Relative sizes of PLTZF and FLTZF tolerances?

| LinkedIn

http://www.linkedin.com/groups/Relative-sizes-PLTZF-FLTZF-toleran...

Applied Geometrics GD&T Connection

Discussions Promotions Jobs Search More... Discussion | Poll

Have something to say?

Share Discussion Join LinkedIn In

Join LinkedIn for free to participate in the conversation. When you join, you can comment and post Or Sign your own discussions.

Relative sizes of PLTZF and FLTZF tolerances?

The standard seems to indicate that the PLTZF tolerance must always be larger than that of the FLTZF. Is this truly a mandated restriction? Why? I'm asking because I have a pattern that is used for a machine-vision application. The vision system captures the positions of the features and computes the center point. As long as that center point (the average of all the positions) is precisely where it needs to be, the individual features can actually wander a fair amount. So it's the overall pattern that I care about. Must I more tightly tolerance the individual features just to meet "the letter of the law"? Is there a practial reason why I must?
1 day ago

Greg

Like

Comment

Follow

Flag

More

7 comments
ads not by this site

Swapnil G. Hello Greg, Yes, PLTZF is always larger tolerance than FRTZF. FRTZF is always refinement of the PLTZF.
Swapnil

Here's to simplify the things: if you add regular single segment frame of position tolerance, it will control location directly and orientation for free of cost. Exa. if you added a position tolerance of dia 1mm, location & orientation will get controled within dia 1mm tolerance cylinder. But sometimes, we are not ok with same orientation value or inter-relationship between features (maybe simply the max & min distance between produced imperfect holes). One will use composite tolerance (PLTZF & FRTZF) only when its okay to have liberal location tolerance but tighter orientation and inter-relation between pattern features. Let's say the part you have has pattern of holes. Meaning of adding composite tolerance is they can go off-location more, but still the mating part will assemble in those holes because we controlled inter-relationship with features with each other more tightly. If you can send some picture, it will be very easy to explain / mark-up. Hope this is of some help to you. Swapnil [email protected]
1 day ago

Manager's Choice Announcement from Uncle Norm

Norm C. See all

Group Statistics
Director Manager

CHECK OUT INSIGHTFUL STATISTICS

ON THIS GROUP

Entry

MEMBERS

Murugaperumal R. Hello Greg PLTZF tolerance must be larger than FLTZF. It is a functional requirement of a part having pattern of holes can be positioned using more tolerances with respect to the datum and tight tolerance within the feature. Take an example of positioning a name plate having 4 pattern of holes to mount it in a board. The requirement of the name plate is to be positioned with respect to the datum and it should match with the four holes in the board. So the pattern of holes can have more tolerances with respect to the datum and tight tolerance with in the feature to match with in four holes in board Regards MP.
1 day ago

3,759
View Group Statistics

Murugaperumal

Greg F. Greg, If you were to have larger tolerances in the lower segment/FRTZF, those larger tolerances would not be meaningful, because the individual features must still satisfy the tolerances in the upper segment/PLTZF. My first concern would be whether the dimensioning and tolerancing scheme being applied was truly based upon the functional needs of the product, or whether it was being based upon an inspection scheme. I suspect that it may be the latter? If what you are describing truly represents the functional requirements, a

Greg

1 of 3

30-03-2013 07:03

Relative sizes of PLTZF and FLTZF tolerances? | LinkedIn

http://www.linkedin.com/groups/Relative-sizes-PLTZF-FLTZF-toleran...

Mark

Mark F. Greg F is right. The first couple of responses describe how a Composite position works, and Greg H, you were misunderstanding what the PLTZF does, so the explanation of how a Composite Position tolerance works was necessary. But as Greg F noted, if what Greg H described as the truly functional requirements actually are the truly functional requirements, then Composite is the wrong tool for the job. So first, just to clarify and consolodate the other responders' explanations of how the PLTZF and FRTZF work, you need to understand that the PLTZF does NOT orient/locate some imaginary construct of the "center of the pattern" of features. It is simply a positional requirement for each of the features within the pattern to a datum reference frame -- just like any single-line Position feature control frame would do. The FRTZF simply refines the location of the features within the pattern to each other as well as orientation to any datum references. The COMBINED EFFECT of the PLTZF and the FRTZF is to locate the pattern "loosely" (i.e. more loosely than the FRTZF) and to orient/locate the features to each other more "tightly." So you could think of the PLTZF/FRTZF (i.e. the composite FCF) having located the "center of the pattern," but I would advise against looking at it that way because that is not how it is defined. With that, now let's look at how to really specify your true design requirement where you have a very loose tolerance for the feature-to-feature orientation/location within your pattern of features, but you want to keep the "center of the pattern" located to some other datum features more loosely. If I'm understanding what you are describing correctly, it seems to me that you should be using the pattern of features itself as the datum feature, and then locating other features of the part relative to the datum reference frame defined by that pattern of features. So then you could have just a single-line feature control frame for the loosely-toleranced position of the features to each other, attach your datum feature symbol to that position feature control frame (thus defining the pattern of features as a datum feature), and then relate whatever other features need to be relative to the datum reference frame you have just defined.
21 hours ago

