Hello,
We are making a component which is defined by a reduced dimension drawing. One of the features that is explicitly stated on the drawing is a ø1.0 ±.1, ↓ .3 ±.1. As modeled, the hole is ø1.0 ↓ .3 with a 118° point extending past the full diameter. Our quality department is interpreting the inspection requirement as being the 118° angle needing to conform to the "profile of .06 unless otherwise specified" tolerance that applies to all un-dimensioned features. The machine shop interprets the hole callout (not model) as fully defining the feature, including the drill point angle which is optional unless called out as a countersunk hole.
Thoughts?
We are making a component which is defined by a reduced dimension drawing. One of the features that is explicitly stated on the drawing is a ø1.0 ±.1, ↓ .3 ±.1. As modeled, the hole is ø1.0 ↓ .3 with a 118° point extending past the full diameter. Our quality department is interpreting the inspection requirement as being the 118° angle needing to conform to the "profile of .06 unless otherwise specified" tolerance that applies to all un-dimensioned features. The machine shop interprets the hole callout (not model) as fully defining the feature, including the drill point angle which is optional unless called out as a countersunk hole.
Thoughts?
Comment