tree representation

[magrinsi72]

I've heard today that the keyless trees aren't being dissected...? ? ! !
I understand if one in the table only puts the tree on the table... but if there is a view and then it dissects it for all its length to indicate the lengths of the sticks rather than to tear around the sticks.
What exactly does the legislation say about it?

 

[TETRASTORE]

you can see the correct representation qui e qui.

 

[magrinsi72]

So that wouldn't be correct?
processing at the ends is identical. . .

 

[MassiVonWeizen]

the law says that the trees do not dissect.
on your design you know that they are equal, but who realizes it must not deduce anything; the drawing is a document that makes faith in case of controversies and you can not say - and but it seems obvious to me that...-

 

[magrinsi72]

the law says that the trees do not dissect.
on your design you know that they are equal, but who realizes it must not deduce anything; the drawing is a document that makes faith in case of controversies and you can not say - and but it seems obvious to me that...-

the symmetry axis in the view should indicate it.

 

[TETRASTORE]

on the practical side you must also consider that in your design you are forced to represent the particular with three views while with the partial sections it would be enough two and the design would be clearer for an operator.

 

[meccanicamg]

So that wouldn't be correct?
processing at the ends is identical. . .

the correct version is that you do the sections in place for each tab....eye that key and tab are different.
the cads allow everything, and now in these years it seems interests little if you respect the norms but the important thing seems to be clear the design. Of course, seeing a tree all dissected makes vomiting regardless of norm or not.
Of course, if you're a little strict, the design is cleaner.

another way is to make one view and sections for each tab.
The odds on the tree that you dissected move on the tree.

 

[MassiVonWeizen]

So that wouldn't be correct?
processing at the ends is identical. . .

view in section basically useless because all odds could be placed in the view in the plant, as already noted by other users. this would further facilitate reading because form tolerances and datum would be close and also you should not run around the sheet to look for quotas.
then why if the piece is symmetrical put some odds on one side and a little on the other? same applies to tolerances.
the m12 is a big step so it does not need to indicate the step of the thread.

it seems that you made the drawing only to fill the sheet and then feel obliged to spread the information. I think it is not well done