correct technological quotation?

[marcoevolution]

obb: to make a correct technological quotation for processing only removal of material
below I attach the tracing and drawing of the cad model that I processed of the piece (by preventing the thickness to be changed to make distinguishable lines of quotation and geometry of the piece) is correct (transferring tolerances, roughness etc)?
my main doubt is on how I have quoted the hole highlighted that as you see it is not applied on a flat surface but instead tilted

thanks in advance of your time

 

[MassiVonWeizen]

You still don't understand that you have to properly distance the rates. I also had an image attached to you in your other post, but you can see that you read only the things you like.
67.74 does not serve a blessed fava. What do you think would represent?
the diameter 80 of the holes should not be put in that view because being a sloped hole is not understood at what point it refers (the outer thickness, the inner thickness, the average psessor? )
the axes of those holes are wrong because in the axieme you see very well that they are straight and not tilted, they are even drawn straight... just copy
1:1 front view is not needed and there is no identification of the view in section
the scale only puts itself if it is different from the general one
that 23.8 of the quarry on the hole cannot be seen. the norms indicate that the quotas are brought out of geometry
It sucks enough also the quotation of the holes of the laminated hole. do a detail (learn to do details!!!) and quoti in a single stroke diamteri and depth of the lamatura
A ray is missing.

Ultimately there are errors also present on your other post and as quptatura leaves enough to want

Do you please explain where those odd odds with decimals and cents come from?

 

[falonef]

I think another kind of speech should be made.

the notions of how to correctly quote them to shark (with q?).

then if you have catia v5 it would take a nice basic course to learn how to model a 3d and how to create a design starting from the 3d and take the most advantage of the various functions and options that this cad offers.

Finally a good cad administrator should be able to fix all those little problems (often lines, cartiglio etc.) of which many of us patiently explained.

from what seems to me to understand but you have to arrange yourself and here the path is a little windy.

is my question because the various stages are not respected?
c is a basic problem with your school path.

Have you ever been able to attend?

friendly?

 

[falonef]

the absurd quotas with the decimals and the cents are set so in the original cartiglio of the ds what I would never do because it lacks personal settings or the company for which you work.

If you take a tour in the v5 cat section you will find interesting information that you do to your case.

 

[MassiVonWeizen]

the notions of how to correctly quote them

hopefully they did, otherwise what have they done so far evolutionary bearing theory from pleistocene to henry ford? I had linked him a couple of links about the material about it and in which there were some quoted drawings that should have brought him to the right path.

he has already written that in fact they have to arrange themselves. I think they don't even have the same cad and that would limit them. enormously because they cannot confront each other and teach each other.
but just read the questions of the various students on the forum, it is clear that there are few who know how to use the software they talk about, most have taken one randomly and uses it as if they try to make a h7 tolerance with a grinder

and absurd quotas with decimals and cents are set so in the original cartiglio

ok, but I imagine that faithfully remarries the model and that therefore be ques to be modeled with absurd figures

 

[meccanicamg]

I'm not the same piece. in the axieme the holes have parallel axis to the axis of the piece. in your particular holes are tilted. Where is the truth? tilt also different from the cone and the plan..... boh.... then quit with sti numbers comma 2 that invents you from where?
bad quote as they already told you.

 

[meccanicamg]

the holes where the screws go to brugola are quoted not bad, not wrong but really meaningless.
How the hell do you think you're quotating the diameters in the left view?
enlarge the section and quotes diameters and heights! x the misery! Have you ever taken a bruised screw?

 

[meccanicamg]

the spacing between the quotas is too much.... I hate so little girls that fill the pages and you do not lose the logical thread when working on the machine tools.

