Do you find these statements ambiguous or incorrect?
When a surface flatness has been specified, the DMP flatness is inherently also controlled, but the converse is not true. In other words, when a DMP Flatness is specified, the surface does not have to be flat at all, although it must now be...
MBD environment and settings
Should we model at "the nominal" or at "the mean"?
Looks like design-inspection preference is "the nominal" and manufacturing is "the mean".
Creating a derivative for manufacturing looks like it is NOT a GREAT solution (could be an OKAY one however) due to the...
Per a discussion on a different platform, I would like to ask the members of this group the following questions:
What means “Engineering Check Processes” in the MBD world (otherwise stated what checkers are looking for when a MBD model is verified)?
What tools checkers are using to verify the...
I am working on a part similar to the one shown with model based definition geometrical controls. The part’s product definition should be based on the ISO GPS (8015, 1101 and 14405-1)
The center hole is considered as a datum feature for the 6 small holes. I have 24 of those instances (24 inside...
If a feature of size tolerance is large enough, can it vary in form to a degree such that the angle between surfaces can be larger than an "UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED" block angle tolerance allows…?
In addition to Rule #1, can/must form also be limited by block
angle tolerance? Another way I've...
How to deal with withdrawn ISO standards still shown on drawings?
What is your best recommendation? How your company is doing it?
Nevertheless, withdrawn standards can still be used within an industry, community or by a government, and this is often what happens when there are no replacement...
Straight forward question:
ASME Y14.5-2018
In order to correcly use dynamic modifier with profile, do we need to have the radius basic or is okay "as-is" (plus / minus)?
ISO
Same question for the OZ modifier.
I've always been under the impression that if the drawing creator missplaced the datum feature symbol for a cylindrical surface, the datum is still the axis (yes, even the datum feature symbol is not aligned with the size dimensions, AGAIN, on a cylindrical feature and not on a width/ tab)...
From a likedin discussion
"Conceptually, symmetry is extremely similar to DMP flatness, which is why we're discussing it- just in reference to a datum. If DMP flatness is a form tolerance - and it is - symmetry is also a form tolerance"
Do you guys agree with the statement above?
Sometimes...
Are there any definitive statements from Y14.5 (1994, 2009, 2018 or any version) to reflect that flatness shall be applied to a (nominally) planar surface only?
Or, in other words, what prevents the application of flatness to a curve?
What is your opinion about this drawing?
Are datum feature B and datum feature C fully defined or are incomplete? Otherwise stated, is profile general note (profile|3|A|B|C|) applicable to "B" and "C" datum features?
Flatness of the sides shown with red arrows: the combined effect of the two requirements shown (size 28±0.1 and perpendicularity 0.4|A|)
What is the maximum possible flatness error in those 2 cases:
1.) ISO GPS
2.) ASME Y14.5 (with no rule#1 in place)
Is it different or it's the same in...
For the part shown use ASME Y14.5-2009 and determine what would be the maximum envelope for this part?
Will the parallelism of 0.003 (black option) versus 0.010 (red option) make any difference in calculation the maximum envelope?
(datum feature A is the same for both options = the bottom...
"Those Who Do Not Learn History Are Doomed To Repeat It." writer and philosopher George Santayana
Just looking in ASME Y14.5-2018 fig 8-13 I have noticed that F symbol is gone from the FCF.
Going back in history here is some summary:
ASME Y14.5-2018: F OUT of FCF (No free state modifier in...
ASME Y14.5-2009
If a slot (groove) width is dimensioned with a direct toleranced dimension (10 mm ± 1) and one side of such said slot is profiled (located) from a datum reference frame (profile xxx |A|B|C|), does the xxx value for the profile should be smaller than 2mm (total size for the width...
Does anyone know (or maybe has an article to post) on how to do a capability study on position tolerance at MMC callout using "Virtual Condition" boundary approach?
As far as I remember, and read, this method has been developed (and shown) by prof. Don Day few years ago.
Few questions came in...
Is Ø31.6 - 31.8 outside diameter controlled to profile within 0.5 to |A|B| and shown circular runout (0.1|C|) it's only refinement?
How do I treat the circular runout?
Is the sentence shown below correct? Should I understand that the holes are located by both (position and default profile) and the more stringent one takes precedence??
What the holes definition has to do with the unless otherwise specified note? I do not know I understand that. Thanks...
Folks:
Do you think LP and GX combo is valid for the same cylindrical feature? Is it allowed based on ISO GPS set of standards?
What would be your opinion?
Thank you for any input in this matter.
I'm trying to grasp ISO concepts and I would like to clarify some on my (most likely) misunderstandings:
A hole is dimensioned for size and location:
Ø40 ± 0.1 E (envelope requirement)
pos Ø0.05 (circle X) to A primary, B secondary and C tertiary
is the above scheme equivalent with
Ø40 ±...
