Search results for query: *

Regarding "progressing" (which I would prefer be called "Normal expansion or contraction" in the standard) vs. scaling, with the dynamic profile modifier, I think the best way to describe why the tolerance zone boundaries are both a normal expansion or contraction from true profile, with the...

Sem, Pardon my cryptic feature names and the lack of a drawing. Feature D does not mate with anything in my example, only the edge between the drafted feature "D" and the close to perpendicular feature "ND". Because the face of feature D is not functional, the preference would likely be to...

Semiond, I can't imagine that anyone could have complained about your posts. You have been very polite in this discussion, at least. Your illustrations of why profile of a line doesn't work on the edges that have been discussed are very good. This helps explain why some other tool (a modified...

3DDave, A profile tolerance zone is based on the true profile of the feature that it is applied to. There is absolutely no support in Y14.5 to have a profile tolerance be other than following the true profile of a feature. The definition of a feature is vague, but definitely does not include...

Hi Dave, I'll try this again. If the intersection between two surfaces on a CAD body is sharp, and it is desired to apply a tolerance zone to that sharp edge for which the boundaries have a particular orientation where they do not lie about the true profile of either surface, then Y14.5 does...

erik3000, I just looked at this again and I see that I included a vertical basic dimension to the larger hole. Please disregard that. I didn't intend to leave that in the mark-up. Best Regards, Dean

3DDave, No, I am not referring to a theoretical intersection. Best Regards, Dean

3DDave, What definition of a feature do we have that includes edges between two intersecting faces? The answer is none, I believe, so applying profile to something that is not defined as a feature is an extension of principles out into "space" (outer space) to the degree that I think we need a...

Does what I've shown in the attached file provide what you're after? I hope this helps. Best Regards, Dean www.validate-3d.com https://files.engineering.com/getfile.aspx?folder=4fc8177a-3c9f-4da9-ba21-9313789a158c&file=AlignedBlock.pdf

chez311, I agree that the surfaces that form an edge should also be controlled. I think a profile modified with PROJECTED EDGE (with notes as needed to clarify what it means) is still a useful refining tolerance. 3DDave, I disagree with your opinion. Profile applied to an edge is not...

semiond, Yes, I think profile of a line would be problematic for controlling an edge because its tolerance zone cannot currently be the needed boundaries that extend infinitely in the projection direction. A given cross-section that profile of a line would apply to can be assumed to be...

aliiben, I agree with the others that say that the tangent plane modifier will not work for this application. What I think would work fine is to show an end view of the feature (so the feature appears as two full circles, with the highest portion of the ring projecting towards us), with a...

semiond, Sorry to be late for the party here. I'm just getting back to "normal life", but my time to login here is still a bit spotty. You point out a gap in the standard. When you need to apply straightness or an orientation tolerance or profile (I will say profile of a surface, since I...

chimps12, The partial cylinder at the end of the slots is a "partial feature of size". No standard tells us how complete a feature of size needs to be (and no standard should attempt to tell us this in my opinion). For example, a key slot in a shaft should not change the definition of what...

CH - Your "Now what" figures made me laugh out loud... Good discussion, and very good points. It would be very nice to have one very good standard (set of standards) in the World. Instead we have two separate sets that both need some work. I still like ASME standards much better than ISO...

Yes, I believe <CF> (10 SURFACES) placed by the datum feature B symbol would work fine. As an alternative, you could use the OD as datum feature B instead, with a similar CF modifier, then reference B also (so [A,B]) for your 10 profiles from X to Y. Best Regards, Dean www.d3w-engineering.com

The feature control will not be successful, in my opinion, unless the red tape is dealt with in order to change the drawing. Profile of a surface will not consider a radius value or a center location, the only evaluation will be whether points on the considered feature are within the profile...

I would just use a flag note that says something like "ONE TOTAL RUNOUT TOLERANCE APPLIES TO BOTH CYLINDRICAL SURFACES AT ONCE (INTERRUPTED SINGLE FEATURE COMPRISED OF TWO SURFACES)". Dean www.d3w-engineering.com

This is currently a point of confusion in my opinion. "Planes of the datum reference frame" (the "coordinate planes" in bxbzq's perfectly reasonable terms) are always perpendicular to each other, but "datum planes" are something different... Datum planes should be found on, or at the center...

Have you thought about using a De Dion rear suspension? Solid rear axle control arm approaches remain possible, while accommodating the fixed inner ends of your axles. It may be a better approach, especially if an IRS would need to have short control arms due to space constraints. If a De...