|
GD&T LEGAL CALLOUTS | |||
Post Reply | Forum |
Posted by: jw ® 10/27/2005, 11:16:39 Author Profile Mail author Edit |
Is it legal to have both MMC and LMC on a Feature of Size with true position callout? The reasoning behind this is to achieve max bonus tolerance when feature is at the mean size. As the feature deviates plus or minus, bonus will decrease by amount away from mean. Example: 1.00" dia +/-.010 - at 1.00 dia there would be a bonus tol. of .010. If the dia was 1.005 bonus tol. would be .005 and the dia at .995 the bonus would still be .005. If the dia was 1.010 or .990, no bonus tol. Modified by jw at Thu, Oct 27, 2005, 13:39:24 |
Post Reply | Recommend | Alert | View All | | | |
Replies to this message |
Re: GD&T LEGAL CALLOUTS | |||
Re: GD&T LEGAL CALLOUTS -- jw | Post Reply | Top of thread | Forum |
Posted by: kelly_bramble ® 10/27/2005, 14:15:53 Author Profile Mail author Edit |
If you use separate feature control frames, then technically you could, however I don't think this is neccesary.
If you chart your cylindrical feature size vs allowed tolerance for identical LMC and MMC position tolerance specifications, you will see that you are mearly limting the allowed position tolerance to your specification. You will achieve the same requirement by simply specifying RFS for your position tolerance. |
Post Reply | Recommend | Alert | Where am I? Original Top of thread |
Powered by Engineers Edge
© Copyright 2000 - 2024, by Engineers Edge, LLC All rights reserved. Disclaimer