×
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

General Surface Profile in a Note

General Surface Profile in a Note

General Surface Profile in a Note

(OP)
Do you guys feel like it is appropriate to place a general surface profile tolerance in a general note? The concern that I have is that you don't have a leader line to apply the all-over symbol, nor is it easy to add the text "all over" under the feature control frame within the text notes. So this is what I came up with. (forgive the non-cad formatting) The primary question is, am I missing something that makes this implementation of a general tolerance a "fatal flaw?"

4. UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED, THE GENERAL TOLERANCE IS ⌓0.5ABC ALL OVER.

I've been through quite a bit of this forum looking at the various opinions on general surface profile tolerances. I have ASME Y14.5 if you have a reference that I missed. I think the idea is pretty slick. I especially like doing away with the default tolerance block with significant decimal places. (Metric with no trailing zeros, anyone?)

Perhaps I should simply forego the note and attach the feature control frame to one of my drawing views. I expect that a machinist would look at my title block with no tolerance block and then look at notes. I kind of like notes to establish "policy" for an entire drawing.

This would be my first drawing done for personal use, hence no corporate guidance to follow. I'm writing my own rules.

Thanks to all for your contributions throughout the years. You've done a tremendous service to engineers world wide. (esp KENAT, CheckerHater, drawoh, Sykes and others)

Regards,
Jason C. Wells

RE: General Surface Profile in a Note

It is perfectly fine to use text note to clarify your requirement when symbology alone doesn't seem to do the trick. So, no "fatal flaw".

Using Profile "all over" as general requirement was mentioned on this forum and seems to be acceptable. (Please note that if you reference your control to A|B|C, then A, B and C should be shown somewhere on the drawing.)

Using FCF is also appropriate (see enclosed picture).

You notice "drawing done for personal use"; do you "personally" also have the means to measure your Profile in reasonable way?

"doing away with the default tolerance block with significant decimal places" is another "larger than life" topic bringing in heated discussions on this forum.

And question that should probably be asked first: are you operating under ASME or ISO framework?

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

RE: General Surface Profile in a Note

(OP)
I think I've read all the hot topics you mention. I've always thought that the default tolerance block causes more problems than it solves. Surface profile all-over is just too powerful to ignore.

The only critical feature on my part is the threads and I will buy gauges for those. The tolerance on threads falls under the "UOS" rubric (e.g. UNC-2B, ISO 6g).

Thanks for attaching the picture. Perhaps specifying the all-over surface profile in a drawing view is more clear. Clarity being the benchmark for all drafting decisions. Since I haven't incurred a fatal flaw, I'll just have to decide. Thanks!

RE: General Surface Profile in a Note

(OP)
I read the first link before I came here. I eventually concluded that CheckerHater and JNieman had the most salient comments. The best example of the meaning of UOS was a default surface roughness with a local specification of surface roughness. I think a default surface profile vs a local surface profile is interpreted in precisely the same fashion.

I believe a default surface profile UOS will serve its purpose for 90% of features I need. If there is unclarity with defaults, then it's my job to clarify. Ultimately, 8.3.1.6 says UOS. So adding UOS to a note is repetitive. I will probably delete UOS from the note for that reason.

Regards,
Jason

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