Search results for query: *

Thanks Burunduk, nailed it. Par 7.19 This principle does not apply to the lower segments of composite feature control frames. See para. 10.5.4.2. If a simultaneous requirement is desired for the lower segments of two or more composite feature control frames, a notation such as SIM REQT shall...

further reading of par 10.5.1 states: "Each complete horizontal segment in the feature control frames of Figures 10-39 and 10-40 should be verified separately." These figures are using composite. so am I correct to say that the implicit simultaneous requirement (with same DRF & BC) only applies...

Hi Burunduk, In fig 10-39, I don't understand how the second segment of composites are "explicitly" excluded from simultaneous requirements. Thanks.

3DDave, I think we agree on the default simultaneous requirement when using same DRF with same BC. My problem is that in the standard fig.10-47, the interpretation suggests they are NOT tied up and can move independently right/left.

Hi Garland23, You are saying that the second callouts are not simultaneous? I understand they can move right/left because the Datum Reference Frame does not include C. But my understanding is they can move right/left together as opposed to independently because the default is that all...

Thanks 3DDave for your quick reply, I'm afraid I'm still unsure of the answer. Are the three patterns locked together as a larger pattern or not? Your answer suggests not. Could you please explain why? Thanks.

Hi, Figures 10-38 and 10-47 of ASME Y14.5-2018 are showing a part with three different hole patterns. I understand the aim of these two examples is to show the difference between Composite Frames and Multiple Single-Segments and this is well demonstrated. The confusing part for me is about...