Search results for query: *

Thanx that was too easy so I thought that's not the correct way :-)

Thanks but my point is that result of dividing mms by mms is not "%" I can't figure out how they transform deviation scale between mms and percentage

Hi I have some problems with understanding idea of calculating overall deviation - does anyone of you are familiar with this standard? a) "%" is not strictly clear for me, what are they reffering to when considering percentage values? b) why widthwise deviation is percentage larger than...

hello Gentelmens, with regards to ISO 1938... I have it in front of my eyes and I am not sure if I am doing this correctly I have a slot (to be checked with bar gauge type F) with envelope requirement, let's say 20mm +/- 0.2 Cause the size tolerance is not given as an ISO code, I am using...

yes I was thinking about this kind of calculation but before I started I thought the results will totally not comply with experiment I need to check it

thanks, but imagine the foot is made of homogenouse material and let's focus only on behavior of the thread - I will make physical tests to check it, but I am trying to estimate a rough formula for thread damage in this situation

hello, this seems to be a simple case however I have some doubts there's a statement that thread coils (not sure if I used correct word, eng is not my mother language) are not carrying a load (screw core is always taken under consideration during calculations) - but when the thread of...

Hi all, I was wondering - "standard" Heli-Coil insert thread class is defined at 6H tolerance when we are talking about screw "lock" insert version - GO gauge does not pass, which is rather normal situation because it's tighter I am wondering - how to verify if thread class in screw lock...

didn't have too much time lately but I read all your opinions we are already proceeding with solution which is similar to 3DDave proposal thanks

Hi, just a simple question I think, fig 9.7 from ASME is more or less the only suitable example for this generally it was hard for me to find any examples for runout with more than one datum (except fi 9.7) so I just to ask if this is correctly described: I am measuring runout , but for...

sorry, naturally C is in wrong place my bad we can discuss fig 7.44 - it will be easier I think

or in other words: see Fig 7.44 - how it shall be described if every hole have completely different size but I want to keep tolerance as a common for all of them?

Hi, this is somehow linked to mckski latest question, Nescius mentioned fig7-26 as a reference I took a closer at this figure and compared to my drawing. Do I need to repeat o|0,2|A|B|C at every dimension or is it obvious that 0,2 tolerance field is common for all 3 dimensions? Now this...

Thanks, so it was simpler than I thought. I have tendency to go overboard with intepretations sometimes.

Hi An extract from ISO14405-2 is attached. (Geometrical product specifications (GPS) -- Dimensional tolerancing -- Part 2: Dimensions other than linear sizes) // ISO 14405-2:2011 illustrates the use of geometrical tolerancing for dimensions that are not linear sizes to avoid the ambiguity that...

Thanks everyone for this prolific discussion. As usual innocent question brought interesting results.

pmarc, absolutely agree on your examples regarding straightness/runout relationship taking Euro standard into consideration, I understand that I have just found classic confusion in this general tolerances because in this particular case - if general tolerance runout is allowed to be 0,1 and...

thanks, naturally agree about 0.6 so "default" run-out applies only for at least two-step shafts for single-step shafts case like this, after specyfing datum on bearing surface, straighntess 0.1mm/1000mm could be more or less exchanged to run-out at 0.2mm?... it is hard to imagine this because...

yes, fully agree what's really interesting for me are the situations when theoretically easy question on this forum is placed and forum experts starts to discuss different interpretations this forum is really a treasure for me

hi I started to have some doubts. Runout is a sum of circularityy and coaxiality. And total runout is a sum of cylindricity and coaxiality. But let's analyze runout (1st option) This is one-step shaft. Assuming that circularity is perfect (no deviation), then coaxiality (created by...