J
I have seen multiple ways of drawings specifying (annotating) a key characteristic, and even in the way my company does it, we have had multiple interpretations.
The example problem is we have a flag note next to a hole. The hole is dimensioned with a diameter, position, and perpendicularity. The flag note says that it is a key characteristic and should be tracked per AS9102. The flag note is closest to the diameter, and thus the supplier has given us just the diameter upon shipment.
My argument is that a key characteristic is a feature (not a dimension) and is described by the 3 dimensions (diameter, position, perpendicularity) and thus we need all 3 values reported.
I can work on finding out the intent of the engineer and get this sorted out, but I'm wondering if anyone ever calls key characteristics by the dimension or the entire feature? Does there need to be a standard definition written in our policy? I feel the AS9103 definition still leaves some ambiguity.
The example problem is we have a flag note next to a hole. The hole is dimensioned with a diameter, position, and perpendicularity. The flag note says that it is a key characteristic and should be tracked per AS9102. The flag note is closest to the diameter, and thus the supplier has given us just the diameter upon shipment.
My argument is that a key characteristic is a feature (not a dimension) and is described by the 3 dimensions (diameter, position, perpendicularity) and thus we need all 3 values reported.
I can work on finding out the intent of the engineer and get this sorted out, but I'm wondering if anyone ever calls key characteristics by the dimension or the entire feature? Does there need to be a standard definition written in our policy? I feel the AS9103 definition still leaves some ambiguity.