circular run-out vs perpendicularity
circular run-out vs perpendicularity
(OP)
There is a debate going on in my office about weather to use circular run-out or perpendicularity and I'm looking for some help.
The part is a simple cylindrical stop post for a die set. I believe that circular run-out of the ends of the post to the cylinder give the machinist the most freedom and still keep the part functional. I want the ends to be parallel and perpendicular to the cylinder. I'm not concerned about the ends being concave or convex.
Is circular runout the best choice? Or would perpendicularity or total run-out be a better choice?
The part is a simple cylindrical stop post for a die set. I believe that circular run-out of the ends of the post to the cylinder give the machinist the most freedom and still keep the part functional. I want the ends to be parallel and perpendicular to the cylinder. I'm not concerned about the ends being concave or convex.
Is circular runout the best choice? Or would perpendicularity or total run-out be a better choice?





RE: circular run-out vs perpendicularity
Circular runout does not (have the same effect).
What is more important, the ends to be parallel with each other or to be perpendicular to the axis of the cylinder?
You can even use the rule#1 to control the parallelism between the ends (size tolerance will control the orientation in this case)
Whatever will be functional ..........that is your call.