Search results for query: *

The location of the upper surface of the snap ring (green arrow)is less important than the width of the opening (red arrows). A profile of surface within .020 back to a datum reference frame is added to green surface and a ± width of the slot within .005 is added for size. The checker sent this...

I would like to ask a question for the members of this forum who have or seen the ASME Y14.5-2018 release: If in fig 10-52, the PLTZF is removed from the callout and a datum feature symbol is attached to the reminder of the FCF, would that be a valid callout? Otherwise stated, could a primary...

Another example on what I am talking about would be figure 4-34 /2009. If R4 basic is changed to diameter 8 basic will this alter the meaning of the drawing? Edit additions: Specially knowing that a straight cylindrical pin goes thru datum feature A, some folks think diameter basic would be a...

I have a design where a cylindrical pin (full 360 degrees) contacts the part in question, therefore some engineers feel the need of using basic diameter instead of basic radius as originally planned. Should I understand that wouldn't make any difference for dinemsioning and tolerancing the...

Thank you for feedback. I am not planning to replace the profile with position. I will keep profile. I am planning only to replace the basic radius with basic diameter. May I ask, why if I replace basic radius with basic diameter the drawing may become more confusing? I am talking about...

If in Fig 4-53/ ASME Y14.5- 2009 basic radii R40.5 is changed to basic diameter Ø81 (from radius to diameter), does this modification alter in any way the meaning of the drawing or more precise the feature definition? Or on the same token, in Fig 4-29, datum feature B is defined with R15...

The question about “bump size”, and as far as how I understood it (I can say that has been confusing for me too, but) I would go by “maximum possible variation between neighboring elements, surface elements, circular elements per the above print requirements: size tolerance ±.005 and circular...

I agree that a correct picture would be extremely helpful. Not sure where .007 size is coming from. Looks like the book's answer does not take in consideration axial aspect of the form error, but only radial one. Not understanding why. Hence the "correct" book's answer is .002. Sorry, I don't...

Question regarding ASME Y14.5-1994 or 2009. Feature of size 100 ±.005 Circular runout within .002 to a datum axis. How tall a bump is acceptable in the surface with the runout control? How would you read and interpret the question: bump size to be measured within the same circular section...

LMB for B: 59.7 and Resultant condition boundary: 10.1 + 0.1 + 0.1 = 10.3

I am able to calculate the minimum wall thickness specified on question #6, but I am not able to get the “correct” answer from the book. Anyone, would be interested to get their GD&T and math skills sharpened? I can post my answer: 6.1655. Book’s answer is 5.6083, but I do not understand...

One end of a part is hexagonal—left end: called datum feature A, dimensioned with basic angle, basic size across the flats, basic size across opposite corners and an all-around datumless profile. The opposite end: right end: profile all around to A primary. (same as the left end: everything...

Why on fig 4.35 -2009 / CASE D, distance outside pins works as shown but if only one pin is shown doesn't? Wondering why.

Can it be two parallel planes at minimum separation regardless which orientation is chosen? Looks like we cannot add a position to 12 dimension as shown?

John, I do not know. That's exactly my question too. How to simulate the centerplane of two tapered planar features?

If a tapered wedge IS defined with ± angle and direct toleranced dimension on one end, can its middle plane be used as a datum feature? How to generate the centerplane / middle plane as a datum from the non-parallel but planar adjacent surfaces? Details: A part has its left and right sides...

Can it be considered an irregular feature of size because can contain or be contaned by an actual mating envelope? Or latter answer is also no.

Is the height 12 ±0.4 of the part shown in fig 2-5/ 2009 a feature of size? What about the overall length (not dimensioned)?

Good for you....only weeks ...... I have months and years of nightmares. I don't think you have to. See previous replies by Evan copy-paste "The basic dimensions only apply to the theoretically exact geometry, and could be described as dimensions of the model. The basic dimensions need to...