gdt versus gps

Geometric Dimensioning and Tolerancing (GD&T) versus

Geometrical Product Specification (GPS)

G. Concheri, I. Cristofolini1, R. Meneghello, G. Wolf1

Istituto di Disegno, Università di Padova 1Dipartimento di Ingegneria Meccanica e Strutturale, Università di Trento

Abstract

The definition of standards, aiming at completely and coherently describe the geometrical characteristics of products, concerns GD&T (Geometric Dimensioning and Tolerancing – ASME standards) and GPS (Geometrical Product Specifications – ISO standards). The global market competition and the current more and more critical requirements for quality control make it necessary to clearly know the statements of the standards to which refer when dimensioning. Therefore it looks worthy comparing GD&T versus GPS.

The aim of this work is thus to analyse analogies and discrepancies, firstly describing the basic philosophies and the determining issues, which influence both way of thinking.

As it appears immediately, ISO and ASME differently approach the problem. GD&T, in fact, reflects the need of developing a core of basic principles and

fundaments of macro-geometric characteristics definition and verification, around which specifying various situations. By this way, GD&T is now substantially described by the last version of a unique standard, ASME Y14.5M-1994 (Dimensioning and Tolerancing – Mathematical Definition of Dimensioning and Tolerancing Principles).

On the other hand, ISO principles and scopes are dealt with in ISO/TR 14638: 1995, Geometric Product Specifications (GPS) – Masterplan, where a collection and harmonisation of former ISO standards relating geometric requirements of products is presented. In latest years, ISO efforts lead to more than sixty project of new GPS standards - or revision to existing - with a focus on covering the whole product development cycle (design, manufacturing, verification), eliminating contradictions as well as gaps between standards.

A deeper analysis in terms of fundaments and main standards concerning GD&T and

GPS is then performed, to verify the analogies, which can be evidenced, despite of the apparently different approach.

The results of the whole analysis are finally collect in a “Comparison Matrix”, allowing to evidence the “state of the art” of ASME and ISO concerning the standardisation of the geometric characteristics of products.

Recent efforts of ISO/TC213 concerning GPS development are finally reported and discussed, necessarily remembering that standardisation is by its nature a continuous “work in progress”.

D1-37

XII ADM International Conference - Grand Hotel - Rimini – Italy - Sept. 5th-7th, 2001

1. INTRODUCTION

In these last years the scenery of global markets changed so deeply and quickly that industries had to front a real revolution. Sophisticated CAD systems, new technologies, new materials lead to products showing even more complicated geometries and reveal the need for tools allowing to describe them properly.

It looks thus important analysing the role of standards in this evolving situation, verifying how (and if) they represent the answer to the real problems concerning the definition of geometrical characteristics of parts.

The aim of this work is analysing and comparing the main standards concerning the definition of geometrical characteristics, that means GD&T (ASME standards) and GPS (ISO standards).

The evaluation of the state of the art, evidencing analogies and discrepancies of both philosophies, appears as the starting point for a deeper analysis, aimed not only to punctually compare the current state of single standards but especially to evidence the future trend and the necessary efforts, which could lead standardisation to a coherent representation of a complex reality.

2. HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT

Briefly considering the historical development of GD&T and GPS in their main aspects can help to understand analogies and discrepancies characterising both way of thinking. Basic steps are summarised in Table 1.

Table 1 – Main standards characterising historical development of GD&T and GPS

GD&T

GPS

1905

1939-45

1966

1994

Taylor Concept – Rule 1

Envelope Principle

MIL-STD 8A Form – positioning concepts

USASI Y14.5M

First unified standard for dimensioning and Tolerancing

ASME Y14.5M Dimensioning and Tolerancing

1920s’

1940

1962

1969

1995

National standards on limits and fits (e.g.UNIM 24)

ISA system on limits and fits (in Italy UNI 1088-1098:40)

ISO/R 286 “limits and fits”

ISO/R 1101/I Form-positioning concepts

ISO/TR 14638

Geometrical Product Specifications (GPS) – Masterplan

It is worthy pointing out that GD&T developed essentially an unique standard for

dimensioning and tolerancing during the years, aimed at considering both dimensional and geometrical characteristics of components, thus reflecting the tendency of considering the

D1-38


macro-geometric characteristics as an essential aspect. On the other hand, considering GPS development, we can observe that it really derived in 1995 from the presence of many standards, aimed at exactly describing and characterising the more various cases, rather than collecting basic principles for geometrical characteristics definition in an unique standard [1].

