Search results for query: *

That small section of bore has more than 72 degree sweep. I think it is enough (20% of the whole bore) to determine the centerline. I did not show the other view of the print.

I got used to basic dimension and true position. But ISO seems or this specific customer have different way to define the relationship. What I don't like is that my CMM guy could not intersect the two centerlines then he converted 3D to 2D (project them into an artificial plane) to make them...

Hi burunduk and chez311, The center line of the angled feature because it is how we machined it. There is only a small section of 20 mm diameter bore.

Thank you, Tmoose (I always try to spot a moose where I was in Maine. Did not have any luck). 1.2 mm over 100mm. In my case, 19 mm would have .228 mm. It is kind of big , about .0089 of True Position. Half of it is still .004.

Thank you, mfgenggear. At least I can have something to refer to. I was thinking tighten it up even more <.003.

I am sure ISO should have some kind of tolerance on the centrality of these two features. We hardly use ISO. Instead we follow military and auto industry standard all the time.

That what I thought. I am just not that familiar with ISO. The general notes define like this: Precision: 2768-mH; Tolerance: ISO 8015.

I marked two centerlines red. They are supposed to be in the same plane. But we machined them in two different setups. How much tolerance of centrality I could have? Print did not give any.

I have an European print in which there are two bores at 45 degree. By theory they should be aligned with each other (their center line in the same plane), but in reality they may not be that perfect. I want to know by the ISO, what tolerance I should have?