I too would not recommend it, but I think it's pretty clear in meaning the axis. Definition (e) does mention an extension line of a cylinder (which the right-hand figure shows) and (e) even says that it can be separated from the size dimension (the arrows). It doesn't say that such usage must...
You didn't describe the feature that the perp tolerance is applied to. But if it's a surface then yes, profile of a surface might be an alternate way to do things. But if it's a hole/pin or other "feature of size" then I wouldn't change the symbol to profile because that would change the...
Hi.... First of all, I think you're referring to just Fig. 4-31 and its sub-figures of 4-31(a), 4-31(b), and 4-31(c). They're all on page 73 of that 2009 edition.
Regarding your main question, in that third example where they invoke MMB, yes one point of contact (minimum) is required. The...
Suppose we were dealing with a square peg/hole: If it had a similar dimension of .753 +/- xxx and the word SQUARE, would you also say that its definition is lacking?
I wouldn't. (I know there's a square symbol, but I'm just posing this question to keep it analogous to the HEX question.)
Since the drawing clearly says "HEX," I think it's clear that the datum is intended to be created from the full six sides, not just the two flats being pointed to.
In the ASME Y14.5 standard, Figure 7-3 shows two interesting examples at the bottom of that graphic. Although they are rounded, not...
That's true for the boundary/simulator/counterpart; of course. But the initial question (highlighted in yellow in the first post) was whether the modifier affected DATUM B -- the "theoretical axis of the inner hole," to use the OP's phrasing. Thus, it's probably best to answer the question based...
I'll be nitpicky -- that's not quite true. For a feature being toleranced with position at MMC (the four holes), that would be true. But a datum is always a theoretical plane, axis, point, or combo of those. With MMB, it just means that the theoretical axis is one that's derived from the feature...
jassco, according to paragraph 8.4.3 of the 2018 standard, I think that the AVG notation already tosses R#1 out the window. So I'd still say that the F is not needed.
There is no way to say if a tolerance is tight or not, without understand the function and the mfg process juxtaposed to each other. (What is the purpose of the clip?)
Why is .005 inch a tight tolerance? What if we were making something at a microscopic level? Then it would be a huge...
Perhaps the flatness callout is tagged to a surface that also happens to be a datum feature. Then, you could indeed locate a hole (position) from that "flatnessed" surface.
Attached is an example of a slot-type shape being used as a datum feature, from Fig. 7-3 of the ASME Y14.5 standard. However, since you are asking about two slots, you'd have to be careful not to overconstrain the degrees of freedom. Perhaps you could reference B and C with the "M" modifier...