×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Step on surface allowance?

Step on surface allowance?

Step on surface allowance?

(OP)
I have a stamped part with a suface height requirement of .380/.365". In order to acheive this on the non-flat part after stamping, the supplier milled the face leaving a .005" step part way across the suface. Dimensionally the part meets the requirment, but I consider the step unacceptable for function of mating part.  I cannot find anything in Y14.5m/GD&T to support my case with supplier. Do we really need to call out something as simple as "no Steps permitted" or specifiy a flatness tolerance on all our drawings?   

RE: Step on surface allowance?

The short answer to your final question is "yes". If your tolerance allows steps and you don't want them, you need to say it. There is a way to eliminate this according to the new standard. See the following tip:

http://www.tec-ease.com/tips/may-09.htm

It is a common misconception that the supplier "should know better" and all kinds of other nonsense like that but the bottom line is that one should apply tolerances (including "form" tolerances) based on a little forethought up front in order to get what you want.

 There is a new symbol in the new standard that is for a Spotface. They had to do this in order to make a spotface mean something different than a counterbore because of a lawsuit that had to do with a supplier creating a spotface on a casting that wound up breaking through an o-ring groove and thus ruining the parts. The supplier wound up winning the lawsuit even though they probably should have known better than to break into the o-ring groove.

  If you have no flatness callout less than .005 on your print, then you are probably going to have to buy those parts unless your supplier is willing to rework or remake them.

Powerhound, GDTP T-0419
Production Manager
Inventor 2009
Mastercam X3
Smartcam 11.1
SSG, U.S. Army
Taji, Iraq OIF II

RE: Step on surface allowance?

You may also note a surface finish or roughness, or both.

Chris
SolidWorks 09, CATIA V5
ctopher's home (updated Aug 5, 2008)
SolidWorks Legion

RE: Step on surface allowance?

GSKMP,

  Perhaps you could post a drawing of your part and allow us to offer some advice on how to correctly apply GD&T. It's possible there are other issues with the print that may rear their ugly heads the next time you have these parts made.

Powerhound, GDTP T-0419
Production Manager
Inventor 2009
Mastercam X3
Smartcam 11.1
SSG, U.S. Army
Taji, Iraq OIF II

RE: Step on surface allowance?

See p.162 at the end of para. 6.4.2.1.1 for an example of how to apply flatness on a unit basis per the 1994 standard. This will prevent your problem from happening again.

  In case you were interested; by default, your flatness error could have been up to .015 and the part would still have been good and/or it could have been out of parallel by .015 and still been good UNLESS you had a parallel callout and a datum that it was tied to. Did you have any datum structure and GD&T applied to the part at all?

Powerhound, GDTP T-0419
Production Manager
Inventor 2009
Mastercam X3
Smartcam 11.1
SSG, U.S. Army
Taji, Iraq OIF II

RE: Step on surface allowance?

(OP)
I was just looking for an opportunity to hold the supplier accountable. Appears I am out of luck. I'll update this forty year old drawing to correct this and look at other potential issues. Thanks for your advice.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources