Aug 21, 2007 #1 cmwatson78 Chemical Joined Aug 7, 2007 Messages 25 Location US Should you apply the law of significant figures to GD&T?
Aug 21, 2007 #2 KENAT Mechanical Joined Jun 12, 2006 Messages 18,387 Location US 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 Joined Jul 9, 2001 Messages 4,205 Location US 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 Joined Jun 12, 2006 Messages 18,387 Location US thread404-195481 KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet... Upvote 0 Downvote
Aug 22, 2007 #5 TheTick Mechanical Joined Mar 5, 2003 Messages 10,194 Location US 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.