Search results for query: *

Our title blocks only says ISO-2768-1989 and that would be the only thing a manufacturer would be able to go by from looking at our drawings. Officially our handbook says we use ISO 129, 406, 1101, and ANSI Y14.5M-1982 but everybody here uses the 1994 standards.

I have a question regarding proper dimensioning of a small part. This miniature part has 6 "sharp" tips that must lie within a plane parallel to datum A. The overall location of the plane from the datum is not a big concern. However, the 6 tips must be within .02 mm of each other relative to...

I tried to use the hole pattern as a datum but kept running into the issue of requiring the datum B to be defined by datum B. The first drawing I'm pretty sure is illegal. The second drawing still gets my design intent across but I'm not sure if it is ambiguous. I still want to refrain from...

When I think about it more...if the hole pattern was defined as the secondary datum then my original drawing would show original design intent. I could declare the edges with general tolerances and the only basic dimension would be the 1.500 between the holes. The perpendicularity of the hole...

Thanks Dave. That is what I fear may happen. I changed the drawing to satisfy management but feel this new tolerancing will be added work on the inspector's part (at increased cost to us), all for a "form" that is not critical. Would I be wrong to assume this second method is going to increase...

I have been following this forum for a few months now and thought I had a basic understanding of GD&T. I have a book as well and have read it cover to cover. We had a drawing review session last week and one of my drawings came up for question. The other drafters picked out my GD&T and marked it...