ScottHaselden
Industrial
Hypothetical question: When producing slip-over drop through profile gages for stamped or press-brake bent cold roll steel parts, does the material thickness (which is usually thinner than nominal) allow for a bit of MMC for the overall profile, as long as it stays within the tolerance envelope?
I recently went to work for a new company. This company produces such gages for their own internal verifications, and the company is using ASME Y14.5-1994 still. I have been doing design and verification for 27 years now, but never ran into a scenario like this one. Everything I have found thus far basically states that as long as the surface of the part fits entirely within the profile tolerance envelope without slipping out of it at any point, then it is an acceptable profile. With a thinner material, there would naturally be more play in the profile gage, of course, similar to how MMC affects a bolt circle (larger holes mean there is more tolerance for true position movement... (Bonus tolerance). Is my understanding of the Y14.5 correct that the material thickness, if nominal, would have to be more central to the profile envelope and if the material were thinner, it would allow for more bonus tolerance for the profile to fit inside of (similar to stud bolts, if smaller, have bonus tolerance for position)?
My understanding of the profile dimension is that, if the nominal value is met, the tolerance envelope is then the limit tolerance, as in other types of tolerancing, and anything falling within it, at the points of the profile measurement, is considered acceptable. Is this off, or is it correct? Our tolerances are all considered equally bilateral, unless otherwise specified.
I recently went to work for a new company. This company produces such gages for their own internal verifications, and the company is using ASME Y14.5-1994 still. I have been doing design and verification for 27 years now, but never ran into a scenario like this one. Everything I have found thus far basically states that as long as the surface of the part fits entirely within the profile tolerance envelope without slipping out of it at any point, then it is an acceptable profile. With a thinner material, there would naturally be more play in the profile gage, of course, similar to how MMC affects a bolt circle (larger holes mean there is more tolerance for true position movement... (Bonus tolerance). Is my understanding of the Y14.5 correct that the material thickness, if nominal, would have to be more central to the profile envelope and if the material were thinner, it would allow for more bonus tolerance for the profile to fit inside of (similar to stud bolts, if smaller, have bonus tolerance for position)?
My understanding of the profile dimension is that, if the nominal value is met, the tolerance envelope is then the limit tolerance, as in other types of tolerancing, and anything falling within it, at the points of the profile measurement, is considered acceptable. Is this off, or is it correct? Our tolerances are all considered equally bilateral, unless otherwise specified.
