How many angles are in a circular pattern? 6

[cwdaniel]

See attached drawing.

Is fig. A or B correct?

 

[ewh]

Ah, but was the figure directly addressing the issue at hand, or was it to illustrate the proper use of 'X'?

Believe it if you need it or leave it if you dare. - [small]Robert Hunter[/small]

 

[KENAT]

Where's that head banging a wall emoticon when you need it;-(.

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

 

[ctopher]

Chris
SolidWorks/PDMWorks 08 3.1
AutoCAD 06/08
ctopher's home (updated Jul 02, 2008)

 

[KENAT]

Thankyou.

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

 

[tk369]

everybody, everybody!

mechanical drawing 101:

if you have 5 holes in a circular pattern, you also have 5 spaces! how could you think any differently?

point to one hole and say (5) __ dia holes on a __ dia b.c. equally spaced. add your gd&t, perpendicularity, etc. and the indexer on your drill press will put the holes in. then inspect the part.



teddykaye

 

[vc66]

Oh jeez.

V

 

[ringman]

I don't believe Y14.5 recognizes as acceptable the use of Equally Spaced as a BASIC DIMENSION.

 

[KENAT]

tk369, if it was that simple an answer do you really think we'd have dragged this thread out this long? Some of the above posters are pretty knowledgable, at least one recent ex 14.5 committee member. The debate is more on the tolerance implications, which we can't seem to agree on.

What most can agree on is that using GD&T it becomes a none issue.

Lets just leave it there unless the 14.5 committee want to have a special meeting just to bottom this out in time for the new version of the standard.

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

 

[btrueblood]

Do it the way it shows in the spec., and you will have the least arguments, or a least a better way to win the arguments. The spec shows 5x, both for basic dimensions and non-basic. It may or may not be correct, but you can just point to the figures in the spec. and say "show me where it's different".

"What most can agree on is that using GD&T it becomes a none issue."

I think we can ALL agree on that.

 

[KENAT]

Sorry btrue, I must have missed the fully dimensioned & toleranced example using +- dims for this type of hole pattern in the standard and showing 5X;-).

Enough already even though I'm probably the worst offender now for dragging on this rotting equine carcus.

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

 

[btrueblood]

Kenat, fig. 55 ain't complete enough (sorry, but this is from my 1982 copy I have in pdf format on my PC)? Shows the holes 8x and angles 8x dimensioned. You owe ME a pint.

C'mon, we can make it a century here if you just keep playing. There's room in there for one more pint, it's Friday, the missus don't expect ya home for hours anyways...

 

[ewh]

It's fig. 1-56 in the 1994 version, and it is refered to from para's 1.9.5.1 and 1.9.5.2 which only address the proper use of "X" ("...the required number of spaces and an X, followed by...").
We may have to buy our own pints...

Believe it if you need it or leave it if you dare. - [small]Robert Hunter[/small]

 

[vc66]

OK, now this thread has gone around 5X 72°... or is it 4X 72°?

V

 

[ringman]

Let me close by restating my opinion of the original sketches. GROSSLY INADEQUATE to allow for proper asessment.

 

[ewh]

By now, it's gone around about 10X 72° - I mean 9X 72°.

Believe it if you need it or leave it if you dare. - [small]Robert Hunter[/small]

 

[memiles]

I think FIG 3.25 should clarify things. Look at 8x 45deg, FCF also states 8x

Mike

 

[ringman]

I guess my eyes are failing me. I did not see any basic dimensions nor FCFs on the sketches. Rather assumed non geo tol.

 

[memiles]

1.53 and 1.56 are double dim as well.

 

[ctopher]

Ringman,
The Sketches don't. So my assumption was the same, that is why my pick was Fig A.

memiles,
Did I miss something? Where are those dims from? How can two different dim's be dbl dim?

Chris
SolidWorks/PDMWorks 08 3.1
AutoCAD 06/08
ctopher's home (updated Jul 02, 2008)

 

[memiles]

Oops on 1.53

Screwed up, tired.....

sorry

Mike