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!

*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.

Jobs

KCC of Cylindricity Vs Straightness and Circularity

KCC of Cylindricity Vs Straightness and Circularity

(OP)
Hello,

The company's global team for a product family is calling out cylindricity as a KCC moving forward. Due to supplier relations/history on these products for our specific plant, we will be using straightness and circularity as KCCs. What are everyone's thoughts on this? Are we losing any control over the product by doing this?

Thanks.

RE: KCC of Cylindricity Vs Straightness and Circularity

Converting cylindricity to a combination of straightness and circularity still leaves open the possibility of taper. Realize that cylindricity limits the taper (parallelism, so to speak), which is lost if you go with straightness and circularity.

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

RE: KCC of Cylindricity Vs Straightness and Circularity

Total runout? smile

"For every expert there is an equal and opposite expert"
Arthur C. Clarke Profiles of the future

RE: KCC of Cylindricity Vs Straightness and Circularity

Go_Bucks,

What is wrong with cylindricity?

--
JHG

RE: KCC of Cylindricity Vs Straightness and Circularity

(OP)
@drawoh, for the record I would prefer cylindricity. The way it was described to me, our suppliers have been using straightness and circularity for so long it was "easier" to not change it and just add the KCCs to it to the current spec. I don't fully understand the reasoning, but I like to think there is logic behind it.

RE: KCC of Cylindricity Vs Straightness and Circularity

Go_Bucks,

You need to specify what you want. You don't care how they do it. If they inspect for straightness and circularity and ship you good parts, everything is fine. If you inspect and find they are not cylindrical, you send the parts back, and they review their procedure.

I have never specified cylindricity. It implies to me that you need the part to be round and straight, but that you can tolerate a lot of diameter error.

--
JHG

RE: KCC of Cylindricity Vs Straightness and Circularity

You can tell if it's important by looking at the sensitivity analysis for the function of the feature and any interactions with other parts. It's probably going to be in the stress analysis for the system, but there may be something in the performance analysis.

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


Close Box

Join Eng-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close