几何尺寸与公差论坛------致力于产品几何量公差标准GD&T (GDT:ASME)|New GPS(ISO)研究/CAD设计/CAM加工/CMM测量  


返回   几何尺寸与公差论坛------致力于产品几何量公差标准GD&T (GDT:ASME)|New GPS(ISO)研究/CAD设计/CAM加工/CMM测量 » Norm Space: Product Automatic Standards - 范数空间:产品自动化标准 » GD&T standards » Standard training » tec-ease(America)
用户名
密码
注册 帮助 会员 日历 银行 搜索 今日新帖 标记论坛为已读


回复
 
主题工具 搜索本主题 显示模式
旧 2009-09-05, 12:32 PM   #1
huangyhg
超级版主
 
huangyhg的头像
 
注册日期: 04-03
帖子: 18592
精华: 36
现金: 249466 标准币
资产: 1080358888 标准币
huangyhg 向着好的方向发展
默认 questions on drawing reading

questions on drawing reading
following are my questions when i read this drawing:
1. the drawing shows a movable gage (chuck or collet) to create datum x and datum y (because of the diameter size ?.250+.002-.003 is not a basic dimension), then how to check the profile tolerance between a and b (or c and d) since these portion covered by the gage.
2. is it legal to designate two different datum (x and l or y and m) on the same feature?
3. is it correct to have a between symbol on position tolerance callout?
4. is it legal for two different tolerance callouts on the same feature?
profile line control |profile line|.006| between e and f.
circular runout control |circular runout|.006|l| from section a-a.
thanks for your comments
seasonlee

1. datum x & y are in fact meant to be datum points by the look of it, not the diameters. however, i'm not sure they're properly indicated as they are only shown in the one view, it's not clear how far along those diameters they are meant to be.
2. again, x & y are datum points, not the entire feature. potentially this could be legal.
3. i think this is probably legal. it's telling you the position is only required on the diameter for the length of .538 shown in the above view where x & y are indicated (not same as x & y datum targets). the rest of the diameter still needs to be controlled by other tolerances though.
4.
kenat,
kenat
please note the profile callout
|profile|.006|x|l-m|n| x is primary datum
|profile|.006|y|l-m|n| y is primary datum
so, x and y here is not just a datum point.
seasonlee

here is a clear print, sorry for the earlier post.
seasonlee
x1 & y1 still appear to be indicated as datum points in the bottom left view. i see no other indications of additional datum points or other datum indicators for x & y.
i agree the profile call outs may not be valid as normally a single datum point wouldn't form a plane for the primary datum, however this is on the limits of my gd&t comfort zone. i'm not quite sure what they're trying to achieve with the l-m. if they mean the plane through l, oriented by m then i would have thought this was the primary datum.
there appear to be several problems with the drawing, i tried to limit my initial post to answering your questions as best i could.
kenat,
a reiew of the drawing in question, indicates to me that excessive control have been established that will result in an excessive cost for a part. sorry but my opinion.
any similar opinions?
x and y are not datum points but rather an indication of what portion of the feature must meet the tolerance. in other words the feature must meet the tolerance between points x and y. they have nothing to do with being datum points. this should take care of questions 1 and 2. i don't know the answer to question 3 but cross hatching the area, dimensioning it, and pointing an arrow to it saying "tolerance applies in this area" is how i've handled this in the past. regarding question 4; profile in this context must be associated with a datum so the profile of a line callout is illegal. the runout is incorrectly applied because it doesn't say where the measurement is to be taken and by definition, the feature will violate the tolerance. showing the .180 dimension appearing to be at the smallest diameter is not sufficient.
regarding similar opinions of the drawing, considering that i have no clue what the application of this part is, it would be unproductive for me to speculate on whether or not the tolerancing scheme is excessive or not, if there is such a thing, especially since that's not what the op asked. why would being specific in your requirements equate to an overly expensive part? what would you change about this tolerancing scheme to make it "cheaper"?
powerhound, gdtp t-0419
production manager
inventor 2009
mastercam x3
smartcam 11.1
ssg, u.s. army
taji, iraq oif ii
powerhound, x & y are used twice. in the top view to indicate a portion of the surface but also in the bottom left view they appear to be shown as datum points.
kenat,
powerhound
i think x and y designated as both datum and between points, they are used repeatedly, it's a problem need to be corrected for sure. my question is shall we use a v-block or movable chuck (or collet) to create the datum x and y?
based on what i understood there are no basic diameters given for the datum targets, a variable diameter gage should be used, so how can one to check ( or inspect ) the profile tolerance between point a and b (or c and d) since these portion covered by the variable diameter gage? the designer should think about the part inspection, any suggestions to solve this problem?
from what i know, it's a shackle used on padlock, would you mind to talk more on the "cheaper" design, which feature tolerance need to be changed?
seasonlee

it appears that a degree of tolerance relaxation would be appropriate for the .010+/-.005 and .015+/-.005 r. (diff to verify and overly restrictive)
n is not required in the fcf for posn tol of .115 and .250 dias.
targets x and y are misapplied
response to the op.
2. no
3. no
4. no
seasonlee,
the question of a cheaper design was directed at ringster since he seemed to already know what the function of the part was.
the x1 and y1 are either datum "points" or a datum line that is not fully defined. a v-block will not work for checking this part wrt a datum point or line.
powerhound, gdtp t-0419
production manager
inventor 2009
mastercam x3
smartcam 11.1
ssg, u.s. army
taji, iraq oif ii
__________________
借用达朗贝尔的名言:前进吧,你会得到信心!
[url="http://www.dimcax.com"]几何尺寸与公差标准[/url]
huangyhg离线中   回复时引用此帖
GDT自动化论坛(仅游客可见)
回复


主题工具 搜索本主题
搜索本主题:

高级搜索
显示模式

发帖规则
不可以发表新主题
不可以回复主题
不可以上传附件
不可以编辑您的帖子

vB 代码开启
[IMG]代码开启
HTML代码关闭

相似的主题
主题 主题发起者 论坛 回复 最后发表
drawing number system - do you still indicate dwg sie in the huangyhg tec-ease(America) 0 2009-09-05 10:30 AM
drawing conversion from plus minus to comply with gdt std huangyhg tec-ease(America) 0 2009-09-05 10:28 AM
datum reference style old new on y14.5m standard drawing huangyhg tec-ease(America) 0 2009-09-04 05:44 PM
【转帖】drawing number system - do you still indicate dwg sie in the yang686526 American standards 0 2009-04-29 07:45 PM
【转帖】asme - where to star yang686526 American standards 0 2009-04-29 07:28 PM


所有的时间均为北京时间。 现在的时间是 09:08 AM.


于2004年创办,几何尺寸与公差论坛"致力于产品几何量公差标准GD&T | GPS研究/CAD设计/CAM加工/CMM测量"。免责声明:论坛严禁发布色情反动言论及有关违反国家法律法规内容!情节严重者提供其IP,并配合相关部门进行严厉查处,若內容有涉及侵权,请立即联系我们QQ:44671734。注:此论坛须管理员验证方可发帖。
沪ICP备06057009号-2
更多