Aug 21, 2007 #1 cmwatson78 Chemical Aug 7, 2007 25 Should you apply the law of significant figures to GD&T?
Aug 21, 2007 #2 KENAT Mechanical Jun 12, 2006 18,387 cmwatson78 In what respect? ASME Y14.5M-1994 (assuming that's the standard you work to) talks about leading & trailing 0s in section 2.3. It differs for metric and inch systems. KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet... Upvote 0 Downvote
cmwatson78 In what respect? ASME Y14.5M-1994 (assuming that's the standard you work to) talks about leading & trailing 0s in section 2.3. It differs for metric and inch systems. KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...
Aug 21, 2007 #3 looslib Mechanical Jul 9, 2001 4,205 Also, in engineering, rounding is always to the even number to account for accumulation. "Wildfires are dangerous, hard to control, and economically catastrophic." Ben Loosli Upvote 0 Downvote
Also, in engineering, rounding is always to the even number to account for accumulation. "Wildfires are dangerous, hard to control, and economically catastrophic." Ben Loosli
Aug 21, 2007 #4 KENAT Mechanical Jun 12, 2006 18,387 thread404-195481 KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet... Upvote 0 Downvote
Aug 22, 2007 #5 TheTick Mechanical Mar 5, 2003 10,194 No, there is no appliation of sig figs in GD&T. i.e. 2.0 - 1.500001 = 0.499999 Also, there is no "influence" of sig figs on GD&T tolerance. GD&T callouts are explicit. Upvote 0 Downvote
No, there is no appliation of sig figs in GD&T. i.e. 2.0 - 1.500001 = 0.499999 Also, there is no "influence" of sig figs on GD&T tolerance. GD&T callouts are explicit.
