Recent convert to ISO GPS, so I want to make sure I'm thinking correctly about things now that size does not control form (no rule 1!) and I also need to rely on form tolerances much more than with ASME. I'll likely still use some ASME terminology.
For the sake of discussion, let's consider an...
If there are no other comments about how to perform the tolerance stack, I could ask something else about the drawing provided above.
Since this drawing uses ISO GPS, rule one does not apply (independent size and form is default). In the image provided "LP" stands for 2-point linear...
Rereading pmarc's reply makes me think my interpretation of the common datum was incorrect. Given his definitions, why would pmarc not think the cases are equivalent? I see two 90 degree TEDs linking the two planes. I think this means that datum plane A-B would be obtained by collapsing two...
Datum plane E would be obtained by collapsing two perfectly parallel planes around the feature.
Datum plane A-B would be obtained by placing two unrelated perfect planes on each datum feature and creating a midplane. That is my current understanding of how common datums are established, since...
I'm seeing your callouts as shown below:
| Concentricity | dia 0.1 (M)(R) | A |
ACS
| Concentricity | dia 0.3 (M) | A(M) |
ACS
I'm a new convert to ISO GPS from ASME Y14.5. I understand that by default we would evaluate the diameter using the envelope principle (and this would result in a...
My intent is to make sure the shaft will always turn easy once assembled into the housing. I'm a bit new to specifying these kinds of parts, but I was thinking a modified floating fastener analysis could be applicable (although with the tight clearance in the hydrodynamic bearing, this analysis...
The primary intent of the parallelism tolerance was related to creating a even fluid film within the hydrodynamic bearing. While performing a floating fastener tolerance analysis, I needed a coaxiality tolerance but could not find a direct control on the drawing. Upon further investigation, I...
Well that led down a long road. Looks like this is an example of "back-door location" as discussed in https://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=315082
But I'm not sure what the equivalent location/position tolerance would be. Any ideas?
"NO" would be my first thought also, but it does seem to control coaxiality to some degree. Can you think of why someone would use this form of control? Or how would you account for this form of control in a floating fastener scenario (where the above drawing details the fastener)?
CAUTION: This post uses the ISO GPS system of geometric dimensioning and tolerancing
Can the parallelism tolerance shown in the below image (with respect to common datum A-B) be considered to control coaxiality of the A and B diameters? If so, would you assume the equivalent...
