Straightness refinement of flatness

[Kedu]

In order to control the waviness or unevenness of a flat surface can a straightness callout be used as a refinement of flatness on the same surface (different view)?
See fig 5-7(2009) page 94
Front view: flatness applied to a planar surface within 0.25
Left view: straightness within 0.05

I‘ve never seen this kind of combination before. Is it legal?
Any drawbacks of this approach?

 

[Belanger]

That would be legal.
The big drawback with using straightness on a planar surface is that it almost cries out for a datum reference. It's supposed to apply in the direction of the view where it's given, but that implies that the part is oriented to one of the faces you're looking at.

John-Paul Belanger
Certified Sr. GD&T Professional
Geometric Learning Systems

 

[CheckerHater]

It would be nicer if you provided better explanation of what you are trying to achieve.
Because specifying "Flatness in one view and straightness in the other" will bring you something like this - situation when straightness has very little control over flatness:

"For every expert there is an equal and opposite expert"
Arthur C. Clarke Profiles of the future

 

[Kedu]

This is not the company’s I work for design. We got the order and he have to make it per the print requirements. However, per my understanding talking to their purchasing folks, there are some needle bearings, linear motion or roller bearings (or something around those lines) that must have an intimate contact with the parts we are making for them, hence the flatness and straightness requirements.

Looks like it is legitimate/legal. And I agree it is a view dependent.
I’ve seen straightness-straightness combo (fig 5-6/ 2009), but not flatness-straightness, therefore my question.

 

[Kedu]

I've been told the application looks something like this (more or less).

 

[SeasonLee]

Hope you will find out the answer from this thread.
In worst case, the flatness is...

Season