TYP

[macduff]

See attached

Colin Fitzpatrick (aka Macduff)
Mechanical Designer
Solidworks 2010 SP 5.0
Dell T5500 XP Pro SP 3 (32-bit)
Xeon CPU 2.53 GHz 3.00 GB of RAM
nVida Quadro 4000 2 GB
3D Connexion-SpaceExplorer

 

[applejack2]

No, MAX and MIN do not link to any kind of value. They only indicate the tolerance limit. TYP is not a tolerance, so it doesn't belong in that list.

 

[macduff]

Ok.....you have a good point. thanks

Colin Fitzpatrick (aka Macduff)
Mechanical Designer
Solidworks 2010 SP 5.0
Dell T5500 XP Pro SP 3 (32-bit)
Xeon CPU 2.53 GHz 3.00 GB of RAM
nVida Quadro 4000 2 GB
3D Connexion-SpaceExplorer

 

[fcsuper]

TYP is not supported by the standards, in that it's use is not included in the section regarding quantity. TYP is the official abbreviation for TYPICAL though.

Matt Lorono, CSWP
Lorono's SolidWorks Resources & SolidWorks Legion
Follow me on Twitter

 

[ewh]

While I agree that it is not good practice generally speaking, ASME has loosened up its wording on prohibiting the use of "TYP".

"Good to know you got shoes to wear when you find the floor." - [small]Robert Hunter[/small]

 

[macduff]

Yeah, you know.....I'm not a big of using this "TYP", but it does have it's cases where it could be used.

Colin Fitzpatrick (aka Macduff)
Mechanical Designer
Solidworks 2010 SP 5.0
Dell T5500 XP Pro SP 3 (32-bit)
Xeon CPU 2.53 GHz 3.00 GB of RAM
nVida Quadro 4000 2 GB
3D Connexion-SpaceExplorer

 

[debodine]

I agree there are legitimate cases for the occasional use of TYP (meaning TYPICAL as fcsuper noted). However, those cases as far as we are a company are concerned are rare and can be handled by other means just as well, so our company continues the ban on using TYP on our engineering drawings.

Certainly I am not stating the use of TYP to be "right" or "wrong", just noting that there are still organizations which prefer not to use it.

Part of that reason goes to the OP in the sense that it is not always crystal clear what feature or aspect of a feature is to be considered TYP. applejack2 clearly demonstrated this with the first response given.

This is a big part of the reason I like this forum so much. Almost every thread sharpens me a bit more just for having read it and increased my understanding of the wide world of engineering.

 

[hititfaster]

Haha how I laughed at that simple little title and the discussion I know would follow!

Before starting with my current company, I'd never even HEARD of this, 'TYP.' thing; now I use it on heaps of drawings where I have radii/chamfers/holes...

I do have a personal 'rule of use', however: if there are radii/chamfers/holes of different sizes on the part, TYP. is out. If all holes are - say - Ø8.5mm then I can't see how anyone can get confused by 'Ø8.5 TYP.'

This dilemma has been eased slightly for me by using the hole callout button rather than a smart dimension with notes added, as it gives you a quantity as well. Simples.