![]() ![]() The figure indicates it as "Virtual condition of the mating part". But in this case, the 10.3 diameter is not related to the MMC size of the internal thread's pitch diameter. The normal situation for features verified for conformance to position at MMC is that the virtual condition of the controlled feature itself is being simulated. It would still be the pitch diameter of the internal thread that is being controlled. I also understand how it sort of makes sense with the projected tolerance zone modifier, but If there was no MMC modifier, just the circled P, then the axis of the pitch diameter(unless otherwise specified), extruded above the part, would need to fit in the projected tolerance zone. I perfectly understand the logic of this and how it represents the design intent, but what part of the Y14.5 standard suggests that the tolerance can be inspected this way? ![]() The virtual condition considered at the design of the gage is not the virtual condition of the threads themselves (the pitch diameter of the internal thread of the component being toleranced), but of the fasteners, after they are assembled into the holes (their external threads' major diameter or their unthreaded shank portion). The threaded holes are positioned at MMC and with a projected tolerance zone. One of the things I am yet to wrap my head around is threaded holes modified at MMC and their gaging.Īttached is a link to a tip by Tec-Ease tip of the month June 2003 ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |