No matter how good a dimensioning system is GD&T, anyone?

there will still be errors

encountered on drawings, simply because there will always be human beings who are behind the
creation of a new drawing. And of course we all make mistakes. But I want to point out a few
of the more common mistakes that I encounter in my travels.
Failure to include a diameter symbol in a feature control frame when needed. Im thinking
particularly of position and perpendicularity. When tagging these tolerances to a hole or pin, you
usually need to include the diameter symbol before the number, so that the axis of the feature is
contained in all directions.
There are times when a holes position tolerance should not use a diameter symbol: if you really
only want the tolerance to apply in two directions. But that must be clearly indicated by proper
using of dimension arrows.

No dia symbol, so the tolerance is assumed to be two parallel planes, but in what direction?

Now the direction of the tolerance zones is clear, and the result is a square tolerance zone

This is probably what the original intent was: A cylindrical zone indicated by the diameter
symbol

The next common error Id like to review is similar to the first using a diameter symbol
when it shouldnt be there! I see this in feature control frames for circularity, cylindricity,
circular runout, and total runout. It might be tempting, because each of these is applied to a
round feature, but the tolerance number given is NOT a distance across a circle (which is the
definition of diameter), but a radial bandwidth. This one isnt as egregious, because there is
only one way to interpret these symbols, and thus the meaning isnt different.
Another error probably the most common one Ill be listing here is the improper
location of the datum feature symbol. Too many times Ill see this triangle symbol tagged to a
center line, because the designer/engineer thinks that the datum will be the center line. And that
is TRUE! The theoretical datum is very often a center line or axis. However, the triangle
symbol doesnt identify the true, theoretical datum; it is supposed to identify the physical feature
from which the theoretical datum will be derived. Notice the difference!
While that is sometimes easily forgiven, the bigger problem is when this misuse of the datum
symbol creates ambiguity, such as this one on the left, and the corrected version on the right:

 The next error is related to quality control and statistics. Many of you may be familiar with the
practice of identifying critical characteristics which require the inspector to measure something
and keep a log or spreadsheet for these measurements. This allows the long-term statistical
trends for that dimension/tolerance to be tracked. This gets into things like standard deviation,
six-sigma, Cpk values, and other lovely terms from statistics.
When imposing these ideas onto GD&T, however, a common mistake is to flag a basic
dimension as a critical characteristic. This shouldnt be done, because basic dimensions
themselves have no tolerance there is nothing to track! Instead, the real variation to be
measured is shown in a feature control frame. Thats where the critical flag should be noted.

Finally, sometimes you may see the position symbol used on a single feature (a hole, for
instance) and then the only datum referenced is a single planar datum that happens to be
perpendicular to that hole. In other words, the only thing being controlled is perpendicularity.
Dont use the position symbol, then!
The full explanation of this was covered in an earlier blog entry, found here.

Thats it for now feel free to send comments/suggestions about these or other common
mistakes that you encounter. Happy spring/summer, everyone!

Words Are Important

Posted by gdtsemin_admin on 8:56 am in GD&T questions | 2 comments
Ah, yes. I remember as a child being told that words are important! And that is certainly true in
the world of geometric dimensioning and tolerancing. So many people think that GD&T is just a
matter of learning the symbols, and its true that that is a key part of understanding the language.
But behind the symbols are many rules, acronyms, and definitions that can make a great
difference if they are not fully understood.
One of the most significant examples is the confusion about the term concentricity. To a casual
beginner, the word concentric sounds like a simple idea: two or more circles that share a
common center. But in the world of GD&T, concentricity has a very specific meaning that is
more specific than what youll find in Websters Dictionary! FYI the same confusion applies
to the symmetry symbol. (For more about concentricity, see this blog entry from a couple of
years ago.)
Here are a few other miscellaneous terms to be careful with:

