×
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

Position Tolerance - Urgent Help !

Position Tolerance - Urgent Help !

Position Tolerance - Urgent Help !

(OP)
Hi All,

I have little experience with using GD&T. I have a 8mm plate in which there are 12 bushings. The location of these bushings are critical.
In-order to control this, i have made 1 bushing as Datum B, and given position tolerance of 0.3mm. All the other bushings are referenced to this. Datum A is the bottom surface of the part.
I am not sure if this way of dimensioning is correct. Please help me in correcting this. Please find the attached picture of the drawing.

RE: Position Tolerance - Urgent Help !

One quick comment about the dimensioning -- you don't need to say 2X or 3X or whatever because it's already understood that all holes/bushings that appear on the same line will be at that distance.

If all bushings are of equal importance, then the best way might not be to pick on one of them as datum B, but rather have datum B be the bottom (or top) surface. Then, there is a special way in GD&T to control the location of the bushings on the part, while controlling their spacing to each other a little more accurately.

It's called composite position tolerancing. If you're new to GD&T this might be a little advanced, but I'm thinking that it may be a good solution for patterns such as yours. The way it's displayed is to show a "double-decker" position callout with one position symbol centered vertically in the first compartment, but then have two lines of tolerance. See attached image for a random example of what one looks like.

John-Paul Belanger
Certified Sr. GD&T Professional
Geometric Learning Systems

RE: Position Tolerance - Urgent Help !

I would first ask, what exactly does "the location of these bushings are critical" mean?

Is it enough to keep bushings within dia. 0.3 relative to each other without worrying too much about location of pattern of bushings relative to some faces of outer contour of the part (like face identified C) or is location of the pattern relative to the outer contour critical too?

If former, then J-P's (Belanger's) suggestion to use composite positional tolerancing is good choice. If latter, then simple single segment positional callout may be well enough.

RE: Position Tolerance - Urgent Help !

(OP)
Thanks to both of you for this feedback. I am only concerned about the Bushings locations relative to each other and not to the outer contours.
I will study about Composite tolerancing and figure out on how to use it.
Last question: For knowledge sake, if my location of the pattern was important w.r.t to the outer contour, is mentioning Datum reference A & C in the feature control frame sufficient? Is it necessary to include Datum B in the box ?

RE: Position Tolerance - Urgent Help !

Hi deepeshmm

Well you have a datum C but there is not a single hole dimensioned from it so having datum C is pointless.
I cannot find datum A on your post and thirdly while I can see you have a datum B which is one of the holes it appears to be floating as it isn't dimensioned from any of the other datums, if you want to keep datum C then dimension the hole referenced datum B from it.

RE: Position Tolerance - Urgent Help !

No, it is not sufficient to reference to A & C in the feature control frame. This just controls perpendicularity of the pattern relative to datum plane A and location in horizontal direction from datum plane C. However, nothing controls location of the pattern in vertical direction.

desertfox has a good point about lack of basic dimension from datum feature C to at least one center of the hole within the pattern. It has to be there.

RE: Position Tolerance - Urgent Help !

(OP)
Ok. I notice this basic error i have made. I have modified the drawing, and it seems right to me now (i.e. considering the outer contours is important).
I have attached the updated pic now. Please tell me what do you think about this. Looking forward to your feedback.

RE: Position Tolerance - Urgent Help !

Hi deepeshmm

That looks a lot better now!

RE: Position Tolerance - Urgent Help !

Yes, better -- don't forget to drop the 2X and 3X before all basic dimensions.

John-Paul Belanger
Certified Sr. GD&T Professional
Geometric Learning Systems

RE: Position Tolerance - Urgent Help !

deepeshmm:
You still have the redundant 2X multipliers on the horizontal dimensions. As already explained, whenever there are extension lines extending to in-line features the multiplier is not needed. Also, nowhere on the drawing is datum feature B used. Lastly, the drawing is not functionally dimensioned. Formally, you're dimensioning scheme is sound because with basic dimensions it doesn't really matter how their placed, but you can always take a step up and dimension the part in a way that shows the spacing between features; if someone wanted to determine those functionally important dimensions they can see them directly on the drawing and won't be required to do arithmetic to get them. The way you've done it is traditionally the way coordinate dimensions (non-basic dimensions with +/- block tolerance applied) are placed to avoid chain dimensioning and minimize the resulting tolerance accumulation. But there's nothing technically wrong with the way you've done it since you are using basic dimensions.


Tunalover

RE: Position Tolerance - Urgent Help !

(OP)
I have done the changes. I still have to understand Composite tolerancing. But thank you all for helping me out !

RE: Position Tolerance - Urgent Help !

Tunalover, you mention "whenever there are extension lines extending to in-line features the multiplier is not needed." I follow this practice and I see this indicated in Y14.5M for example in Fig, 1-55, but is this explicitly declared anywhere? Paragraphs 1.9.5 seem to be where this is should be covered, but it's not.

I only have access to Y14.5 and Y14.100 but I'm trying to dot my t's and cross my i's for the new boss who seems to love it when I share chapter and verse.

Thanks for any insight. Diego

RE: Position Tolerance - Urgent Help !

I don't think it has to be explicitly declared; when you dimension to a centerline with multiple features on it, you are still dimensioning to the centerline, not the individual features. By default, the features are considered to be on that centerline (if that is the way they are presented). A bolt circle is a good example... you never see "#X" appended to such a dimension as only one centerline diameter is being dimensioned, but many holes may lie on that diameter.
If the centerline does not connect to all of the holes in line (even though they do lie on a line), then you would add a qty to the related locational dimensions.
Hope that makes sense!winky smile

ôKnow the rules well, so you can break them effectively.ö
-Dalai Lama XIV

RE: Position Tolerance - Urgent Help !

Thanks for the feedback ewh, it does make sense. I wondered if this explicitly applied only when using a basic dimension to the centerline, or if it applies (Per Y14.5M or some other ASME standard that I don't have) when GTOL is not used.

Thanks, Diego

RE: Position Tolerance - Urgent Help !

It is basic drafting, with or without GD&T.

ôKnow the rules well, so you can break them effectively.ö
-Dalai Lama XIV

RE: Position Tolerance - Urgent Help !

One minor issue, I don't see where datum B is used.

Looking at this particular dimensioning scheme, it seems like you would want to use a composite true position for the hole pattern.

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