×
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

Rule #1 Question - Implied Flatness

Rule #1 Question - Implied Flatness

Rule #1 Question - Implied Flatness

(OP)
Quick scenario, followed by a question:

A vendor fabricates a large circular panel. It is comprised of two thin aluminum face sheets bonded to aluminum honeycomb core in between. Holes were drilled in this panel, located with positional tolerances. The thickness dimension on the panel is 0.80", +-.1". No explicit flatness is defined. The fabricated part is warped (by a half inch in some places!).

Given that a drawing note indicates to interpret the drawing per ASME Y14.5M-2009;

Does Rule #1 apply to the thickness dimension of this panel (i.e. implied flatness of .2" if the part is built to the nominal dimension)?

Or, does the "stock item" argument hold any water here, thereby nullifying Rule #1? The face sheets were called out as .020" 2024-T3C aluminum, and the data sheet for the aluminum core only mentions a thickness tolerance of +-.006".

I realize that there *should* have been an explicit flatness callout on the drawing to avoid confusion, but unfortunately that's water under the bridge at this point.

RE: Rule #1 Question - Implied Flatness

Thickness and flatness are two totally different dimensions. I've had this argument on many occasions. You can buy a sheet of steel and see out of flatness conditions of 3/4" or greater be on the sheet and still meet the material this thickness. You may stand a chance by calling the problem a workmanship problem however the vendor will then point out put the tolerance on the print. Try to use the part as is or add a flattening operation or order new parts which meet your requirements.
Bill

RE: Rule #1 Question - Implied Flatness

If the drawing has the .80"+-.1" clearly stated on it for the assembled panel then my understanding would be that yes "Rule #1 <does> apply to the thickness dimension of this panel (i.e. implied flatness of .2" if the part is built to the nominal dimension)?"

This assembly dimension/tolerance would override the stock dims of the piece parts.

If you don't need tighter than .020 flatness then you don't actually need to add separate flatness tol. However, because places frequently overlook the application of rule 1 to part thickness it can be a good idea to add it as a preventative measure.

Posting guidelines FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm? (probably not aimed specifically at you)
What is Engineering anyway: FAQ1088-1484: In layman terms, what is "engineering"?

RE: Rule #1 Question - Implied Flatness

If the finished part is given a finished thickness dimension then that controls the flatness/straightness. You should not need a flatness control unless +/-.1 was larger than required.

The 'stock' tolerance is to avoid substituting the title block or note dimension tolerance and control for an existing one which may be better or worse.

RE: Rule #1 Question - Implied Flatness

Agree with the others. But just to clarify, the implied flatness tolerance would NOT be .2" if the part is built to the nominal dimension. The nominal dimension is .80, which only affords .1 warpage. (Only a part at the least material condition would get the full .2 for flatness purposes.)

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

RE: Rule #1 Question - Implied Flatness

(OP)
Thanks for all the responses. Much appreciated!

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