Stupid counterbore and interupted chamfer questions
Stupid counterbore and interupted chamfer questions
(OP)
1- Is there a preferred way to callout counterbored holes? I mean, should the callout arrow be on the hole (the smallest) or on the counterbore (the bigger) instead?. The 2009 ASME standard seems to lean towards the later.
http://files.engineering.com/getfile.aspx?folder=e...
2- I have a shaft output with splines and therefore the lead-in chamfer is interuppted. How do I callout such a chamfer? Should I add a multiplier to account the individual faces or just take it as the single feature it was before the splines? The continuous feature symbol would have been useful in this case but unfortunately, it applies only for features of size.
http://files.engineering.com/getfile.aspx?folder=b...
Thanks for you time.
2JL
http://files.engineering.com/getfile.aspx?folder=e...
2- I have a shaft output with splines and therefore the lead-in chamfer is interuppted. How do I callout such a chamfer? Should I add a multiplier to account the individual faces or just take it as the single feature it was before the splines? The continuous feature symbol would have been useful in this case but unfortunately, it applies only for features of size.
http://files.engineering.com/getfile.aspx?folder=b...
Thanks for you time.
2JL





RE: Stupid counterbore and interupted chamfer questions
My own rule of thumb which is completely imagined is - I put it the more critical feature, or if equally uncritical, the inner. I'd be very happy to know if there's a "right" way, though.
I believe the chamfer is one feature and needs one instance of callout. The drawing view removes ambiguity, so I don't think there's a vulnerability in the requirement.
_________________________________________
NX8.0, Solidworks 2014, AutoCAD, Enovia V5
RE: Stupid counterbore and interupted chamfer questions
"For every expert there is an equal and opposite expert"
Arthur C. Clarke Profiles of the future
RE: Stupid counterbore and interupted chamfer questions
_________________________________________
NX8.0, Solidworks 2014, AutoCAD, Enovia V5
RE: Stupid counterbore and interupted chamfer questions
JNieman, I agree with you, the drawing view should be enough to remove any ambiguity. Counting the number of chamfer faces might just do the opposite!
2JL
RE: Stupid counterbore and interupted chamfer questions
Regarding the splined end chamfer, you do not need to use a multiplier.
RE: Stupid counterbore and interupted chamfer questions
RE: Stupid counterbore and interupted chamfer questions
RE: Stupid counterbore and interupted chamfer questions
At least in the -1994 version there is bit of a disclaimer over figures in 1.1.4
What is Engineering anyway: FAQ1088-1484: In layman terms, what is "engineering"?
RE: Stupid counterbore and interupted chamfer questions
I think the phrase "The symbol shall precede... the dimension" covers it, as there is nothing in call-out, but symbol and dimension.
To me there is enough text and pictures as the enclosed picture shows.
"For every expert there is an equal and opposite expert"
Arthur C. Clarke Profiles of the future
RE: Stupid counterbore and interupted chamfer questions
_________________________________________
NX8.0, Solidworks 2014, AutoCAD, Enovia V5
RE: Stupid counterbore and interupted chamfer questions
Of course, that can be interpreted differently as well.
"Know the rules well, so you can break them effectively."
-Dalai Lama XIV
RE: Stupid counterbore and interupted chamfer questions
RE: Stupid counterbore and interupted chamfer questions
2. Second image
Chris, CSWA
SolidWorks '15
SolidWorks Legion
RE: Stupid counterbore and interupted chamfer questions
John Acosta, GDTP Senior Level
Manufacturing Engineering Tech
SSG, U.S. Army
Taji, Iraq OIF II
RE: Stupid counterbore and interupted chamfer questions
What if the text says "You shall do it as figure shows"?
"For every expert there is an equal and opposite expert"
Arthur C. Clarke Profiles of the future