3. BASIC PHILOSOPHY AND FUNDAMENTS

In few words, the basic philosophy of GD&T, can be stated as follows: dimensioning is considered an activity that, starting from the evaluation of the actual “function” and “relationship” of part features, allows a clear, concise and unequivocal description of such items [2].

Conversely, GPS basic philosophy appears more difficult to synthesise (due to the many standards involved) and can be derived substantially from the analysis of the GPS Matrix, which will be further explained. The GPS approach tends to detail every geometric characteristic separately, but with no emphasys on the underlying correlation between “specification” and the “verification”.

Analysing the fundaments, in GD&T “Rule 1” [3] establishes a deep correlation

between size and form, prescribing the extent to which variations in geometric form as well as size are allowed when only a tolerance of size is specified. On the contrary, ISO 8015 [4] establishes the “independency principle”, that means that dimensional and geometric tolerances have to be considered as independent, geometric tolerances have to be applied without considering parts dimensions.

Anyway, it looks worthy underlining what will be clarified by the whole analysis. The

main differences between GD&T and GPS, which could appear considerably deep, substantially reflect the different historical development and the different peculiar approaches related to different characteristics. The connections developed in these years imply that the effort now is now spent in order to minimize the differences, and therefore to obtain an efficient tool describing components, which are globally even more sophisticated.

4. GPS MATRIX

The first effort aimed at harmonising the existing ISO standards is described by the so-called “GPS Matrix”, which will be following briefly described as presented by ISO/TR 14638:1995 [5].

In GPS matrix model the concept of “chain of standards” is applied. Referring to a specified geometrical characteristic, the chain collects all the standards related, which can be used in the different steps of the production process (from design to verification, also considering manufacturing and metrological aspects). Each single standard in the chain affects the other standards, which have necessarily to be known, to understand and apply it properly. Four different main groups of standards are identified: Fundamental GPS standards (for the time being, only the Principle of Independency belongs to), Global GPS standards (standards covering or influencing several or all chains of standards), General GPS standards (the main body of GPS standards, establishing rules for drawing indications, definitions and verifications principles for different types of geometrical characteristics), Complementary GPS standards (standards establishing complementary rules for specialised categories of features or elements). A scheme for GPS matrix model is reported in fig. 1 [6].

D1-39


Design Verification Measuring Measuring Instruments Traceability

DIMENSION GEOMETRY SURFACE

General GPS Matrix

Fig. 1 – Scheme for GPS Matrix model

The comparison between ASME standards and GPS matrix, precisely described in

Appendix, leads to the following considerations. Firstly, considering the features describing the parts, ASME Y14.5M-1994 tends to

separate the features essentially in two groups (depending on if they can be or not associated with a size dimension), GPS matrix presents the features as associated to the more various geometrical characteristics. This different point of view reflects to the Datums concept too. Datum Reference Frame definition, as well as Datum Features establishment, are in fact basic concepts in ASME Y14.5M-1994, necessary to univocally and completely describe geometrical characteristics and relationships of parts. On the other hand, Datums are considered just guidelines defining the geometrical characteristics of the parts, not so deeply related to the definition of relationships between features or parts.

Again, ASME Y14.5M-1994 considers essentially macro-geometries, not explicitly referring to surface texture aspects (also if ANSI/ASME B46.1-1985, Surface Texture (Surface Roughness, Waviness and Lay) is reported as reference). GPS Matrix, otherwise, also includes micro-geometries and surface texture aspects.

Moreover, while ASME Y14.5M-1994 focuses the attention on final characteristics of the parts, thus considering functionality and verification when dimensioning, GPS Matrix tends to evaluate the whole production process, thus collecting standards, which could be useful during manufacturing too.

We can finally evidence the lack of considering metrological aspects in ASME Y14.5M-1994, which are conversely reported in GPS Matrix. Table 2 summarises the main results of the comparison previously described.

