I spent almost an hour trying to explain to an Engineer how GDnT works and how and why the part was failing. I would think with all of the GDnT on the prints they would have a better understanding of it. (I know its not all engineers may be just a few that I work with)
The newer engineers get 40 hours of instruction and are suddenly experts. So new or old the majority of engineers don't have a firm grasp and understanding of GD&T. There is the occasional exception, but the vast majority know just enough to be extremely dangerous.
The newer engineers get 40 hours of instruction and are suddenly experts. So new or old the majority of engineers don't have a firm grasp and understanding of GD&T. There is the occasional exception, but the vast majority know just enough to be extremely dangerous.
Strange since all these prints have GDnT on them. we have one engineer in charge of quoting parts but doesn't know a lick of GDnT and cant identify Datum schemes that will be to difficult for our manufacturing capabilities to meet. And then they get mad when I let them know the part failed
After 25 years of programming CMMs staring at prints and working with GD&T, I've finally been asked to participate in APQPs and to give my thoughts on the prints.
I don't think I can wait 25 years. Luckily the Engineer in charge is open to ideas, thoughts and concerns anyone may have, (I'm not sure how much he actually cares but at least he's open to input)