Greg H. Thanks, all. Greg, you're on the right track with your supposition that this is more of an inspection scheme than a typical assembly issue, In this case, however, the requirements of each are not mutually exclusive. We have a vision guidance system used for assembly that looks at one of the located arrays and uses an algorithm to compute a derived center point. That derived center point is then used as the "go to" target for the motion system to achieve a properly aligned placement of the part to be assembled. So, my abuse of the definition is actually based on functional reality. I've had the strong feeling, however, that I was perhaps headed down the wrong road considering use of either a composite positional tolerance or two single-segment feature control frames, so I'm glad I asked. I wish LinkedIn allowed me to post a picture, but I think perhaps I can draw an adequate "word picture" using a familiar reference to do the job: Picture the front grill of an old-school Willys Jeep: A headlight on either side of seven vertical slots. (Google image search "Jeep grill" if you haven't looked a Jeep in the face lately.) Bottom center is a license plate with some sort of graphic in the center of the numbers. That's essentially analogous to the geometry I'm wrestling with, except in my case it's a bit of a mutant Jeep with four equal-sized headlights forming a 2X2 array and the seven grill slots bisected horizontally such that they form a 7x2 array. My intended primary datum is the rear surface of the grill (the side facing the radiator), restricting the translation DOF along the longitudinal axis of the Jeep and rotation about the vertical and transverse axes. The secondary datum is the graphic at the center of the license plate, restricting translation along the transverse and vertical axes. The tertiary datum is established by the height dimension of the license plate, restricting rotation about the longitudinal axis. The position of the grill slot array as a whole can be loosely toleranced with respect to the license plate graphic, but each slot relative to the others must have much tighter positional tolerances. So that would seem to be a great application for either a composite positional tolerance frame or a two single segment frame. But which? (Incidentally, I don't care nearly as much where the slots fall along the vertical axis relative to either the license plate graphic or each other as I do about their slot to slot position along the transverse axis.) The center of the headlight array must be very precisely located relative to the center of the grill slot array along the transverse axis, but that's really all that matters about that array.So it seems to me that Mark's suggestion of using the grill slot array as a datum for the head light array is indeed the way to go, but at that point, I have a very imperfect grasp on how things should work. Using the rear surface of my grill as the primary datum again, I again restrict the same one translation and two rotations as before. But does using the grill slot array as a datum restrict the remaining three by itself? And then what position control would be best for the position of the head light

Greg

2 of 3

30-03-2013 07:03

Relative sizes of PLTZF and FLTZF tolerances? | LinkedIn

http://www.linkedin.com/groups/Relative-sizes-PLTZF-FLTZF-toleran...

Mark

Mark F. Interesting issue, Greg, and I agree with you that I wish LinkedIn would allow for attachments in this group. You did a creative job of painting the word picture, but I still feel like I need a drawing to ponder your true design requirements. If you would, please email me anything you can to help me see your issue, and then I will try to comment back to the group. [email protected]. Thanks.
19 hours ago

Greg H. Thanks, Mark. I'll take you up on it. Hopefully no "lurkers" are waiting with baited breath to also see the answer. I'm sending you a PDF format file called "The Mutant Jeep.pdf" via email that contains a final page that contains only a non-annotated representation of my "Jeep grill" just in case you might want to doodle on it.
15 hours ago

Greg

Have something to say?

Join LinkedIn In

Join LinkedIn for free to participate in the conversation. When you join, you can comment and post Or Sign your own discussions.

Help Center

About

Press

Blog

Careers

Advertising

Talent Solutions

Tools

Mobile

Developers Groups Directory

Copyright Policy

Publishers

Language

SlideShare

LinkedIn Updates

LinkedIn Influencers

LinkedIn Jobs
Privacy Policy

Jobs Directory

Company Directory
Cookie Policy

Skills Directory

Title Directory

LinkedIn Corporation 2013

User Agreement

Community Guidelines

3 of 3

30-03-2013 07:03