full listing model

[welcome to the machine]

great respect for bitten that with honesty not milliant knowledge that does not have. in this forum is rare goods. wishes for his work and for his life.
the most experienced could (but this is only my opinion, each manifests as you want and for what it is) be a little more transient than a way of expressing itself that can be conditioned by the difficulties of a very critical personal moment. stan 9411 had gone a bit heavy, but, for what my opinion is worth, I much appreciated how ... it came back into tolerance
I am instead surprised negatively by the fact that these associates of alleged design continue to recruit boys on the basis of a banal design....it will be also only the filter to participate in a first interview, but it seems almost a mirror for allodoles: "Come, if you can put two odds on the cross, we'll make you a designer." and then they put you down boards from other people's drawings to a thousand pounds....
Maybe it doesn't work like that, and instead they invest to train you or, but I don't think, you're gonna miss the interview if you're not an already trained designer. However I find it strange that the same drawing turns again after 5 years...

 

[meccanicamg]

I agree with you.
Moreover the mechanical design represents only the last communicative frontier towards a third that must perform the piece. in Orossyanni will be all digital and the representations will go into the forgotten.
definitely before this activity there is behind a series of specialized works to create, test, simulate, plan and construct and definitely need a very professionally prepared figure.

 

[MassiVonWeizen]

I only point out to you that the throat is a seeger seat that has well-defined quotas and tolerances.
the rules of the internal seeger is the din 472; looking for this rule also find the size

 

[Bitto87]

thank you for those who understand me and, on the phrase "excellent dealer bad engineer" I did not want to offend any category, just say that, with all the efforts made to graduate me (and being the only graduate in all my family, not only as parents and brothers but also grandparents uncles and cousins) I would do anything to make fruit I am blessed piece of paper, hopefully you understand me... .
However the gaps there are, I know, but I can't claim who knows what.. the work scarcely and do the sketchy can't, what I don't know I will learn by working...I'm sorry to quote (I don't question it) but drawing is easier (even if things should be connected but that I can do it. It'll be my limit.

However a first sketch of the piece I did,cortesemente you can help me understand what to add, what to improve and if I have quoted well? I ask you this effort because, even if with some initial misunderstanding, you seemed to me people first and professionals then (because for many the title counts, even for it is clear, but the human quality I think must always prevaricate on the professional one,otherwise we will be only automatons) that with a little understanding and some effort give it, and of this I thank you... .
crucify me first if you have to, but then help me if you can.. thanks

 

[Bitto87]

p.s 27,6 and 42 are data taken from the bearing.. which as reported in the supplied material is a 2rs1-20/42/12

 

[MassiVonWeizen]

the tolerance he put is not to be put. the bearing will be housed in hole 42, it will be this to be tolerated
radius r0,4 should not be done there, but in the edge of housing bearing, therefore that 2x45° does not serve.
missing the diameter of the seeger seat.
missing the total depth of the hole

 

[simone1996]

hi bitto, if I can say mine:
if possible do not interrupt the particular as you did, if it is too long do a break of this type: and quota the total length.

if possible the quota lines fall less panciute
missing the outer cylinder ø
I would put another roughness in bearing housing (ra 1.6)
I personally would have drawn the piece with horizontal symmetry axis (axial piece executed by turning) (as it is designed it is not absolutely wrong anyway).
5.25 I would change it, instead of taking the inner edge of the bevel, I would start from the external line.
a nice cart, with all the indications of the case, and there you are according to me.

for the rest I agree with massivonweizen.

 

[MassiVonWeizen]

the width of the seeger seat is also wrong.
you never quote by taking a bevel as reference; 5.25 is unnecessary because a result of the other quotas.
an operator must never count to know a measure

 

[Bitto87]

Thanks to the notes, I have time I will edit....for simone96,I can not change the design(or make other quotas),that is and that must be (so the person who sent me) so what you see that should be quoted....for the total length,like the embroidery?
Sorry but I'm a little in the ball, I ask you advice precisely for this...then, if you want, on the page are the two drawings to quote, the first already quoted and requoted in the pages of sta conversation, and the second that is this here, part all and two of a set that you always see on page 1


Excuse me but, considering you learn and then ask advice to those who know more about you and can correct you and teach you everything I think is wrong... thank you again

 

[MassiVonWeizen]

the total length does not matter because the exercise focuses on the bearing housing; for this I have not made to mention that missing the outer diameters, even if to quote it pleases the eye

 

[simone1996]

If the design is that and must remain so, it will never be complete.
I didn't realize it was an exercise focused on bearing housing.
if the exercise does not provide a complete quotation and correct representation of the particular, the total length of the piece cannot put it (if the exercise provided full quotation, then you should put it).

 

[Bitto87]

I'll try again. I will be goat or I don't know.. but, please take a look and tell me that it seems to you, and, if someone has time and want to show me the errors I make graphically (I don't say quote it to my place, if you want it to do it for "sfizio" yours, but clearly I don't ask this, we miss it) maybe taking the image that I place and looking for errors in red (as in xd school) and saying. I'll give you time and patience, but you don't know what help you're giving me.

