Any limitation to invoke ASME Y14.5 in the prints 1

[bxbzq]

Say I want a Chinese supplier to invoke ASME Y14.5 2009 in their prints. The only thing I'm sure is the supplier needs to buy the standard, but what else they should do? Any restriction, legal issue, export control?

 

[fcsuper]

Nope. AMSE would be happy to sell them the standard. However, to be friendly, you may wish to buy it yourself and ship it to them. The standards you may wish to consider are ASME Y14.100-2004 (the umbrella standard for everything), ASME Y14.5-2009, ASME Y14.3-2003, ASME Y14.4M-1989, and ASME Y 14.35M-1997. This will cover most cases. There are still specific symbols that may require additional standards.

Matt Lorono, CSWP
Product Definition Specialist, DS SolidWorks Corp
Personal sites:
Lorono's SolidWorks Resources & SolidWorks Legion

 

[CheckerHater]

Complement Y14.5 with Y14.5.1 – they like mathematics.
Don’t forget B.4 for limits and fits, B46 and Y14.36 for surface texture.
You will need Y14.34 before using Y14.35; Y14.2 is as important as Y14.3 or 4.
Consider Y14.8 if your parts involve casting/forging, Y14.6 if they will have threads, Y14.13 if your design involves springs, and B17 if it will use keys.

 

[MintJulep]

Of course what will really happen is that "ASME Y14.5 2009" will be added to the title block and the body of the drawing will continue to be whatever they want.

 

[KENAT]

Might want to ensure they are competent to work to the relevant ASME std's, or is that just me being silly.

Posting guidelines faq731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

(probably not aimed specifically at you)
What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484​

 

[dingy2]

Kenat:

You are absolutely correct about competency of the relevant ASME. Where are they to be trained to the 2009 standard? Remember that the 2009 standard is more complex than the 94 and so many people don't under the 94 standard. Sticking it on the drawing without intensive training does not help anyone.

Dave D.

http://www.qmsi.ca

 

[pmarc]

bxbzq,
Have this supplier ever worked to any GD&T standard, ASME or ISO?
Apologies for that question, but if not, do they speak and understand English in a way they could properly understand ASME standards at all?

 

[fcsuper]

It is presumed from the agreement to fulfill the terms of your contract (make it to print) that they state that they can fulfill the terms of the contract. However, it doesn't hurt to ask.

I would suggest asking them to avoid using GD&T frames until they can show that they understand datums and symbology of GD&T.

Matt Lorono, CSWP
Product Definition Specialist, DS SolidWorks Corp
Personal sites:
Lorono's SolidWorks Resources & SolidWorks Legion

 

[bxbzq]

China has national gdt standards. These standards are very close to ISO std. There are different symbols. But concepts, I think it is safe to say they are almost same.

 

[KENAT]

bxbzq - trouble is ASME and ISO standards are different enough to cause problems occasionally.

Even if they're really good with their local ISO based standard, that doesn't automatically mean they're up to speed on ASME standards.

Plus let's be honest, how many people anywhere are really up to speed on the standards?

Posting guidelines faq731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

(probably not aimed specifically at you)
What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484​

 

[bxbzq]

Do you guys see business in China? They need training!

I think a print review or tech review is needed at very beginning of the project for sure. In terms of technicals, this is not a special case because we do the same with American or European suppliers. And from the response so far, there looks no political risk. Thanks.

 

[fcsuper]

Companies anywhere (not just China) tend to not be educated on GD&T in either ISO or ASME unless there's a monetary reason. It's always good to check their abilities if you need to rely no those abilities, regardless to country. However, this should be done before a contractual relationship is established.

Matt Lorono, CSWP
Product Definition Specialist, DS SolidWorks Corp
Personal sites:
Lorono's SolidWorks Resources & SolidWorks Legion

 

[pmarc]

ASME and ISO GD&T standards are really different. You will be lucky if problems are occasional.

 

[fcsuper]

The core difference between ISO and ASME is in the independancy rule. However, both standards support dependancy and independancy, so even that isn't a real difference. Some callouts vary, but again, not by much. Either way, the OP was asking about requiring ASME from an overseas vendor, which is perfectly acceptable, as long as he does his homework on the vendor.

Matt Lorono, CSWP
Product Definition Specialist, DS SolidWorks Corp
Personal sites:
Lorono's SolidWorks Resources & SolidWorks Legion

 

[pmarc]

The core difference between ISO and ASME is in the independancy rule. However, both standards support dependancy and independancy, so even that isn't a real difference. Some callouts vary, but again, not by much

Matt,
Be careful with that. Have you had a chance to see the newest editions of some important ISO GPS standards like 1101:2012, 5459:2011, 8015:2011. 14405:2010? If not, prepare for what you will see, otherwise you may be really shocked.

If the vendor had any chance to work with those standards (what could happen if Chinese national standards are based on ISO), the confusion may be bigger than anyone expects.

P.S.: I do not think we want to re-start a debate on differences between ISO & ASME approach to position/concentricity/symmetry.

 

[fcsuper]

What's symmetry?

Matt Lorono, CSWP
Product Definition Specialist, DS SolidWorks Corp
Personal sites:
Lorono's SolidWorks Resources & SolidWorks Legion