1/2" PLATE vs PLATE, 1/2"
1/2" PLATE vs PLATE, 1/2"
(OP)
I hope this is the right forum for this question. My company is in the middle of a debate as to the proper way to call out material. Some engineers have asked for the 'PLATE, 1/2"' or 'TUBE, 4" X 2" X 1/4"' style, while others want the size located before the shape...
To my knowledge, there is no standard, but what is more common?
Thanks in advance for your input!
John
To my knowledge, there is no standard, but what is more common?
Thanks in advance for your input!
John





RE: 1/2" PLATE vs PLATE, 1/2"
"Good to know you got shoes to wear when you find the floor." - Robert Hunter
RE: 1/2" PLATE vs PLATE, 1/2"
"Good to know you got shoes to wear when you find the floor." - Robert Hunter
RE: 1/2" PLATE vs PLATE, 1/2"
For what it's worth our company spec calls out noun, adjective(s) order explicitly.
RE: 1/2" PLATE vs PLATE, 1/2"
"Art without engineering is dreaming; Engineering without art is calculating."
Have you read FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies to make the best use of these Forums?
RE: 1/2" PLATE vs PLATE, 1/2"
http:
RE: 1/2" PLATE vs PLATE, 1/2"
What is Engineering anyway: FAQ1088-1484: In layman terms, what is "engineering"?
RE: 1/2" PLATE vs PLATE, 1/2"
Thanks!
RE: 1/2" PLATE vs PLATE, 1/2"
Plus non mandatory Appendix C if you so choose.
What is Engineering anyway: FAQ1088-1484: In layman terms, what is "engineering"?
RE: 1/2" PLATE vs PLATE, 1/2"
RE: 1/2" PLATE vs PLATE, 1/2"
Also, putting the size (adj) before the name (noun) of the part doesn't make a lot of sense from an engineering perspective. 1/2" could be fore tubes, screws, plate, bar, etc.
Matt Lorono
Lorono's SolidWorks Resources & SolidWorks Legion
&
RE: 1/2" PLATE vs PLATE, 1/2"
What is Engineering anyway: FAQ1088-1484: In layman terms, what is "engineering"?
RE: 1/2" PLATE vs PLATE, 1/2"
Matt Lorono
Lorono's SolidWorks Resources & SolidWorks Legion
&
RE: 1/2" PLATE vs PLATE, 1/2"
<Material Spec>, <Size> STK THK (<Descriptive Name>)
For example,
AMS5599, 1/2" STK THK (INCONEL 718)
The descriptive name is optional, but helps avoid confusion.
RE: 1/2" PLATE vs PLATE, 1/2"
RE: 1/2" PLATE vs PLATE, 1/2"
As for not specifying stock material thicknesses for machined parts, I believe that this is the best practice. The manufacturer (being knowledgeable about manufacturing) may wish to use a particular size of stock material for reasons important to the machining process, but unimportant to the functionality of the part.
RE: 1/2" PLATE vs PLATE, 1/2"
STEEL, 1/2" STK THK, AMS5599
I am a Standards violator, myself. I dislike ALL CAPS and would go with:
Steel, 1/2" Stk Thk, AMS5599
RE: 1/2" PLATE vs PLATE, 1/2"
I've seen many drawings that only specify CRES or 300 SERIES SS, but if you're dealing with production parts, consistency matters; you want to be darn sure about your material properties if you're making 100,000 widgets. Hence, if I'm checking a drawing, the material spec should be on there (at very least).
RE: 1/2" PLATE vs PLATE, 1/2"
MATERIAL: 5052-H32 AL PER UNS A95052.
We don't have raw material in house, so I don't know how that would apply to naming a stock as its own item (standard first vs. general name and then standard)
Matt Lorono
Lorono's SolidWorks Resources & SolidWorks Legion
&