×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Contact US

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Rule #1 envelope question

Rule #1 envelope question

Rule #1 envelope question

(OP)
With rule #1 a feature of size must be in perfect form at MMC.

Where this confuses me is I thought if you apply MMC *with* positional tolerance then the hole can be out of perpendicularity up to the tol zone amount.

Am I thinking correctly whereby you would need a FCF with zero positional tolerance to be enforcing rule #1 on a part? If you instead apply the above FCF with .10 tolerance then at MMC the hole could be out of perfect form, no?

Thanks.


RE: Rule #1 envelope question

If you want to "cover" for Rule#1 --to be shown- you might need straightness of zero at MMC.
Form (straightness, circularity, cylindricity, flatness) and location (your shown position) are two different things.

RE: Rule #1 envelope question

Quote (sendithard, 10 Jan 22 15:53)

Am I thinking correctly whereby you would need a FCF with zero positional tolerance to be enforcing rule #1 on a part?

No, rule #1 is always enforced unless otherwise specified on ASME Y14.5 compliant drawings. Your size tolerance dictates that the hole may not violate a boundary of size .490 (UNCONSTRAINED to any datum features) in either case. The difference lies in the position tolerance so that in your upper case it also must not violate a boundary of size .480 CONSTRAINED to A|B|C whereas on your lower case it also must not violate a boundary of size .490 CONSTRAINED to A|B|C. That means in your upper case that a feature at MMC size .490 it may still have position/orientation error (.01 at MMC), but in the lower case at MMC size your position/orientation must be perfect (0 at MMC).

RE: Rule #1 envelope question

(OP)
Chez,

I believe I understand this, but where I get confused is if you give the hole positional tolerance it then is allowed to be out of form at MMC, seemingly violating the rule. It seems if you do anything other than give it a zero tolerance the rule doesn't meet reality.

I understand your quote below, but at .490 you are at MMC and due to the .01 tolerance you are allowed to deviate from perfect form. But then the standard says you can't.
" a feature at MMC size .490 it may still have position/orientation error (.01 at MMC)"

RE: Rule #1 envelope question

Quote (sendithard, 10 Jan 22 17:51)

if you give the hole positional tolerance it then is allowed to be out of form at MMC, seemingly violating the rule

The hole is not allowed to have any additional form error beyond what rule #1 dictates, unless otherwise specified. A position tolerance does not count as "otherwise specified". Your position tolerance is applied at MMC therefore your rule #1 boundary requires perfect form at MMC - your feature may not violate a boundary of perfect form of .490 . If your hole size is .490, no further form error is allowed. However, the hole may have location and/or orientation error ie: it is allowed to shift/rotate up to the .01 specified in your FCF.

Lets imagine it as a series of gauges. Your rule #1 gauge is a free-floating gauge pin of size .490 which must be able to pass through your hole. Your gauge for the position tolerance is a pin of size .480 pressed into a plate which has simulators for A|B|C. To verify your position tolerance your part is placed on the latter gauge, the pin must be able to pass through the hole when in contact with the simulators for A,B, and C. The part must satisfy BOTH gauges to pass.

Below is a list of the exceptions to rule #1. These are the ONLY exceptions to rule #1 allowed in the standard (besides a note that literally states "RULE #1 DOES NOT APPLY" or similar) which count as "otherwise specified".

Quote (ASME Y14.5-2018 para 5.8.2)

(a) items identified as stock, such as bars, sheets, tubing, structural shapes, and other items produced to established industry or government standards that prescribe limits for straightness, flatness, and other geometric characteristics. Unless geometric tolerances are specified on the drawing of a part made from these items, standards for these items govern the surfaces that remain in the as-furnished condition on the finished part.
(b) tolerances applied with the free state modifier.
(c) when form tolerances of straightness or flatness are applied to a feature of size. See paras. 8.4.1.3 and 8.4.2.1.
(d) when the “independency” symbol is used. See Figure 5-10 and para. 6.3.24.
CAUTION: Without a supplementary form control, the feature form is uncontrolled where the “independency” symbol is applied.
(e) when average diameter is specified. See subsection 8.5.

RE: Rule #1 envelope question

Rule #1 (ASME) requires perfect form at MMC for Regular Features of Size. It does not required perfect orientation or perfect location. A RFOS can have perfect form and still be less than perfect for its orientation and/or location.

RE: Rule #1 envelope question

A regular FOS may be at MMC, may have an orientation and/or location error, and still not have perfect form wink It all depends on what one means by "a FOS is at MMC".

RE: Rule #1 envelope question

(OP)
Thanks for the help. For some reason I felt form included all the other geometric characteristics for this topic. I know form and orientation are separate tolerance types, but I thought when they used 'form' in the envelope rule it encompassed all of them. I got confused that a hole could tilt at MMC yet wasn't allowed to deviate in perfect form. I thought perfect form included being perpendicular.

RE: Rule #1 envelope question

pmarc,

I fully agree - I was avoiding that just for simplicity sake and explanation purposes. Maybe that was not wholly wise?

Typically I assume "a FOS at MMC" to mean a FOS that is at the MMC size at all cross-sections. That is to say that both actual values for the feature have r=rMMC. Perhaps thats not the most useful way of thinking about it, but its the way I process it - maybe it would be better to discuss it more directly in terms of simply that form error which violates the rule #1 MMC perfect form boundary is not allowed? Or that your UAME must be >= MMC size for a feature for which rule #1 applies

RE: Rule #1 envelope question

chez311,

I understand.

Your assumption of "a FOS at MMC" is exactly how I think about perfect form at MMC imposed by Rule #1.

However, for orientation or position tolerancing at MMC, "a FOS at MMC" merely refers to the UAME size of the FOS equal to the MMC size. A FOS with UAME size = MMC size does not have to have perfect form.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members! Already a Member? Login


Resources

Low-Volume Rapid Injection Molding With 3D Printed Molds
Learn methods and guidelines for using stereolithography (SLA) 3D printed molds in the injection molding process to lower costs and lead time. Discover how this hybrid manufacturing process enables on-demand mold fabrication to quickly produce small batches of thermoplastic parts. Download Now
Design for Additive Manufacturing (DfAM)
Examine how the principles of DfAM upend many of the long-standing rules around manufacturability - allowing engineers and designers to place a part’s function at the center of their design considerations. Download Now
Taking Control of Engineering Documents
This ebook covers tips for creating and managing workflows, security best practices and protection of intellectual property, Cloud vs. on-premise software solutions, CAD file management, compliance, and more. Download Now

Close Box

Join Eng-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close