Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet
Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals
-
Congratulations waross on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Legality
- Thread starter greenimi
- Start date
What is total size tolerance for features controlled by this callout?
If it is greater than .020, the requirement defined in the FRTZF may mean nothing for actual sizes allowing bonus tolerance to be greater than .020.
I would not however say it is illegal - at least in my opinion it does not violate any rule of composite positional tolerancing.
If it is greater than .020, the requirement defined in the FRTZF may mean nothing for actual sizes allowing bonus tolerance to be greater than .020.
I would not however say it is illegal - at least in my opinion it does not violate any rule of composite positional tolerancing.
CheckerHater
Mechanical
If I am not too late - I used term "legal but useless" on this forum before.
Exactly for the reason that FRTZF value may become larger, I wouldn't recommend anyone to use it. But I couldn't find anything explicitly forbidding the technique.
Exactly for the reason that FRTZF value may become larger, I wouldn't recommend anyone to use it. But I couldn't find anything explicitly forbidding the technique.
LEGAL is a bad word to use in this context! Is it ALLOWED or WITHIN THE SCOPE of the standard would be better.
No one is going to come and throw you in jail for using a bad GD&T calllout.
"Wildfires are dangerous, hard to control, and economically catastrophic."
Ben Loosli
No one is going to come and throw you in jail for using a bad GD&T calllout.
"Wildfires are dangerous, hard to control, and economically catastrophic."
Ben Loosli
CheckerHater
Mechanical
looslib,
Napoleon used to say: "Every private in the French army carries a field-marshal's baton in his knapsack."
Every GD&T "expert" is a wannabe lawyer.
Napoleon used to say: "Every private in the French army carries a field-marshal's baton in his knapsack."
Every GD&T "expert" is a wannabe lawyer.
greenimi,
Your tolerance box can be interpreted as per ASME Y14.5M-1994. The top tolerance box even makes sense to me. You are specifying the accuracy with which a hole pattern is located. This does not require MMC. Your second box ensures that screws pass through the holes. MMC now is a useful concept.
When you say "legal", I have visions of Captain GD&T smashing his way into your office and hurling a mouse pad at you.
--
JHG
Your tolerance box can be interpreted as per ASME Y14.5M-1994. The top tolerance box even makes sense to me. You are specifying the accuracy with which a hole pattern is located. This does not require MMC. Your second box ensures that screws pass through the holes. MMC now is a useful concept.
When you say "legal", I have visions of Captain GD&T smashing his way into your office and hurling a mouse pad at you.
--
JHG
- Thread starter
- #9
Thank you gentlemen
So, the conclusion is:
It is ALLOWED or WITHIN THE SCOPE of the standard (legal)
Pmarc,
Quote: "What is total size tolerance for features controlled by this callout?
If it is greater than .020, the requirement defined in the FRTZF may mean nothing for actual sizes allowing bonus tolerance to be greater than .020."
The size is within ±.005, so, total size tolerance is .010 for features controlled by the callout.
So, the conclusion is:
It is ALLOWED or WITHIN THE SCOPE of the standard (legal)
Pmarc,
Quote: "What is total size tolerance for features controlled by this callout?
If it is greater than .020, the requirement defined in the FRTZF may mean nothing for actual sizes allowing bonus tolerance to be greater than .020."
The size is within ±.005, so, total size tolerance is .010 for features controlled by the callout.
- Status