×
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

GD&T Interpretation - Perpendicularity and Limits of Size

GD&T Interpretation - Perpendicularity and Limits of Size

GD&T Interpretation - Perpendicularity and Limits of Size

(OP)
I reccently had to check a drawing of a right cylinder, with a length tolerance of +/-1 and a perpendicularity requirement on each flat end of 1.5 with respect to the axis (Datum A).

I rejected the drawing, on the basis that if each end has 1.5 perpendicularity at the same time, then rule 1 is violated, as the resultant size range on the length of the cylinder based on the prependicularity tolerace would be 3, not 2, as defined by the size tolerance called out.

It was then suggested to me that I had the wrong interpretation. By having a 1.5 perpendicularity tolerance on each end, they argued that if one end of the cylinder is at 1.5, then the other end can only be 0.5 because it is regulated by the size tolerance.

So basically, the debate is my interpretation that having all 3 requirements on a drawing consititutes an "AND" requirement, where all information must agree simultaneously as presented, while the competing interpretation constitutes a conditional requirement("OR"), where the maximum deviation may only occur on one side at a given time, but either side is eligible for the maximum deviation.

(Of course the whole thing could be made a non-issue by using different combinations of GD&T, or by adjusting the tolerances accordingly, but for reasons unknown to me, there is resistance to these simple changes)

Whats the right interpretation? Can anyone link a passage in the ASME standard which clarifies this? (I do have the standard, but am not sure what phrases or keywords I should use to search).

RE: GD&T Interpretation - Perpendicularity and Limits of Size

The original drawing was fine. It's true that each end would not be able to tilt in opposite directions (because that would throw the length beyond its size tolerance). But if both flats tilt the same way, then a tape-measure type of gage would still see the overall length as correct.
In ASME Y14.5, check out paragraphs 2.7 and 2.7.4. The latter states that a size dimension/tolerance has no bearing on orientation.

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

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