Re: Positional tolerance question

On Tue, 02 Aug 2005 10:45:09 -0700, Garlicdude <pulsar@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

>DJ Bjorklund wrote:
>>
>> Not looking for a doctorial thesis on mechanical tolerancing, just an
>> opinion. We're machining fairly low-tolerance mechanical parts. A
>> machinist disciplined for not checking holes ultimately discovered to
>> be off the center-line ~.025 makes the somewhat weak point that there
>> was "...no dimension, so what's the tolerance?!"
>>
>> Cylindrical part
>> Cross hole (pictorially on CL) 1.000" from end
>>
>> In your typical "three place means +/-.005" situation is location
>> tolerance about the CL a function of the OD, .875 in this case, thus
>> +/-.005,...or even perhaps +/-.0025 ?
>>
>> E-mail is fine, thanks
>
>
>
>Are you or your machinist intermingling MMC, Maximum Material Condition
>, and RFS, Regardless of Feature Size, which are used with a True
>Position callout and Ordinate Dimensioning??
>
>MMC and RFS don't apply in ordinate type dimensioning.


No I don't believe he is. He's just making a weak case against the
disciplinary action.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Positional tolerance question
    ... We're machining fairly low-tolerance mechanical parts. ... > Cross hole 1.000" from end ... > tolerance about the CL a function of the OD, .875 in this case, thus ...
    (alt.machines.cnc)
  • Re: Positional tolerance question
    ... We're machining fairly low-tolerance mechanical parts. ... > tolerance about the CL a function of the OD, .875 in this case, thus ... MMC and RFS don't apply in ordinate type dimensioning. ...
    (alt.machines.cnc)
  • Re: Positional tolerance question
    ... > Not looking for a doctorial thesis on mechanical tolerancing, ... We're machining fairly low-tolerance mechanical parts. ... In my novice opinion, both the engineer and the machinist are wrong. ...
    (alt.machines.cnc)