Datum Technically, a datum is a perfect plane, axis, or point (or combination of these). So
when talking about the actual surface of a part, we shouldnt call it datum A, because that
surface may be imperfect: slightly concave, convex, etc. The proper term for the actual part
surface is datum feature A.
MMC The maximum material condition is literally the size of a feature when it has the
maximum amount of material allowed. This is a simple idea that is usually covered near the
beginning of any GD&T training. It is invoked upon a geometric tolerance by the circled M
modifier after the tolerance number. However, few people are aware that when the same
modifier appears after a datum letter, it is not called MMC. Instead, it is referred to as MMB, or
maximum material boundary. The reason its different is that a datum feature may have more
than just a size tolerance; it could also have a geometric tolerance of its own, thus making the
worst-case boundary different from the true MMC. This is an idea that was clarified in the 2009
ASME standard.
Basic dimension this one is not a difficult term. But what gets me is that many people
confuse it with reference dimension. I guess they are a little similar; they both have no
tolerance. But the reasons are different. A reference dimension (a number shown in
parentheses) has no tolerance because it is not to be checked. It is just for reference, or nice-toknow information. A basic dimension, however, is linked to GD&T. A basic dimension (a
number enclosed in a rectangle) also has no tolerance not even from the title block because
it establishes a perfect size, location, or angle from which a geometric tolerance is established.
These are just a few of the dozens of terms that are so important to understanding GD&T. And
especially for anyone who is preparing for the official ASME certification test, thorough
knowledge of all these terms and acronyms is essential!

Another New Symbol in GD&T

Posted by gdtsemin_admin on 11:51 am in 2009 ASME standard | 2 comments
If youve been keeping track of the new GD&T standard, then youre probably aware of most of
the bigger changes. (Yes, I know that 2009 doesnt sound new, but most people still call it the
new standard since it takes a while for companies to switch to a new dimensioning standard.)
The new item I want to show you is pretty easy. It is called the all over symbol, and it is very
similar to all around, which may be familiar to you. Both of these symbols will be found with
feature control frames that use profile of a line or profile of a surface. Heres an example of the
all around symbol, which has been in use for many years:

The all around symbol is the small circle on the elbow of the leader line for the GD&T feature
control frame. This means that there is a profile zone imposed around the entire perimeter of the
part, but only in the left-hand view. It doesnt cover the two large faces of the part (this is why
the 30 mm dimension still has a tolerance on it). Here is the same all around profile zone
shown in yellow:

OK, but now lets look at the new one, which is called all over:

Notice that there are two circles around the elbow of the leader line this is a new addition in
the 2009 standard (to get the same effect previously, we could have used a text note ALL
OVER). This means that the profile tolerance extends everywhere! Notice that the depth
dimension of 30 must now be a basic dimension. Here is this new tolerance shown in yellow:

So as I said, its not a difficult concept. But be careful all over literally means all over! If
there were any holes in this block, the profile tolerance would also cover the walls of the hole
(which means the diameter of the hole would have to be given as a basic dimension). So use this
new one with caution.

How Literally Should We Take the GD&T Standard?

Posted by gdtsemin_admin on 6:52 pm in GD&T questions | 4 comments
I hope everyone has had a great summer. Heres a topic that will be helpful even to seasoned
experts in GD&T, and it kind of follows the previous blog entry

Often, when discussing the finer points of GD&T with others, we end up going to the official
standard (or standards) that pertain to dimensioning and tolerancing in order to seek guidance.
But if youve been in the real world, you know that a technical document cant capture every
possible scenario.
So we naturally look for the example or description in the standard that is closest to our realworld situation. However, we have to make a decision whether we can make the leap of logic to
say that a proposed design is still within the spirit of the standard. This can sometimes be a
sticky point!
An aside: The two major standards when it comes to GD&T are ASME Y14.5 and also the ISO
series of standards (ISO has an umbrella of several standards that embrace GD&T, not just one
book). The predominant standard in North America and the one Im most familiar with is
ASME. In some ways the two standards have different philosophies about the depth of
coverage: in some areas ASME tries to nail down every option, and in other areas ISO takes the
harder line.
There are those who would say that we must make our designs conform to the exact letter of the
law, and any practice which is not described in the standard (or an obvious modification of one
given in the standard) is not to be used. But others espouse more leeway and say that the
concepts given in the standard can be extended to many other areas that might have been
unforeseen by the standard writers.
I put myself into the latter camp. The key is to look carefully at the wording of the standard: if
the words shall or must are used, then the door is pretty much closed to bending that
principle. But if no prohibition is given or better yet, if the verb used is may then there
are probably other ways to practice the given idea and still be in conformity to the standard.
One concept that can serve as an example is the tangent plane modifier. When introduced in
the 1994 ASME standard, this modifier was shown for use on the three orientation symbols
(when applied to surfaces). Eventually, someone was bound to ask whether the tangent plane
idea could be used with profile of a surface. The standard never said this cannot be done, and so
my vote would be that its OK. Others said, nope, it wasnt in the standard, so tangent plane
wasnt to be used on profile of a surface. In the 2009 standard, the notion of extending tangent
plane to profile of a surface is now clearly allowed; although no specific example is given, they
added a footnote saying that the concept of tangent plane is equally applicable to other
geometric characteristic symbols where the feature is related to a datum(s) (see page 103 of the
current edition of Y14.5).
Bottom line: GD&T is a language. And like any language, there are certain rules that must
always be followed. However, there are many ways to patch together different parts of that
language and still say something clear. We shouldnt be too legalistic and limit ourselves to
designs that are only identical to the examples given in the standard. Obviously, this is where
training and knowledge of the fundamentals of GD&T are necessary in order to know when the
envelope is being pushed to far!

