【转帖】rue position of coaxial diameters

yang686526

true position of coaxial diameters
if i have a drawing with two coaxial diameters with no true position callout, what is the assumed true position, if any?
is it located positionally by the size tolerance?
thanks,
runz,
could you describ the part.....is it a shaft or block?
i you have asme y14.5m then check the taylor principle or comely known a rule #1 - where only a tolerance of size is specified, the limits of size of an individual feature prescribe the extent to which variations in it geometric form, as well as its size, are allowed.
if this is a shaft part....then i would make one hole a datum and apply runout to the other hole referencing the applied datum.  do not use tp on a shaft....your qa department will through a fit.
best regards,
heckler
sr. mechanical engineer
sw2005 sp 5.0 & pro/e 2001
dell precision 370
p4 3.6 ghz, 1gb ram
xp pro sp2.0
nivida quadro fx 1400
      o
  _`\(,_
(_)/ (_)
"coming together is a beginning, staying together is progress, and working together is success." - henry ford

like hole with counterbore, features are assumed to be concentric to each other within size tolerance(s). where holes are located to your other datum is depending on the dimensioning done to define their location.
if it's a counter bored hole then you can apply the same tp tolerance for the hole and c'bore or individual tp tolerances to the hole and c'bore by placing the word individually under the feature control frame.  so if you applied a single tp feature control frame to the hole and c'bore it would be understood that these features.  there is a section in the spec that deals specifically with c'bore holes.
best regards,
heckler
sr. mechanical engineer
sw2005 sp 5.0 & pro/e 2001
dell precision 370
p4 3.6 ghz, 1gb ram
xp pro sp2.0
nivida quadro fx 1400
      o
  _`\(,_
(_)/ (_)
"coming together is a beginning, staying together is progress, and working together is success." - henry ford

the part in question is actually a stepped pin.  if the centerline axis runs through both diameters, is there a default true position implied?  if so, does a true position tolerance added to one of the diameters need to be a refinement of the size tolerance?
i have a drawing of a stepped pin and the centerline runs through the entire part.  the size tolerance on the smaller diameter is ±.010 and the true position tolerance is ±.022.
just wanted to know if a tighter true position was already being held by default, then the ±.022.
thanks,
runz,
as i mentioned in my previous post......i would not use tp for this.  i would make one diameter a datum and reference the other diameter to that datum via runout or total runout.  the same would be true if you want to use tp one diameter would have to be a datum and the other diameter would be referenced to that datum.
a positional tolerance defines a zone within which the center, axis or cetner plane of a feature of size is permitted to vary from true (theoretically exact) position.
circular runout is a two dimensional, surface to an axis control.  the tolerance is applied independently at each circular cross section.  when applied to a surface constructed around a datum axis, circular runout will control cumulative variations of circularity and coaxiality.  unlike total runout , it doesn't control taper.
total runout is a three dimensional, surface to an axis control.  total runout provides a composite control of all surface elements.  when applied to a surface constructed around a datum axis, total runout will control the cumulative variations of circularity, straightness, coaxiality, angularity, taper and variations in the surface.
best regards,
heckler
sr. mechanical engineer
sw2005 sp 5.0 & pro/e 2001
dell precision 370
p4 3.6 ghz, 1gb ram
xp pro sp2.0
nivida quadro fx 1400
      o
  _`\(,_
(_)/ (_)
"coming together is a beginning, staying together is progress, and working together is success." - henry ford

part shows common axis so small diameter must run-out within +/-0.010 of large diameter by default (taylor principal), your true position is redundant (and way too big). as heckler wrote, do not use true postition for cylindrical parts, this is not good useage. use runout or total runout (or roundness/cylindricity if you have machinery to measure this.)
sorry, crosspost with heckler...
regardless of true position or concentricity, section 2.7.3 (relationship between individusl features) seems to disagree with alexit's statement of run-out.
am i misinterpreting this section.
without any true position, concentricity, etc, how much can the center axis of these two coaxial diamter (each with a size tolerance of ±.010) vary?
i guess to put it another way, if i can live with a true position of .020 between the two coaxial diameters, do i need to add any controls to the drawing if the size tolerance is ±.010?  if there are no gd&t controls, what is the positional relationship between the two diamters?
thanks,
"runout tolerance control - where a combination of surfaces of revolution are cylindrical, conical, or spherical relative to a common datum axis, a runout tolerance is recommended.  for this type of control, mmc is not applicable because the tolerance controls elements of the surface." quoted from the spec
best regards,
heckler
sr. mechanical engineer
sw2005 sp 5.0 & pro/e 2001
dell precision 370
p4 3.6 ghz, 1gb ram
xp pro sp2.0
nivida quadro fx 1400
      o
  _`\(,_
(_)/ (_)
"coming together is a beginning, staying together is progress, and working together is success." - henry ford