5 6

Measurementequipment

requirements

Calibrationrequirements –Measurements

standards

…,10360-x,… 3650

…,10360-x,…

Chain linknumber 1 2 3 4

Geometricalcharacteristic

of feature

Productdocumentation

indication -Codification

Definition oftolerances –Theoretical

definition andvalues

Definitions foractual feature

–Characteristicor parameter

Assessmentof the

deviations ofthe workpiece– Comparisonwith tolerance

limits

Size 129,286-1,…286-1,286-2,…

286-1,1938,… 1938

Distance 129,406

…

Complementary GPS Matrix

Manufacturing

D1-40


Table 2 – GD&T versus GPS standards characteristics

GD&T

GPS

Features and features of size

DRF as basic concept

Surface Texture not explicitly included

Final characteristics of the parts

Functionality - Verification

Metrological aspects not included

Various geometries

Datums as geometric characteristics

Surface Texture included

Characteristics during production too

Functionality – Manufacturing - Verification

Metrological aspects included

Until here, we just pointed out the state of the art, considering the existing standards. It

can be seen like a “photograph” of the situation until 1995. Now, it can be observed that, being ASME Y14.5M-1994 a complete and efficient tool

for dimensioning (also if necessarily subject to revisions: new version of ASME Y14.5M is expected to be disposable in 2005), maybe the more interesting work in these last years has been done by ISO Technical Committees (i.e. ISO/TC 213), in order to perform the harmonisation started with GPS Masterplan. Next part of the work will focus on this evolution.

5. GPS ACTIVITIES DEVELOPMENT - DISCUSSION

The need for a strong effort (and the intention to do it!) aimed to the harmonisation of ISO standards concerning geometrical characteristics of products is well explicated in the documents “The challenge of ISO/TC 213”-1996 [7] and “Strategic policy statement of ISO/TC 213”-1997 [8].

The scope of ISO/TC 213, reported in the following, leads to further considerations. “Standardisation in the field of geometrical product specifications (GPS) i.e. macro- and micro-geometry specifications covering dimensional and geometrical tolerancing, surface properties and the related verification principles, measuring equipment and calibration requirements including the uncertainty of dimensional and geometrical measurements. The standardisation includes the basic layout and explanation of drawing indications (symbols).”

Starting from the consideration that “an estimated 50% of the necessary standards are either not available or are in contradiction to other GPS standards” [8], it individuates the first activities in completing the chains of standards. Analysing them, it looks interesting to evidence how some needed activities tend towards ASME Y14.5M/Y 14.5.1M-1994 concepts (definitions of Datums, of derived and associated features, mathematisation of GPS definitions…), while others are peculiar (surface texture, uncertainty in measurement…). The tendency to approach some “ASME-concepts” looks particularly evident considering ISO/CD 17450 “Geometrical Product Specifications (GPS) – Model for geometric specification” [9], where definitions for features are given, reminding those in ASME Y14.5M-1994, also comprehending a mathematical approach close to that of ASME Y14.5.1M-1994.

It is anyway revealed the effort for considering a quickly and deeply evolving reality, where the use of CAD systems, of sophisticated metrology, of new materials and

D1-41


technologies, of quality management systems, markedly evidence the need for adequate standards.

5.1. “Geometrical Product Specifications GPS 2001 – A vision for a new engineering tool”- January 2000

This tendency is confirmed by the Vision, “Geometrical Product Specifications GPS 2001 – A vision for a new engineering tool”- January 2000, and strongly supported by the development of a Draft Business Plan of ISO/TC 213-Febraury 2000.

The new engineering tool proposed by the vision for product development is a total integrated system for specification and verification of workpiece geometry, expressedly aligned with market needs of industry, explicitly referring to new technologies, new manufacturing processes, new materials and visionary products. Its implementation is seen as a prerequisite for surviving in global competition.

The objective of this tool is thus providing a more precise method of expressing functional requirements related to the geometry, aimed to the reduction of costs by avoiding the acceptance of inadequate workpieces due to insufficiently defined drawings. Relevancy is given to the use of computable mathematical functions expressing these specifications. The concept of “uncertainty” is given as basis for this new development, for quantifying ambiguities in the specification itself, as well as for the general concept of measuring uncertainty.

The Draft Business Plan even underlines the link of ISO/TC to the Business Environment, carefully considering its general, political, legal, economical, technical aspects.

5.2. Comments to the Vision Statement

The result of the inquiry on the ISO/TC 213 “Vision Statement” previously described leads to very interesting considerations. Main critical comments come from USA member, so that they can be analysed as starting point in a comparison to “ASME point of view”.

The first general comment immediately reflects the pragmatic American spirit (which can also be evidenced by the principles determining the whole ASME Y14.5M) considering that the vision statement appears “very forward looking” and “too large and unrealistic for the resources that appear to be available”. It is also criticised appearing somehow too philosophic, not enough connected to other TC’s and industrial organisations. The need for establishing deeper links with other TC’s explicitly refers to ISO/TC 184 (STEP), being one of the objectives in the vision an easy implementation in 3D CAD systems. Again, the pragmatic need for defining basic, well-defined range of situations looks fairly contrasting with the proposal of extending GPS language to “allow expression of requirements relating to a wide range of work piece functions”. Moreover, it is underlined that known techniques for describing and representing uncertainty in specifications are reminded, as they already be disposable, while they do not actually exist yet.

