Search results for query: *

I have strong suspicion that simulated datum feature will rather look like this:

There in no standard for u-bolts. You will have take your inspiration in catalogues.

With MAX dimension the other limit is ZERO, not INFINITY. So the unilateral tolerance cannot be larger than 26. Question: should it really be MAX?

I knew I saw it somewhere. (https://www.eng-tips.com/threads/unused-portion-of-profile-tolerance-zone.465737/#post-8549677) Yes, indeed, the printed version is different from the DRM PDF version

Greenimi, Yes, indeed. I saw one not so long ago. Cannot post it because of "proprietary" thing. ;)

It may or may or may not be locked by admin. Some companies go both ways. Someone has to be thought what this means. As well as many other things.

I opened my software. Which one to chose?

There is no chiseled in stone rule how exactly feature has to be fixtured to produce datum axis. Shaft being installed on bearings inside of a motor, pump, etc. is no better and no worse than shaft installed on v-blocks. It looks like using GD&T on assemblies is a next big thing, and Fig. 12-16...

I guess the answer to the OP's question is: "Why not?" There are hundreds of situations when it makes sense to measure runout of assembled part. And it it is done in thousands of shops tens of thousands of times. And it's called "Runout". 2018 simply legalizes the fact. Or take a look from...

Is this Runout or Profile?

It looks like the technique has its roots in 50-s / 60-s simplified/functional drafting aiming at reducing manual paper-and-pencil design time. The idea become less relevant with proliferation of CAD systems, but some standards still carry recommendations clearly aiming at manual drafter...

Is anyone concerned by the fact that there is no target to meet and no tolerances to stack without FCF anyway?

Something like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interrupted_screw :-) "For every expert there is an equal and opposite expert" Arthur C. Clarke Profiles of the future

From Australian Standard AS 1100.101—1992 Technical drawing General principles: This Standard is in agreement with the following International Standards: ISO 128 Technical drawings — General principles of presentation ISO 129 Technical drawings — Dimensioning — General principles, definitions...

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

Back in good old times using ISO standard tolerances and fits would automatically imply Envelope requirement. New edition of ISO 286 removed that, but you still can specify Envelope requirement individually if you want your size to also control things like form and orientation. "For every...

Since no datum is referenced, the frame will only control relations of features to each other. It still looks like flatness may be not the best choice. "For every expert there is an equal and opposite expert" Arthur C. Clarke Profiles of the future

https://files.engineering.com/getfile.aspx?folder=39328bd9-8b14-4efd-84e0-fa849c99f69b&file=Capture.PNG "For every expert there is an equal and opposite expert" Arthur C. Clarke Profiles of the future...

It's hard to imagine something going thru 8000 revisions and still backwards-compatible. (Otherwise new part number is in order) Just ¢2 "For every expert there is an equal and opposite expert" Arthur C. Clarke Profiles of the future