I have a cylinder (actually a "pipe"), from which I establish datum "A" as the axis of the OD of the cylinder, datum B as an end of the cylinder, and datum C from a hole drilled into the side of the cylinder.
On the OD of the cylinder, I have to machine a grooved contour, one that presents...
ASME Y14.5 - 2009 specified in section 8.3.3.2 that profile could be specified on a unit basis (as a note to the section). In the 2018 version of the standard, this reference has been omitted from the comparable section and there is seemingly no reference permitting profile on a unit basis...
Got a bit of an oddball question
I have a series of different sized features for which it would be beneficial to control via multiple single segment positional tolerances. It has been proposed to turn one of those holes into a datum reference for controlling one or more other holes, also with a...
Autodesk Inventor, which can be equipped with a 1-D tolerance analysis tool that largely relies on model based definition for WC and RSS outputs, but we mostly use 3DCS Multi-CAD for monte carlo based 3-D analysis.
I can only speak anecdotally, but the department I work for has had some pretty good success with transitioning to a hybrid of 3D PDF and traditional 2D drawings, with an eye towards eventually going to just 3D PDF's in the future.
For us, MBA doesn't take any more time than traditional...
Having a bit of a philosophical debate at work, and I was curious what a broader community might think.
ASME Y14.5-2018 Section 4.1 (p) states "Dimensions and tolerances apply only at the drawing level where they are specified. A dimension specified for a given feature on one level of drawing...
I have a sheet metal part, which is more or less square, with a bilaterally symmetric, sinusoidal contour cut on one side. I set my primary datum "A" at the large planar surface of the part, secondary datum "B" as the midplane of the part, and tertiary datum "C" as the edge opposite my contour...
Here is a simplified sketch:
In this design, DIM 2 and DIM 3 are somewhat critical for fit-up. The part is also too massive to be accurately measured with an arm based CMM. In older days, I would have just used limit dimensioning on DIM 2 AND 3, but I'm trying to be consistent with ASME Y14.5...
Can a datum translation modifier be used when the datum is a planar surface? I can't see anything in the standard which seems to explicitly prohibit this, but every example out there I can find typically only demonstrates this concept using a datum derived from a feature of size (typically a...
OK, so expanding on the idea then, if the dimension isn't called out as a diameter, but as a radius instead, and that profile isn't over the entire surface, but on a unit basis (for example, a note saying that the profile applies in any 45 degree segment, should the radius be basic? Can we say...
I'm looking at a series of prints which detail a round feature of size, controlled by a datum-less surface profile. My question is, should the diameter be basic, or limit toleranced?
My inclination is that it should not be basic - that a datum-less surface profile is just a form control (in...
Referencing this thread:
https://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=314750
It was discussed that a surface profile without a datum would essentially just be a form control on a singular surface. However, based on that discussion, I believe, based on the context of those discussions, that's...
