Continue to Site

Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet

Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals

  • Congratulations SSS148 on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

Manufacturing question about circularity vs size tolerance

Status
Not open for further replies.

greenimi

Mechanical
Nov 30, 2011
2,391
I am in the design, but I got a question from manufacturing a few days ago. I need a bit of help to answer it correctly. Again, the main thing I don't want to provide bad information.
One of our customers supplied them (manufacturing) with a drawing which has an outside diameter (cylindrical surface) dimensioned with a size dimension as follows:
Ø .237 ±.003 with I symbol attached. (per Y14.5-2009)
Then the same OD has a cylindricity within .015 and a circularity within .008 applied.

The question from manufacturing: if the size tolerance is to be within .006 and all the actual local sizes are to be within .006 (.234 - .240) then how the circularity can be within .008. In their opinion any value bigger than the size tolerance does not make sense.

I don’t know the customer application; we are just making the parts for them per the print requirements.
 
Replies continue below

Recommended for you

It seems like the circularity tolerance would not do much.
 
There was a thread a few years ago that really delved into this. (What I'm about to show you was a pretty involved discussion, but if you really want an answer...)

What made the light bulb go on for me regarding circularity-bigger-than-size-tolerance was Pmarc's graphic that was the first post given on 8 May 2013:

[URL unfurl="true"]http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=344229[/url]

John-Paul Belanger
Certified Sr. GD&T Professional
Geometric Learning Systems
 
Okay. Thank you for your help.
Crisis has been diverted. I told manufacturing to ignore the I symbol, cylindricity and the circularity callouts. They were happy with the answer. Measure the parts, as usual, actual local size and qualify the parts per rule#1 and the parts are deemed to be acceptable. Happy campers.

But I am not happy with my understanding of the I symbol, I guess.
I read the thread shown above along with other threads on eng-tips and linkedin and I found some (in my opinion) conflicting informations/conclusions regarding this subject (Independency symbol).
If independency I symbol is used and rule#1 is not in charge, and the perfect form at MMC requirement is nullified only in the axial direction (and each individual cross-section the tolerance feature still needs to have a perfect form when produced at MMC) THEN how come and why is not in conflict with the statement from Y14.5-2009
5.4.3/2009:
“The circularity tolerance must be less than the size tolerance and other geometric tolerances that affect the circularity of the feature, except for those parts subject to free-state variation or the independency principle.”


 
And to help a little bit, if possible, IF on pmarc’s sketch attached the Independency symbol is attached on Ø79.5-80.0 size dimension, will the picture pass ASME requirements?

I do have a really hard time understanding circularity, specially combined with the Independency symbol per ASME Y14.5-2009.
 
 http://files.engineering.com/getfile.aspx?folder=101e4171-d951-4dfc-af61-2d4912c6ef64&file=independency_circularity_2.jpg
J-P Belanger, 3DDave, greenimi,or all,

Do you think that Ø60.8 “possible” value in Tec-ease example attached, is different if Independency symbol is added on Ø60.71±0.03 inside diameter dimension?
(Ø60.8 possible - bottom lower figure)

Or remain the same?--see attachment--
 
 http://files.engineering.com/getfile.aspx?folder=879530d4-d6ad-4593-b037-4fbd6fb7eb59&file=Circularity_Tec-Ease.JPG
Status
Not open for further replies.

Part and Inventory Search

Sponsor