 

[MassiVonWeizen]

if you do 40 inlet hole how do you insert a bearing with diameter 42?
the 27,6 is wrong; with that quota you put in contact with the shouldering of the bushing both the outer ring and the inner one and it is not good. if you look at the design in post #1 you deduce that the inner ring is in contact with the pin while the inner ring with the bushing. then you will have to follow the indications that in skf you find as shoulder size.
for the seat of seeger:
ok the quota 1.85
the quota 3.8 (it was not 5.25 initially?) it does not need
11.5 was better as in the first version
missing the diameter of the seat

lack other tolerances and roughness 1.6 does not go on the shoulder but on the circular area

 

[Bitto87]

I hope this is good, I am sorry for the insistence but I do not surrender, sooner or later I can... thank you for the answer, especially thanks to you massiwonveizen for the advice and patience.. I hope it's good but I don't think so, so let's see a little...p.s. but for geometric tolerances what should I put?

 

[MassiVonWeizen]

I'm not clear about roughness, but you've been thinking about it too.
roughness serves to indicate the quality of the surface to be obtained; having to make a couple between two objects, these must have surfaces as smooth as the more precise the coupling tolerance. in your case you have to mount a bearing that has precise tolerances in a hole with an equally precise tolerance; So where will the roughness of 1.6 be put?

24.6 where did you get it from? Did you look at the link I put on the skf table?

the diameter of the seeger seat is wrong. Did you look at the seeger tables?

the 52.5, I repeat it for the third time is superfluous, it does not serve anything. why don't you tell the total length as I also specified in the image?

to do a precise job the initial hole part should be done slightly larger (42.5 would be fine); in this way it facilitates the insertion of the bearing

 

[Bitto87]

I admit, I understood little and nothing... now I'm out of the house and I'm coming back tonight late... Tomorrow morning I'll take my hand and see what goes out
for the odds I made the mistake of measuring them on the sheet and, having some data from the skf tables of the bearing I made the mistake of using a factor of scale and multiply the quotations of the sheet for that factor.. I know I am demonstrating little skill, and I admit to quotation I do not understand anything, I can draw but use the odds put by others, I personally do not know capable, but I have to mention it all I have to pass I have to discover my odds .
I understand the disconcerting of someone or the "no" made with the head by others but, I repeat, if the job discards I settle. ..I could "pump" on other fields of engineering but I try with everything.. for a period I followed a course on the wcm but I did not passionately and I quit after 10 days (the course lasted two months and then after interview there was possibility of insertion in the company), I use various fem programs but I do not want to do analysis. The problem is that the university doesn't tell you what the engineer's job is (many, if not all, the professors have never worked and only know how to study, so what do you want them to understand?) and once the problem comes out it's ours.. If they ever tell you what the job is, one would make its evaluations. . . attention: I don't say that I don't like it or don't like engineering, we miss it, I just say that my ideal engineer (and maybe many others) is very different from reality. ..comuque thanks again massive...repeto, I have to manage costs what costs,arrender me or say I can not (or I can not) is not part of my character....never surrender!! ! !

 

[MassiVonWeizen]

Look, mine wasn't a controversy, but a bonario rimbrotto.
the problem of phoning is that you lack the logic behind certain choices; I don't go into the merits of who is guilt or how much you weigh your preparation that is probably different and even whether it's right or not that you do every possible attempt, it's not the purpose of your post and it's not right that I talk about things that I don't know.
That design takes little to evaluate if you can put the odds, as to understand if you can use them logically. if you put a m6 instead of a h7 on the 42 is of little importance, but if you put it on the 27, as in the first drawing, and they will ask you why you have to motivate your choice

Let us explain insemen:
the seeger seat has dimensions defined by tables, I have indicated to you which reference standard is concerned; Did you look for her? Do you understand?
Do you get the skf table? Do you understand what I wrote in post #93 about quota 27.6 and shouldering?
Do you understand the concept of roughness?

I understand that you are in the high sea and panicked for an interview, but instead of blurring behind your personal motivations busy asking why of certain design indications that are given to you (until you did).

 

[Bitto87]

OK, I'll calm down and try, but to understand, giving a quick eye to din 472, maybe I read it wrong:
by entering the diameter 42(d1 in the standard name) the data shown are:
m=1,85(and I reported it well I believe,it is the measure of the seeger)
d2=43,5(the outer diameter of the seeger)
on 24,6 l I marked reading the data provided to me on the bearing by those who asked me to quote (they also hold on page 1) but obviously I was wrong. .very likely I did not understand the tables since I did not understand the drawing well.. .
I thank you for the advice you give me (you see that, despite the initial tones, you really like what you do and people like you if from a council I willingly accept it!)...if you have a little patience, please help me understand,otherwise it ends that I don't understand anything in advance and good to make

 

[MassiVonWeizen]

that you see this page is the norm of elastic rings called seeger for holes; find the size of the rings and also the size of the seats (in the column circlip groove). as you see your width is correct, but the diameter is not.
Let's look at the smaller hole I told you it was wrong.
the skf site in the shoulders indicates that the maximum diameter (from) is 39.5so you do not have to overcome this dimension; but as seen from the image the diameter must be higher than the minimum diameter of the outer ring of the bearing that the skf site indicates as d2 38,75from this it is deduced that your diameter (quoted by you 27.6 and 24.6) must stand halfway between these misues to make sure that the shouldering does not go to touch the seals (indicated with rs1) ruining them. as though the test indicates as from 38 and d2 37.2 (an old catalog?) recalculates the diameter with these measures.

 

[Bitto87]

I hope I've been able to do this this time.. If so I don't ask you (against once) to tell me what I was wrong
p.s. if you want I can also attach the manuals that sent me so you take a look at it too, considering that, although little, they differ in the values than those linked by you (which I presume to be more up-to-date and "contemporaneous)