Welcome to the Onshape forum! Ask questions and join in the discussions about everything Onshape.
First time visiting? Here are some places to start:- Looking for a certain topic? Check out the categories filter or use Search (upper right).
- Need support? Ask a question to our Community Support category.
- Please submit support tickets for bugs but you can request improvements in the Product Feedback category.
- Be respectful, on topic and if you see a problem, Flag it.
If you would like to contact our Community Manager personally, feel free to send a private message or an email.
tangential plane - ISO and ASME
aversario_aa
Member Posts: 4 ✭
Hi,
I'm working with ISO. Why wouldn't let me choose tangential modifier on a plane for true position?
edit: changed thread title to include ASME too. But be sure to read through comments.
I'm working with ISO. Why wouldn't let me choose tangential modifier on a plane for true position?
edit: changed thread title to include ASME too. But be sure to read through comments.
0
Best Answer
-
PeteYodis
Moderator, Onshape Employees Posts: 541 
@aversario_aa I have created a ticket and tied you to a bug I filed for us to make this correct for the newer ISO standard needs. Thanks for pointing this out. We'll get it supported.
ASME Y14.5 at least as of 2009 did have support for the tangential plane modifier, but there seems to be some uncertainty about what it can apply to. I have quite an extensive reference that mentions it is appropriate for parallelism, perpendicularity, and angularity. In general we try not to block users from doing something that is not clearly wrong. Sometimes we do block annotations that would be clearly wrong. Some areas get to be a bit gray and we try to accommodate as best as possible without creating additional un-desired complexity if we can avoid it.1
Answers
I suspect in this case you are really wanting a parallelism tolerance control with a tangential plane modifier. We support tangential plane modifiers on parallelism, perpendicularity, and angularity. If you decide parallelism is correct, then the 30 dimension will not be basic but indeed need a defined tolerance on it. It's certainly possible the dimensional tolerance along with the parallelism control will give you what you need.
Let me know your thoughts.
thank you for you attention on this one.
The latest for now is ISO 1101:2017 which will describe the use case of such modifiers. It is in paragraph 8.2.2.2.2. and is applicable to true position also.
Thank you for suggesting the way with parallelism, it sure can be done in combination with some other characteristic, but I can't see why I wouldn't use TP (at least in this case), if it's clearly allowed in ISO.
I don't have access to ASME, but I don't think that ASME even allows to put a TP on a plane if it's parallel to the datum plane. Someone please confirm.
ASME Y14.5 at least as of 2009 did have support for the tangential plane modifier, but there seems to be some uncertainty about what it can apply to. I have quite an extensive reference that mentions it is appropriate for parallelism, perpendicularity, and angularity. In general we try not to block users from doing something that is not clearly wrong. Sometimes we do block annotations that would be clearly wrong. Some areas get to be a bit gray and we try to accommodate as best as possible without creating additional un-desired complexity if we can avoid it.
Thank you Pete and the team!