MassiVonWeizen
Guest
Yes, the axes must also be placed in the views with the hidden edges. if instead the hidden edges are not represented do not put the axes that in such case would not give any indication and would confuse who reads.
gio_deere
Guest
Perfect!
hoped that I was not very exuberant in my requests, unfortunately we do not share daily technical drawings here at university (although I am aware that it must be a fundamental thing!). then we are assaulted by many doubts at the table. Unfortunately the professors even if you ask answer little to the messages.
Fortunately there are these very good communities that give a hand! I thank again for the data advice! I will definitely avoid making certain mistakes.
MassiVonWeizen
Guest
a council, that is not technical, but of approach to work, that I feel to give you is to let rest the design and resume it after doing other; Maybe after continuing with the project or after doing other designs. You will see that with the empty mind of information of that specific design you will notice so many small things that before, with the mind involved, you have escaped.
can be forgetfulness (a quota, a tolerance, a note,...) or improves to put the quota in another position, add a detail,...); This happens because during the drafting we reason with too fresh information that can be given for granted, moreover as it is organized we go from one view to the other inevitably losing the sense of assemblies and also to a subsequent control just over the drawing the eye tends to look for what you already know.
this control will allow you both to do a fundamental self-analysis for when you are in the world of work where there may not be those who control your work, or to do an autocritical to learn what your most frequent mistakes are and correct them, or to acquire a method that will speed up your work.
can be forgetfulness (a quota, a tolerance, a note,...) or improves to put the quota in another position, add a detail,...); This happens because during the drafting we reason with too fresh information that can be given for granted, moreover as it is organized we go from one view to the other inevitably losing the sense of assemblies and also to a subsequent control just over the drawing the eye tends to look for what you already know.
this control will allow you both to do a fundamental self-analysis for when you are in the world of work where there may not be those who control your work, or to do an autocritical to learn what your most frequent mistakes are and correct them, or to acquire a method that will speed up your work.
Vittorio
Guest
I say mine
I would avoid putting the quotas I have deleted
rather I would extend the r22.5 quota so that it is clear that it is centered on that point
if the operator starts to track with the quotas 29° and 5° that seem rounded to the whole. .
the piece will not conform to the intentions.
I prefer to put only the quotas that serve for the construction and total dimensions
less odds= less errors
I would avoid putting the quotas I have deleted
rather I would extend the r22.5 quota so that it is clear that it is centered on that point
if the operator starts to track with the quotas 29° and 5° that seem rounded to the whole. .
the piece will not conform to the intentions.
I prefer to put only the quotas that serve for the construction and total dimensions
less odds= less errors
wert
Guest
on the equation "less odds = less errors" do not agree to me. the construction operator should not be computed, because it is in that case that mistakes can be made. If you remove the angles quotation, then you must add the coordinates of the centers of the extreme fittings and also in those you need to extend to the center the quota line.
gio_deere
Guest
theoretically if a quota is in brackets is only for verification, you should not start drawing or realizing from those quotas (at least I know so).
the corners are rounded. I also wanted the extension line as you said, but I have to put a moment in inventor's quota styles... I see if I can
MassiVonWeizen
Guest
putting the quotas in brackets indicates that they are not functional, moreover the round is insignificant, respective 28.96° and 4.94° and on a geometry of the genus do not inficiate the development. not knowing how it will be produced for me it is preferable to put them.
even the total 138, which you would need to place the r20 connection, is in brackets and is rounded, therefore not even using that you can get the exact geometry.
even the total 138, which you would need to place the r20 connection, is in brackets and is rounded, therefore not even using that you can get the exact geometry.
Vittorio
Guest
Yes the rule is this... but in the workshop not everyone is aware of these rules and if there are not these quotas.. do not interpret them as you like
I agree that it is insignificant for this piece, precisely that it is insignificant what it is to put them?
MassiVonWeizen
Guest
attention, a quota in brackets means that it is not functional and can suffer the discards of the tolerances of other quotas, it is absolutely not a quota that serves for verification. in a chain of quotas where there is also the total one must be in brackets because derived from the others.
For example, in the spacer rather than the 41 of the height could be the 8 of the thickness that net of the other quotas worked in tolerance could be 7.8 or 8.2 without compromising the operation of the particular.
gio_deere
Guest
the 138 I can say that from the cad is returned such, that is 138,0000000 ... is not approximate in short
However the corners I leave them and I am looking for some oction in the styles of inventor quota
MassiVonWeizen
Guest
It is insignificant the rounding, not putting the quotas.
if it is necessary for the construction should not be put in parentheses.
gio_deere
Guest
Yes, she was much more precise, maybe I was wrong to use "verification" but I meant this speech. Thank you.
gio_deere
Guest
Ultimately, I think that the tables will leave them listed in this way (launched below). the delivery is by midnight and frankly I would like to close here, also because I have to carry on other things.
I thank all those who helped me and told them. I hope that this debate will help others too!
I wish a good Sunday to all!
I thank all those who helped me and told them. I hope that this debate will help others too!
I wish a good Sunday to all!
Vittorio
Guest
No, I meant that not only is the rounding, but also the construction. that there are or are not the piece can still be realized.
It's my way of thinking, if you don't need a share, I won't put it.
Creative Soio Studio
Guest
we have written an article on views and views sections in technical drawing if it can help.
Ghio
Guest
I confirm that the laminated hole is better to quote it in section.
Moreover in general it is prudent not to use the wizard function to quote them because if the hole has been realized, instead of passing, blind with an arbitrary depth that just goes beyond the thickness of the plate the wrong function
Ghio
Guest
I meant the hole caption function. that is the one that in the table quotes in that way
Attachments
Kaji
Guest
I apologize if I have not read the whole discussion (among other months old) and make useless observations, but I do not see the center of the quota r20, I can assume that it is half the asola, but it seems to me anything but obvious.
Moreover, even if it is probably too early for considerations of the genus, usually the representation of the design must have memory of how it is thought that it will be realized and to what it serves; from the uniform sampling seems made from a single piece, then it is a piece obtained by fusion, mold etc and then finished to the machine tools, or it starts from a painting 50x50 and it contours completely, in the first case I make two different designs: one for the realization of the model (considering
Moreover, even if it is probably too early for considerations of the genus, usually the representation of the design must have memory of how it is thought that it will be realized and to what it serves; from the uniform sampling seems made from a single piece, then it is a piece obtained by fusion, mold etc and then finished to the machine tools, or it starts from a painting 50x50 and it contours completely, in the first case I make two different designs: one for the realization of the model (considering
Last edited by a moderator:
Ghio
Guest
hi kaji, I think for the radius r20 external controls the total length of the piece: you have a plate with that length and attach the side surface with radius 20.
that is the quotation of the finished drawing (which also can depend on so many things, e.g. from the machines used, the purpose of the piece, etc.)
of course there is also the design of the preworked, it does not always serve.
many intermediate processing workers (who have been working in the company for a long time) already know how to do it, they need the size of the result to be obtained.
other times a given component you buy already made