Continue to Site

Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet

Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals

  • Congratulations pierreick on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

Concentricity vs. Runout

bandersen4004

Aerospace
Jan 28, 2025
1
I am working on modernizing technical data and updating specifications and GD&T for parts designed 50 years ago to be manufactured today. In ASME Y14.5 2018, concentricity was removed and it seems like it is recommended to use total runout instead. Is there an easy way to convert the concentricity tolerance to a total runout tolerance? Or would you suggest using something else in place of concentricity? Any and all help is greatly appreciated!
 
Replies continue below

Recommended for you

OP
Look at this post link
 
OP
If taper on faces and diameters is required.
Then total runout is a good call.
If taper is not required standard runout
Would be a better choice.
 
The best substitute for concentricity is usually the position symbol, not a runout symbol. That's because runout is a combination of location and form errors. But concentricity didn't really check for form.
Think about an oval shape: its center point could be perfectly concentric with a given datum axis. That's because the oval shape is still balanced (the old standard talked about "median points" and such). But a runout symbol would reject the oval shape purely because its form/shape causes wobble.
 
Garland you ever work with shafts, no dice, true position is Taylored for holes. Or studs
 

Part and Inventory Search

Sponsor