Chris Vroman Product Specialist
Jenoptik Industrial Metrology Division Hommel-Etamic Rochester Hills, MI
www.hommel-etamic.com
QualityScan A
ccording to ASME Y14.5 2009, the purpose of geometric dimen- sioning and tolerancing (GD&T) is to describe the engineering intent of parts and assemblies. GD&T specifications, when done
correctly, provide only one way to encode and decode those standards and is not subject to interpretation. To have a beneficial effect, these specifica- tions must be created with consideration of every piece of the manufactur- ing process from materials through final assembly. In simple terms, GD&T offers a way to help clearly express design intent so that the manufacturer can choose the best process to meet the design requirements in the most cost effective manner. Good GD&T will also define how the part should be inspected. This is critical in setting the expectations that internal or external suppliers must meet. Unfortunately, a lot of time and money is wasted interpreting GD&T, es- pecially between user and supplier. Usually this comes into play at assem- bly when it is found that parts do not fit. GD&T is supposed to help avoid this, but failure to correctly understand design intent on the one hand and failure to understand manufacturability on the other ends up wasting time and adding cost to a process and ultimately to the parts produced. If an experienced engineer made a list of what not to do and why,
about 90% of mistakes made in manufacturing regarding GD&T could be eliminated.
Although the rise in popularity of GD&T has provoked the rise of consul- tants that aim to help companies implement GD&T, most do not represent the concept accurately. That is why it is important to go back to the source of the standards and teach a common way to use and implement GD&T, which would result in a more competitive manufacturing industry. So, we as the manufacturing industries, have an opportunity: if we properly understood that GD&T starts in design, through manufacturing, to purchasing and assembly, and that it is a rule-based system leaving no room for interpretation, we could avoid cost related to misunderstanding. Consider these common mistakes that disrupt effective use of GD&T: Failure to locate datums on significant manufacturing loca-
tions. The net surfaces and control locations are all too commonly located in places that are not significant to manufacturing or the application of the part being defined.
14
ManufacturingEngineeringMedia.com | August 2013
GD&T: A Tool for Improving Manufacturing
Failure to consider orientation and the effects of gravity. Yes, a crankshaft can deflect due to gravity.
Using tolerances that are at or beyond the limit of the desired manufacturing processes. Maintaining tolerances at process limits is expensive and requires frequent maintenance. It is possible to design a part that cannot be manufactured. This is often the result of: Failure to validate process and capabilities. To do GD&T well, one must understand manufacturing process capabilities in all three dimensions. GD&T can positively affect manufacturing quality based on the designer’s understanding of the capabilities of the manufacturing pro- cesses. Products must be designed with an understanding of tolerances, stack-ups, and the limitations of the processes that produce the elements of the final assembled product.
GD&T offers a way to clearly express design intent so a manufacturer can choose the best process to meet the requirements.
Failure to follow product/process changes through to GD&T
standards. If GD&T updates lag product revisions, they cannot be helpful to producing a quality product at minimum cost. Initially, GD&T is expensive. One would need to review each step in the manufacturing process as well as properly train the individuals involved. It is an upfront investment that many reject largely because the eventual cost of not understanding GD&T is not known. There could be, instead, a very significant return on investment if it is implemented. The standards have matured over time and have become highly compe- tent at conveying information accurately. Also, it is the best method avail- able and still continually improving. The principals involved should learn GD&T and understand what it is, what it is not, and how it can assure that design intent is successfully and profitably manufactured. An engineer with a wide view of manufacturing and thorough under-
standing of processes can be an invaluable benefit to company success if he or she can implement GD&T throughout the operation—every part, every process. ME
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132