Thread notes - Dual dimensions?

[proed]

Hi folks

I've raised an enhancement request with PTC to enable dual dimensions in thread notes, but wanted to check if anyone had any ideas on a workaround for this?

Currently we usually add drawing notes for each threaded hole, but we do hundreds of these and I'd like to move to the standard thread notes created by Pro/E for each standard hole. I've worked out how to format it the way we want, but it only shows primary dims, not the dual dims we need.

Plus, the no. of decimal places doesn't reflect that of the dimension... I'll attach a screenshot to help explain the difference.

Thanks in advance for any tips. Meantime, I'm thinking of a UDF which contains a parametric note.

Regards

Edwin Muirhead

This thread is inactive and closed by the PTC Community Management Team. If you would like to provide a reply and re-open this thread, please notify the moderator and reference the thread. You may also use "Start a topic" button to ask a new question. Please be sure to include what version of the PTC product you are using so another community member knowledgeable about your version may be able to assist.

[ehill]

I would think that dual dimensions aren't appropriate for thread
callouts. Thread standards are unit-specific - the machine shop can't
get a "metric" .25-20 UNC tap, can they? It doesn't seem like there is
any added value by dual dimensioning threads; on the contrary, it would
make them more confusing.



Best Regards,

[proed]

Thanks for your reply, to clarify: on the screenshot you'll see the dual dims are counter-bore features, the imperial thread itself is not dual-dimensioned. The irony is: Pro/E stores the imperial thread size as a metric value!We have the joy of workingwith an inch-driven product, but using metric-driven machine shops.RegardsEdwin

In Reply to Eric Hill:

I would think that dual dimensions aren't appropriate for thread
callouts. Thread standards are unit-specific - the machine shop can't
get a "metric" .25-20 UNC tap, can they? It doesn't seem like there is
any added value by dual dimensioning threads; on the contrary, it would
make them more confusing.



Best Regards,

[tgiauque]

I can't say what Edwin's plan for dual dimensioning was, but I know that we have several drawings where we call out non-standard threads. In such cases, we have to specify the major, pitch, and minor diameters. I could see the value of dual-dimensioning something like that.

However, the thread dimensions in this case could just be treated like any other dimension, rather than in a hole thread callout.

My $0.02.

Tim

[ptc-1932745]

The major, minor, and pitch diameters may be enough for the inspector,
but does not fully define the thread. What about UNJ form, etc...?
The inspection criterion for the threads, units conversion, etc...
should be on an inspection plan, and not on the engineering drawing.



The same concept can be used for material hardness, Vickers hardness
should not be converted to Rockwell, or Brinell, etc... without
authority from an inspection plan or company standards.





Christopher Gosnell

TRIGON INC.
FPD Company
124 Hidden Valley Road
McMurray, PA 15317
PH: 724.941.5540
FX: 724.941.8322
www.fpdinc.com