Tarator, I hadn't noticed that until you point it out, but I do see your point there. Datum C is controlled and defined by the width of the feature, but there is nothing controlling it to A or B, so theoretically, those two features could be say 4 degrees off of A and B and it would be okay per...
Here is the same engineer using the center of parallel FoS again on a sheet metal component. These surface profiles seem fully defined to me, as we assume C is a width datum feature again. Thoughts?
chez, looking at the drawing some more. I agree the 2X 0.75 doesnt add to the drawing, but I dont think its technically invalid, it just doesnt provide value. If I could REV easily I would, but I dont think the drawing is invalid.
Will do thank you. The scheme used in the green box above is valid, correct? It is stating datum B is in the center of the slot, left side is a theoretical 0.75 away, and slot width is .150, correct?
Another engineer made drawings at our company, and our inspection group is questioning this practice. Do all basic DIM HAVE to come from datums? Is this a valid scheme? If you can point me somewhere in y14.5 that would be helpful. I have a feeling this is legal, but I cant find out how... Thanks!