 

[falonef]

hopefully they did, otherwise what have they done so far evolutionary bearing theory from pleistocene to henry ford? I had linked him a couple of links about the material about it and in which there were some quoted drawings that should have brought him to the right path.

he has already written that in fact they have to arrange themselves. I think they don't even have the same cad and that would limit them. enormously because they cannot confront each other and teach each other.
but just read the questions of the various students on the forum, it is clear that there are few who know how to use the software they talk about, most have taken one randomly and uses it as if they try to make a h7 tolerance with a grinder


ok, but I imagine that faithfully remarries the model and that therefore be ques to be modeled with absurd figures

no I think that the odds created them manually in the drawing.
in catia v5 is so that opening a design is maintained the settings defined in xml that fly quotas, settings, thickness lines etc.

rather I would not even be sure that the 3d model was modeled 100% in catia v5 but rather resumed through a nice step made by a friend with another sw

 

[MassiVonWeizen]

no I just think the odds created them manually in the drawing

what I mean is that the odds come from the geometry of the solid, or at least should be so (otherwise that it is modeled to do?), and therefore if in the drawing a measure appears with decimal settordics means that it has made the model with that measure. then if instead of making a length of 17,263567 makes it 17 to the maximum they exit two zeros after the comma (17,00)

 

[falonef]

what I mean is that the odds come from the geometry of the solid, or at least should be so (otherwise that it is modeled to do?), and therefore if in the drawing a measure appears with decimal settordics means that it has made the model with that measure. then if instead of making a length of 17,263567 makes it 17 to the maximum they exit two zeros after the comma (17,00)

then by catia v5 expert I confirm that in 3d models and (you can) insert also tolerances.

then in the 2d c is the possibility to recover quotas with tolerance created in the 3d thing but I doubt that I did.

after 17 years of cv5 experience it is seen to be seen that the quotas in the 2d created them manually with so much insertion of the various predefined tolerances in the cart.

What does the student confirm? ...

 

[MassiVonWeizen]

I still can't understand.
Now I'm going a little out of the subject, but so much always about catia, to learn something about software.
I start from how I make the modeling in solidworks just to understand then how he reasons catia.
I model my detail and give it a length of 150,6 and a diameter of 100.
I create the table creating the various views from the created model. I can also import the quotas that become usable in order to modify the model (i.e. if I change the share the model accordingly) otherwise I create new quotas in the design environment and these do not affect the model. My odds will still be 150,6 and 100 and according to the settings I can have a fixed number of decimals in which there will be zeros to fill the lack of unity (150,600 and 10,000), I can have a number of decimals in which zeros will be omitted (150,6 and 100), I can not have decimals and the figures will be rounded to the nearest unit (151 and 100). if I change the model the odds fit
there is also the possibility to manually edit the quota, but obviously has no relation with the model and modifying the quota remains with the edited value.
for this I say that to get a 87.74 he must have decided in the phase of modeling.
rightly you say that it is hardly a consequence of the tolerances inserted (he also declares that he did not consider them) and equally absurd that if he had edited the quota (which I don't know if in the ca... cappero.
I'm sorry if I make it long

 

[falonef]

you have not longed

you have described exactly the scenario that is possible with solidworks but also with cv5 so much they both belong to ds.

at this point the quota 87.74 could have been created manually starting from a view imported from a dxf and here they would also return the accounts of why the views are flat with the giometria that has the same thickness of the quota lines.

Could but I'm not sure.

It's up to the student to tell us how he created it.

 

[meccanicamg]

but I am blessed student, is he able or not to tell us whether he has a 3d model to put on the table or whether he is using catia as autocad lt?
I'm fine... better than doing the course again and prepare well because it's quite lacunous.

