You don't need to dimension it at all, because as you probably know, that part would never be manufactured by looking at the 2D.
At my company, one of the standard notes we put on every drawing is "Referring to solid model for geometry not dimensioned is permissible. All unspecified surfaces must match solid model within .020 in. (and we put the .020 in a ...
SVG and images in general define a coordinate system with
positive x towards the right
positive y towards the bottom
I.e. the pixels with coordinate y=1 are near the top.
On the other hand dwg, defines a coordinate system with
positive x towards the right
positive y upwards
All you need to do is flip your svg along the x axis, either on the original or ...
I think you need to understand what a "tolerance" means in an assembly items. My token view is, a tolerance is the permissible deviation of a part from its ideal design dimension. Additionally, under the non-ideal situation, the assembly will not lose its intended functionality, and desired level of performance. After that, you may start to tighten ...
If the request is coming from whoever will be machining or inspecting the part, I would side with them. They know what they need to see to make sure the part ultimately meets the print.
Also, since your first datum is on the opposing face this implies it is getting machined first, hence why it is a reference datum. The geometry of the face you're making the ...
I don't want to spoil the fun of solving this for yourself so I offer the following suggestions:
Redraw the assembly with all edges, including the hidden edges, shown as dotted lines.
Draw solid lines on all the intersections.
Join up any vertices which form edges not on the outer surfaces of the assembly.
Count the faces.
Step 3 is the only tricky bit. In ...
4 x means it applies to the four instances that look similar on the drawing.
Ø 5 means the hole diameter (drill size) is 5mm.
“Thru all” is added here to remove the requirement for a section view to show hole depth. You can’t tell by the outlines whether it’s through, or you can see the bottom of the hole
M6x1.0 - 6H is the thread and tolerance to be ...
Like promised, I am now looking at EN ISO 14405-1:2016 where this E symbol (Ⓔ) is defined. More accurately is defined in section "3.8 envelope requirement".
The upper value of a external feature defines a virtual cylinder that the entire feature has to fit inside. Likewise a internal features minimum value defines a cylinder that has to fit inside the hole....
When you have an object to draw, you must follow some simple rules to explain your drawing for anyone to understand it easily.
There are 2 example explanatory pictures below.
Hope these helps!
Don't think, look at the numbers! Drawing isometric, or any projective images for that matter is very straightforward. Just as long as you do not try to find a trick to make it easier. Just work out the distance numbers.
Start by sketching your primary axes. These are the directions you are going to measure against in all parallel projections.
Then start ...
One could argue that sphericity is a specific type of profile tolerance. You would just need to make sure perfectly opposing points on the surface (or as close to it as possible) are inspected to properly calculate the diameter.
You probably need some auxiliary sections as well as the three basic views.
For example if you draw a section at mid-height looking down the axis, you can easily dimension the "straight" ribs. If you draw a section normal to one of the curved ribs, you can dimension the cross section of that rib, and presumably they are all the same.
Since the dimensions ...
The Ⓔ is one of the options in the "feature control frame" as defined in the ISO 8015 standard, or ASME Y14.5M.
It stands for "envelope requirement." The basic idea is that the tolerance of the feature should not exceed the perfect geometrical shape at the maximum material size, which is identified by the symbol Ⓜ.
You can use the "Projected View" button to add another view, by selecting an existing view. You should bear in mind, however, that you should avoid adding unnecessary views if you can fully define the geometry of the object with only a few. I can't comment on this without an image of your object, however.
It is possible to use dashed lines for things that are in the image for reference, or not directly part of the item in the drawing. But in general adding something because you have blank space seems redundant. Add something if it makes things clearer.
It is also perfectly ok to write instructions and explanations. Drawings are human readable after all. So ...
For Windows, Linux and Mac, Solvespace will allow one to create three dimensional objects in a parametric as well as free-form manner.
Text and dimensions are part of the program's features. The web site provides tutorials and other useful reference material.
If you did not have the requirement for dimensions, OpenSCAD would have been a good choice. There ...
If something is form-fit-function backward compatible with an earlier rev., then usually you can just bump the rev -- depending on your customer base.
Most places that make changes as rapidly as you imply make the firmware field updatable, and track the product as "Revision X hardware with revision Y firmware" -- in no small part for the reasons you detail. ...
This is a very difficult answer to answer within a single post but I'll give it a try.
Tolerances, Cost and Machine capability
The very first thing you need to remember is that tolerances are indirectly related to cost. More precisely, having tight tolerances means that two objects will be more closely matched compared to two others with looser tolerances. ...
I see 4-solutions. I added straight lines (in GIMP) to represent canted faces. Either the original posted by NMech along with either or both surfaces as canted are also viable alternatives.
(As NMech noted, they could have curvature (except you might then have to show the center of the arc, unless they were b-splines(?).)
It's a tricky one.
Figure 1. Your isometric is missing this line.
Figure 2. A clue. The six-cornered shape is flat so it must be a plane going through these three points. Can you draw it?
Figure 3. The correct isometric view.
Figure 4. Slide 25 by Shelly Wilke on SlideShare. This and slide 9 may be instructive.
Instead of bothering to draw the construction use the parametric tab to do this do the following:
assign a locked constraint to your point and 2 to the tangent line so they don't move by mistake.
Draw a arbitrary circle, on the side of points where you want the circle center to be.
Select the tangent constraint, click circle and line
select the coincident ...
One option would be to do it through a 3 point circle.
First select the two points and then use the tangent snap to select the third point on the line.
Finding the snap location algebraically
$(x1,y1)$ : the coordinates of the 1st point (P1)
$(x2,y2)$ : the coordinates of the 2nd point (P2)
the tangent is horizontal (for simplicity)
Your question is much broad in my opinion, I'll stick with the most important aspects IMO.
Computer 2D drawing has limitations (no detection of crossing of invisible lines, dimension lines touching the solid lines, and lots of others), and cad programs simply don't care about these kind of things (and I hate this aspect, but we work with what we got).
I think you need something inline with this:
Note that the datum A is identified by using an indicator under the callout.
A-B could equally be used with the same meaning if you identify the two surfaces.
You can have more explanation in ASME 14.5:2018 figure 6-6.
This is fine, but not typical for cylindrical faces.
The Profile GD&T symbol describes a 3D tolerance zone around the face, and as such is typically used for complex surfaces where other symbols cannot be used. See https://www.gdandtbasics.com/profile-of-a-surface
If the paper has a lot of blank space without drawing Y, then you can draw X at a bigger scale to fill it up, or use smaller paper!
If Y is physically bigger than X (which seems possible, if X is just a mounting system) you might want to add a reduced scale "sketch" drawing showing how X and Y are assembled.
If Y could be any component with a standard type ...
The link you've provided has a pretty comprehensive set of dimensions. One bit of text that jumped out to me is worded "See sheet 2 for recommended PC board layout."
I would read the reference of 0.127 / 0.097 as a difference of 0.030, which would then translate to 0.112 +/- 0.015 which appears consistent on many of the measurements. A couple appear a bit ...