5.3. “Next generation of the Geometrical Product Specifications (GPS) language – The vision for an improved engineering tool” – June 2000

The following, and actually valid, version of the Vision, “Next generation of the Geometrical Product Specifications (GPS) language – The vision for an improved

D1-42


engineering tool” – June 2000, somehow appears even more ambitious than previous, while on the other hand looks receipting what was evidenced by USA comments.

Firstly, this new engineering tool is proposed no more only for product development, but “for product development and manufacturing”, thus implying partly the effort for an even stronger contact with the industrial (pragmatic) world, resulting however indubitably in an even wider and ambitious perspective. In the objective, the attention is patently focused on providing tools for “the economic management of variability in products and processes”, precisely defining functional requirements, complete and well-defined specifications, and (what’s new to the respect of the previous version) integrated verification approaches. By the way, the need for the harmonisation to others TC’s, is clearly stated.

The reduction of costs is mainly due “by avoiding the manufacture of inadequate workpieces due to incompletely defined specifications”, rather than “by avoiding accepting inadequate workpieces due to insufficiently defined drawings”, as in the previous version.

It is clearly stated that GPS language evolution “will be based on computable mathematics and correct, consistent logic using a generic set of rules, that can be applied to all types of specifications”. By this way, the task is defined, establishing a set of rules coherent with future evolution, but common to all types of specifications. It is pointed out that “proper implementation of the improved GPS system is a prerequisite for the continuous improvement of product quality and time to market”.

The section of the new version, which leads for deeper innovation, is considering uncertainty as “an economic tool”, clearly (compared to the previous version) establishing that “The improved GPS system will use “uncertainty” as the “currency” for quantifying: a) how well the specification expresses the functional requirements; b) what ambiguities exists in the specification itself; c) the uncertainty of measurement”.

The introduction of the “default concept”, specifying that “there will be a global default for each type of GPS specifications” lead to evidence the effort versus simplicity and minimisation of total cost.

With respect of the previous version, it is underlined that “proper implementation of the improved GPS system within a company is important for surviving in global competition”, again evidencing the tendency to become more pragmatic.

The efforts spent in this sense were evidently recognised, being it reported, “This vision has been unanimously (!) approved by the 9th plenary session of ISO/TC 213 on 23

June 2000 in Berlin, Germany”.

6. DEFINING UNCERTAINTY

As it can be evidenced from previous discussion, a main goal for GPS concerns uncertainty, as defined in relation to the comparison between tolerancing and metrology according to the “Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement – GUM” [10].

Being uncertainty itself just an expression of “lack of information”, ISO/TC 213 gives following definitions: specification uncertainty, conformance uncertainty, correlation uncertainty, total uncertainty [11,12]. Specification uncertainty is related to ambiguous drawing indication and/or incomplete specification, while the combination of measurement uncertainty and specification uncertainty is defined conformance uncertainty. Correlation uncertainty describes how well the actual Geometrical Products Specifications match to the actual function of the part and total uncertainty comprehends specification uncertainty, conformance uncertainty and correlation uncertainty.

D1-43


In order to establish more precise correlations between design and verifications, coherently within GPS matrix, symbols are proposed, which allow for specifying the type of size at best relating to the required function; they are shown in Table 2 [11].

Table 2 – Symbols for features of size

Types of size

Symbol Two-point size LP

Local size defined by a sphere LS Least squares size GG

Maximum inscribed size GX Maximum circumscribed size GN Circumference diameter size CC

Area diameter size CA Minimum statistical size SN Maximum statistical size SX Average statistical size SA

Having so defined the features, in order to establish a deeper correlation between specification and verification, the model shown in fig. is proposed [12].

Fig. 2 – Correlation between tolerancing and metrology

D1-44


This model is based on the concepts of “operation” (specific tool required to obtain features or values of characteristics, their nominal value and their limits) and “operator” (ordered set of operations). What is particularly interesting immediately underlining is the presence of the same operations both in specification and in verification steps, postulating a principle of duality. For example, dealing with the problem of representing a whole surface by a finite number of points, techniques as partition, extraction, filtration and association have to be defined both in the specification procedure and in the measurement procedure.

7. CONCLUSIONS

Geometric Dimensioning and Tolerancing (GD&T) and Geometrical Product Specification (GPS) are compared in this work.

