Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!

Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!

Register Log in
  • Congratulations MintJulep on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

Search results for query: *

  1. mopar4u

    GRR and Set-Up Process

    Exactly how did you do the gr&r? Did you calculate the gr&r using .00016 as your total tolerance? Did you do it using the exact method and parts that you will be measuring in process? I guess the reason I ask is that tolerance is really tight and the average cmm probably would struggle...
  2. mopar4u

    GD&T true position question

    Where in the ansi standards does it show the true position formula 2 * SGRT( X to the 2 + Y to the 2)?
  3. mopar4u

    Another concentricity vs runout thread

    1. would a cmm report .023 or .046 for concentricity in the example in the link? 2. so the statement that I hear a lot that "in general tir is double concentricity" is false? (assuming roundness is perfect).
  4. mopar4u

    Another concentricity vs runout thread

    aaahhhh don't all concentricty callouts have a diametrical tolerance zone called out? should the end result be concentric within .023, not .046?
  5. mopar4u

    Another concentricity vs runout thread

    why was his concentricity twice the radial distance?
  6. mopar4u

    Another concentricity vs runout thread

    I realize there has been several of these threads but the more I read the more I get confused. Unfortunately there is no one where I work to go to with these questions. For the longest time I was always under the assumption that "concentricty for the most part will be half your tir" assuming...
  7. mopar4u

    Is this correct GD&T?

    "How is this - NO! Your parallelism of the C/L of the feature references one side of the same feature. Go figure that one. Take the parallelism out for sure. Positional to datum B is OK. This is just showing symmetry and it is only for the width of the feature so that is OK. I don't know how...
  8. mopar4u

    Is this correct GD&T?

    The total runout is to be checked using datum A and Datum B of equal importance, hence the A-B in the frame. Datum A and Datum B are our bearing journals. Heckler, I agree, that parallelism callout is wrong. I guess the more that I look at it, the more symmetry seems to fit what the drafter...
  9. mopar4u

    Is this correct GD&T?

    I'm thinking a symmetry callout would be appropriate?
  10. mopar4u

    Is this correct GD&T?

    How would you inspect runout on two flats? I agree, some kind of runout would be the correct callout but inspecting runout on flats??? I would also like to know if the callouts are correct. Unfortunately our drafting team has little to no knowledge in the GD&T area, our quality department has...
  11. mopar4u

    Is this correct GD&T?

    here is a copy of the print I am talking about http://i168.photobucket.com/albums/u179/mopar4u/positionaltolerance.jpg I have issues with the true postion .002 and the paralellism .005 callout. With the true position are you supposed to assume that the drafter wants you to find the symmetry...

Part and Inventory Search

Back
Top