The Elsmar Cove Business Systems and Standards Discussion Forums Angularity - When angularity is called out should it be to a basic dimension
 Forum User Name Keep Me Logged In Password
 Register Photo Albums Blogs FAQ Social Groups Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 Elsmar Cove Forum Visitor Notice(s)

Angularity - When angularity is called out should it be to a basic dimension

 Elsmar XML RSS Feed Monitor the Elsmar Forum Sponsor Links Courtesy Quick Links Links that Cove visitors will find useful in your quest for knowledge: International Standards Bodies - World Wide Standards Bodies International Standards Organization - ISO Standards and Information Quality Digest

Post Number #1
16th July 2010, 12:28 PM
 jfbock Total Posts: 22
Angularity - When angularity is called out should it be to a basic dimension

Simple question I am having a hard time finding a concrete answer on.

When angularity is called out, should the angle it refers to always be a basic dimension? Wouldn't the angularity callout BE the tolerance for the angle.

I have a customer print that has angularity only as a callout (no form tolerance) and a regular (non-basic) angle callout. My understanding is this is not correct.

Appreciate any help.

Post Number #2
16th July 2010, 01:03 PM
 True Position Total Posts: 669
Re: Angularity

You are right that this is not correct. Either you are measuring the angle(traditional result in °) or the form error from the basic angle. (GD&T angularity)
 Thanks to True Position for your informative Post and/or Attachment!
Post Number #3
16th July 2010, 03:56 PM
 David DeLong Total Posts: 461
Re: Angularity

Quote:
 In Reply to Parent Post by jfbock Simple question I am having a hard time finding a concrete answer on. When angularity is called out, should the angle it refers to always be a basic dimension? Wouldn't the angularity callout BE the tolerance for the angle. I have a customer print that has angularity only as a callout (no form tolerance) and a regular (non-basic) angle callout. My understanding is this is not correct. Appreciate any help.
Using both ASME Y14.5M-94 and now th3 2009 edition, the angle must be shown in a basic dimension. The tolerance in the feature control frame is tolerance for this angle. If the drawing reflects the angle without being a basic dimension, then the drawing is incorrect.

By the way, angles on surfaces in GD&T also include flatness while angles in holes include straightness.
 Thank You to David DeLong for your informative Post and/or Attachment!
Post Number #4
16th July 2010, 08:19 PM
 Jim Wynne Total Posts: 14,160
Re: Angularity - When angularity is called out should it be to a basic dimension

Quote:
 In Reply to Parent Post by jfbock Simple question I am having a hard time finding a concrete answer on. When angularity is called out, should the angle it refers to always be a basic dimension? Wouldn't the angularity callout BE the tolerance for the angle. I have a customer print that has angularity only as a callout (no form tolerance) and a regular (non-basic) angle callout. My understanding is this is not correct. Appreciate any help.
TP and David have answered the "basic" question, but I'll add that whenever you encounter ambiguous specifications it's best to ask the customer what the intent is. If there's no reference to any GD&T standard on the drawing, it means that the designer can use the symbols to mean whatever she wants them to. Even when the standard is referenced, designers will often demonstrate their failure to understand it.
Post Number #5
16th July 2010, 08:39 PM
 Stijloor Total Posts: 15,191
Re: Angularity - When angularity is called out should it be to a basic dimension

Quote:
 In Reply to Parent Post by Jim Wynne TP and David have answered the "basic" question, but I'll add that whenever you encounter ambiguous specifications it's best to ask the customer what the intent is. If there's no reference to any GD&T standard on the drawing, it means that the designer can use the symbols to mean whatever she wants them to. Even when the standard is referenced, designers will often demonstrate their failure to understand it.
How true this is! I often see drawings with mixed symbols from 1982 and 1994 GD&T standards.. No standard reference in the title block, so it becomes pure guesswork...

Stijloor.

 The Elsmar Cove Business Systems and Standards Discussion Forums Angularity - When angularity is called out should it be to a basic dimension

 Bookmarks

 Visitors Currently Viewing this Thread: 1 (0 Registered Visitors (Members) and 1 Unregistered Guest Visitors)

 Forum Posting Settings You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts BB code is On Emoticons are On [IMG] code is On HTML code is Off Forum Rules

 Similar Discussion Threads Discussion Thread Title Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post or Poll Vote Reality99 Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 3 17th March 2014 12:58 PM fabiolag Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 2 2nd May 2013 05:42 PM sindri APQP and PPAP 5 14th November 2012 03:06 PM jfbock Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 3 19th December 2011 12:11 PM JIMO1972 Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 4 23rd April 2009 08:54 AM

The time now is 03:10 PM. All times are GMT -4.