Implied 90 degrees: Is it enough?
Implied 90 degrees: Is it enough?
(OP)
I have searched through all the threads and reread Y14.5 but still can't articulate the answer to settle this argument so I'd appreciate some opinions.
The flange in the weldment drawing pictured is welded to a pipe which is in turn welded to a plate. The flange (detailed on a separate drawing) has two small holes on a diameter.
The weldment drawing has a title block angle tolerance.
Is "implied 90°" enough to control the orientation (rotation) of the flange as shown to within the title block angular tolerance or are additional control needed?
Hope this makes sense, and thank in advance.
The flange in the weldment drawing pictured is welded to a pipe which is in turn welded to a plate. The flange (detailed on a separate drawing) has two small holes on a diameter.
The weldment drawing has a title block angle tolerance.
Is "implied 90°" enough to control the orientation (rotation) of the flange as shown to within the title block angular tolerance or are additional control needed?
Hope this makes sense, and thank in advance.





RE: Implied 90 degrees: Is it enough?
If in doubt, dimension it.
Chris, CSWA
SolidWorks 14
SolidWorks Legion
RE: Implied 90 degrees: Is it enough?
It is best relied on when there is no intention to closely check the result, as when confidence in the general skills of the fabricators exceeds the perceived need for precision. Many warships and clockworks were made with that technical understanding.
The development of feature control frames and geometric characteristics was to make plain what features of a design are related to one another and in what way. It makes recording those relationships easier, but you could write a note that describes the desired outcome. It's there is you need it.
RE: Implied 90 degrees: Is it enough?
Refer to ASME Y14.5M-1994 2.7.3 for my reasoning thread1103-344036: implied positional tolerance?
What is Engineering anyway: FAQ1088-1484: In layman terms, what is "engineering"?