDT:ASME)|New GPS(ISO)研究/CAD设计/CAM加工/CMM测量 » Norm Space: Product Automatic Standards - 范数空间:产品自动化标准 » GD&T standards » Standard training » tec-ease(America)
用户名
密码
注册 帮助 会员 日历 银行 搜索 今日新帖 标记论坛为已读


回复
 
主题工具 搜索本主题 显示模式
旧 2009-09-04, 05:44 PM   #1
huangyhg
超级版主
 
huangyhg的头像
 
注册日期: 04-03
帖子: 18592
精华: 36
现金: 249466 标准币
资产: 1080358888 标准币
huangyhg 向着好的方向发展
默认 datum selection based on manufacturing or upper level assemb

datum selection based on manufacturing or upper level assemb
just wanted an opinion on this one...
this is my thought on the subject.
plate with a hole in the center.
the center hole is created by holding the bottom surface and 2 sides.
the plate is assembled by placing a bolt to the hole and clamping against the large bottom surface
i would do the following:
bottom of the plate has primary
the hole as secondary
possibly one edge has tertiary (if needed)
some people follow the manufacturing method.
bottom as primary
side as secondary
side as tertiary
any thoughts on this??
eng-tips forums is member supported.
if the hole is effectively the critical feature i'd probably use it.
we have cassettes that are located by a pin through a hole. on the drawings of the cassettes we use the hole as the secondary datum if i recall correctly.
function/inspection of the part is more important in the dimensioning scheme than manufacture.
you could perhaps make the face and sides datums a, b & c then make the hole datum d and relate other features to it. depends on the function/design of the specific part though.
but.... the datums should be defined by part functionality.
not in an attempt to mimic the manufacturing method.
that was the point i was trying to make and didn't mean to imply otherwise.
hierarchy in dimensioning is:
function
inspection
manufacture
of course as there's no point putting a requirement you can't inspect or otherwise verify it almost ranks equal to function.
you are correct by using the hole as a secondary and the mounting face as the primary datum. if the part is assemetrical, then a tertiary is a must and probably another hole should be used rather than a side.
manufacturing must somehow follow your datum set and not change it.
dave d.
i use the datums based on how the parts are assembled to each other, not per manufacturing.
chris
solidworks 06 5.1/pdmworks 06
autocad 06
datums should always be developed by the function of the part. that is it!!
dave d.
of course!
but you need to look at how the part is assembled in relation to a mating part ... not to a machine.
it is all i was trying to say.
chris
solidworks 06 5.1/pdmworks 06
autocad 06
theedudenator,
what is it that you are looking for thoughts on?
promoting, selling, recruiting and student posting
are not allowed in the forums.
(add stickiness to your site by linking to this professionally managed technical forum)
title: drafting standards,
description: drafting standards, gd&t & tolerance analysis technical support forum and mutual help system for engineering professionals. selling and recruiting forbidden.
__________________
借用达朗贝尔的名言:前进吧,你会得到信心!
[url="http://www.dimcax.com"]几何尺寸与公差标准[/url]
huangyhg离线中   回复时引用此帖
GDT自动化论坛(仅游客可见)
回复


主题工具 搜索本主题
搜索本主题:

高级搜索
显示模式

发帖规则
不可以发表新主题
不可以回复主题
不可以上传附件
不可以编辑您的帖子

vB 代码开启
[IMG]代码开启
HTML代码关闭

相似的主题
主题 主题发起者 论坛 回复 最后发表
datum definition and datum usage huangyhg tec-ease(America) 0 2009-09-04 05:40 PM
【转帖】positional tolerance and datum precedence yang686526 American standards 0 2009-04-29 09:22 PM
【转帖】ordinate dimensions to define gdt datum structure yang686526 American standards 0 2009-04-29 09:04 PM
【转帖】asme - where to star yang686526 American standards 0 2009-04-29 07:28 PM
【转帖】complex datum schemes for non-rigid parts yang686526 American standards 0 2009-04-29 07:00 PM


所有的时间均为北京时间。 现在的时间是 12:54 AM.


于2004年创办,几何尺寸与公差论坛"致力于产品几何量公差标准GD&T | GPS研究/CAD设计/CAM加工/CMM测量"。免责声明:论坛严禁发布色情反动言论及有关违反国家法律法规内容!情节严重者提供其IP,并配合相关部门进行严厉查处,若內容有涉及侵权,请立即联系我们QQ:44671734。注:此论坛须管理员验证方可发帖。
沪ICP备06057009号-2
更多