Is There Always a Right vs. Wrong Way in GD&T?

Posted by gdtsemin_admin on 9:59 pm in GD&T Tips | 0 comments
Sorry that its been a while since my last blog post! That simply means that our training
schedule has been busy. Though a good portion of the U.S. economy is still sluggish, I have
definitely seen an uptick in the number of requests for GD&T training. So remember, if you
have a group of 4 or more people that need the basics or a refresher in GD&T, dont hesitate to
drop us a line or call for a customized price quote for a group class.
Today I should begin by answering the question posed in the title of this blog entry: No there
isnt always one right way to tolerance something. Recall that GD&T is a language, and like any
language there may be more than one way of accomplishing something. People often criticize
prints for bad or misapplied GD&T. And there are certainly many examples of that. But
many times what people are calling bad GD&T is simply a different way of doing
something! That being said, however, Id like to present the most common GD&T mistakes
which are definite no-nos.
Here are my Top 5 of the most common GD&T errors:
Failure to show a diameter symbol in the feature control frame (if a cylindrical zone is desired
Having parallelism (or perpendicularity) on a surface, and then adding a flatness tolerance of
the same amount or greater
Using the position symbol on a single feature related to a perpendicular datum (use
perpendicularity!)
Using concentricity when position RFS would be adequate (assuming ASME standard is
invoked)
Showing the datum feature symbol on a center line (yes, a center line can be a datum, but the
symbol MUST be tagged with a physical feature)
Of course there are others, but if any of these items shows up on your drawings, you should at
least be comfortable in raising a question to the designer/engineer. If you arent sure what Im
referring to in the items given above, or think that they are OK, then that would make for some
good homework for you! Think about why those things dont make sense; use your GD&T
reference books, or if you need further explanation, feel free to add a comment here and Ill try
to address it in a future blog entry.

The Importance of Blueprint Reading

Posted by gdtsemin_admin on 6:03 pm in Uncategorized | 0 comments

This website and blog naturally focus on GD&T, but its a good time to discuss the importance
of simple print-reading skills as a prerequisite to learning GD&T. As I travel around teaching
classes on GD&T, youd be surprised how many people dont fully understand some of the
simple rules of drafting, view layouts, and notation on drawings.
First, note that there can be different terms for this skill; the title of this blog entry mentions
blueprint reading, but nobody uses actual blue prints anymore. (This name was given
because at one time they really were blue, due to the chemical process used in producing these
drawings; see here for more on the history of this.) I suppose a more proper term today would
be an engineering drawing but if you want to call them blueprints still, hey, go ahead.
If GD&T is to make sense, then the object being toleranced must certainly be understood first.
Most drawings use orthographic projection, which is simply a fancy name referring to the
straight-on, flat view of a part from a particular angle. Think of a cube: each of the six sides can
be flattened out to display six orthographic views. Depending on the part, there may be fewer or
more than six orthographic views (in addition to other views such as section views).
Here is a simple example showing three orthographic views of the same part:

The trick is to look at a series of flat pictures and be able to visualize a three-dimensional object
from those views. Some people are born with that gift of spatial viewing, others can get it with
practice. Plus, on many modern drawings a 3-D isometric view is given, which certainly
helps to visualize the part.
(Note: the traditional orthographic views are usually laid out in a specific arrangement. Here in
North America, the standard arrangement is third-angle projection, which places the top view
above the front view, and the right side view off to the right side of the page. In Europe and
many other countries, the predominant arrangement is first-angle projection, where the top
view is placed below the front view and the right side view is placed to the left. They are both
acceptable, but simply different customs. To be sure, always read the title block or notes to
determine which system is being used!)
Heres one reason why all this is all so important to GD&T: Suppose a surface is labeled as
datum A in a certain view. When we look at another view we may see a feature control frame
tolerancing another surface back to datum A. But if we make a mistake in the visual
interpretation, then we may end up applying the tolerance to the wrong face of the part!
Even if you may feel embarrassed about not being proficient at print reading, dont hesitate to
ask for help or seek out some self-study training materials. Happy new year to everyone