 

[MassiVonWeizen]

in other discussions it has attached images of solid models. it is supposed to do them for all these exercises

 

[marcoevolution]

1) the accuracy in cents of the quota is the result of the process that leads to the realization of the model 3d by means of a factor of proportionality between nominal and measured quota: Catia allows to choose in the drafting environment the accuracy of the quotas and although it is a mistake several times rimarcato, at this moment for me it is not relevant because it is simply to select all the quotas and impose a whole type accuracy: more relevant are errors related to angular quotas/quotas missing/excess rates/recurred rates/set rates considered serious and irremediable errors at the examination

2) on the hole with a sloping axis I do absolutely mea culpa because I have mistaken in the feature sequence in the development of the 3d model (I have placed the tab that creates that local conicacy to the feature hole)

3)Spanish/quote to be brought out of geometry: I understand that it is a mistake over and over again, but it seems to me that once I understand (I understand) you can also suspend to focus on other errors and then remember them in the examination (I guess? )

4) links that have been kindly posted to me are basic design concepts (different line thicknesses according to what this line represents etc.): neglecting the fact that slowly I'm reading it and that here you reason as if I understood instantly what you are talking about on the merits of the software, I'm looking according to the indications you have already provided me to solve the problem, but being self-taught I don't know where to put hand in the settings and not wanting to slaughter in the same settings a few days from the exam I put a lot of time to avoid the problem in this.

5) "make a detail of the view/section to show good and quote better" , problem : I don't know how the hell you do in the casket, a lesson has never been mentioned and know that I have even opened a new discussion apart to understand what the hell it is and how to make them in the drafting environment.

6) the cad model I process it and then the quoto in drafting environment: all in catia v5 for retarded children without any external software. xml,sw are meaningless acronyms for me: never heard and never mentioned in lesson (I asked and gave you certainty)
I thought you didn't do anything about random cad images: from now on it is necessary that the loads? Is there a way to post a cad file?

7) tolerances/work of grinding: are things that in the drawing exam assisted by the computer (my) we are allowed to omit and as if not enough nobody told me how to do so in the casket I do not know where to put hand

8) the decimals in the quotas arise from the realization of the model cad from a section of total from which I take the measures with the ruler multiplying them by a factor of proportionality that is very often decimal: This problem is not insurmountable in the drafting environment where you just select the odds and set the unitary accuracy, asks: if you make logical or even normative errors of quotation, do you not think it would be more serious than not spacing the same in a very perfect way?? ? If I focused on the first and reminded me of the second in the exam? Wouldn't that be the strategy I'm trying to move on?

 

[marcoevolution]

 

[MassiVonWeizen]

spacing/quote to be brought out of geometry: I understand that it is a mistake over and over again, but it seems to me that once I understand (I understand) you can also suspend to focus on other errors and then remember them in the examination (I guess? )

I would say no, because if you reiterate the error, you prove you didn't understand it. If I knew you would correct it.

If you make logical or even normative errors of quotation, don't you think it would be more serious than not spacing the same in a perfect way?? ? If I focused on the first and reminded me of the second in the exam? Wouldn't that be the strategy I'm trying to move on?

So far you've never said so, so at least I've given for granted that you didn't consider it or you didn't care. I don't understand what the problem is to dispose the quotas right now (no one asks for a constant distance, but neither chje are attached as in the first drawing that you have placed or that they are very far from each other). However, this is a normative error.

the decimals in the quotas arise from the realization of the model cad from a section of total from which I take the measures with the ruler multiplying them by a factor of proportionality

Since you put it on the ruler you didn't pass, is it the head that if you roll already on the modeling you earn? or do you consider the measure made with the ruler of a centesimal precision?

 

[marcoevolution]

I would say no, because if you reiterate the error, you prove you didn't understand it. If I knew you would correct it.

I understand: I will try again!


So far you've never said so, so at least I've given for granted that you didn't consider it or you didn't care. I don't understand what the problem is to dispose the quotas right now (no one asks for a constant distance, but neither chje are attached as in the first drawing that you have placed or that they are very far from each other). However, this is a normative error.

(see above)


Since you put it on the ruler you didn't pass, is it the head that if you roll already on the modeling you earn? or do you consider the measure made with the ruler of a centesimal precision?

do you consider the measure made with the ruler of a centesimal precision? Yes because I have a very great fear that then do not fit perfectly the pockets etc. etc.

 

[MassiVonWeizen]

It is certainly not rounding of two or three tenths that goes in mile a model.