Briefly analyzing the historical development of the standards concerning both GD&T and GPS, the different approach to the problem is evidenced, which lead to the development of a substantially unique standard (Y 14.5M – Y14.5.1M) by GD&T, while many standards concern GPS. Again, regarding fundaments, Rule 1 implies in GD&T the adoption of the envelope principle, while independency principle establishes the opposite in GPS.

The discrepancies in the approach appear thus evident, but the analysis of the development of GPS, particularly regarding these last years, tends to harmonise the existing standards in order to minimise the differences.

Some typical “ASME-concepts” (definitions of Datums, of derived and associated features, mathematisation of GPS definitions…) are integrated in ISO standards and a deeper attention to functional aspects is paid. A careful analysis shows anyway some other peculiar and interesting aspects.

GPS considers the whole production process steps (from design to verification, also comprehending metrology) and this can appear a very ambitious project. Anyway, it reflects the effort of representing, as best as possible, a deeply and quickly evolving reality.

REFERENCES

[1] Concheri, G., Siragusa, M., Tosetti, A., Specificazione ed utilizzo delle tolleranze geometriche in applicazioni industriali, Atti del IX Convegno Nazionale ADM, Caserta-Aversa, 27-29 settembre 1995, pp. 683-691, 1995

[2] Meadows, J.D., Geometric Dimensioning and Tolerancing, Marcel Dekker Inc., New York, NY, 1995

[3] ASME Y14.5M-1994, Dimensioning and Tolerancing - Mathematical Definition of Dimensioning and Tolerancing Principles, The American Society of American Engineers, New York, NY, 1994

[4] ISO 8015 : 1985, Technical drawings – Fundamental tolerancing principle [5] ISO/TR 14638:1995(E), Geometrical Product Specification (GPS) – Masterplan, ISO,

Switzerland, 1995 [6] Meneghello, R., Definizione di prodotto finito. Situazione attuale e prospettive, Prooc.

III Seminario Italo-Español de Diseño- Seminario sobre Acotación Funcional, Bilbao, Junio 2000

[7] http://129.142.8.149/isotc213/challeng.htm [8] http://129.142.8.149/isotc213/213n5.htm [9] ISO/CD 17450, Geometrical Product Specifications (GPS) – Model for geometric

specification

D1-45


[10] UNI CEI 9, Guida all’espressione dell’incertezza di misura, UNI 1997 [11] Dovmark,J., New interesting concepts from ISO/TC 213, Prooc. of INTERSEC, Annual

meeting of Associazione CMM Club Italia, Milano 2001 [12] Srinivasan,V., An Integrated View of Geometrical Product Specification and

Verification, 7th CIRP Seminar on Computer Aided Tolerancing, 24th April 2001

D1-46


APPENDIX GPS Matrix collecting ISO standards and related ASME standards

GLOBAL GPS STANDARDS

1 (R), 370, 10209-3, 10579, VIM, GUM B 89, B89.6.2,Y14.5-M, Y14.5.1-M,Y 14.24-M,Y14.34 M, Y 14.35 M, Y 14.100 M

GENERAL GPS STANDARDS

Chain link n. 1 2

Geometrical characteristic of feature Geometric sub-characteristic of feature or parameters Product documentation Indication - Codification

Definition of tolerances Theoretical definition and values

Size

129(R),286-1(R), 406-1

Y14.5-M, Y14.5.1-M, B 4., B4.2

286-1(R), 286-2, 1829

B 4.1, B 4.2, B 46.1, Y14.5-M

“Step” distance (height) 129 (R) ,406

Y14.5-M, Y14.5.1-M

Distance Distance between real or derived feature and derived feature 129 (R) ,406

Y14.5-M, Y14.5.1-M

Radius 129 (R)

Y14.5-M, Y14.5.1-M

Angle between real features 129 (R) , ISO 1119:1998, ISO

2538:1998 (?) Y14.5-M, Y14.5.1-M

Angle (tolerance in degrees)

Angle between real or derived and derived feature 129 (R)

Y14.5-M, Y14.5.1-M

Profile any line 1101 (R), 1660 (R) Y14.5-M, Y14.5.1-M

1101 (R), 1660 (R) Y14.5-M, Y14.5.1-M

Straightness 1101 (R) Y14.5-M

Real feature (line)

Roundness 1101 (R) Y14.5-M

Profile any line 1101 (R), 1660 (R) Y14.5-M, Y14.5.1-M

1101 (R), 1660 (R) Y14.5-M, Y14.5.1-M

Straightness 1101 (R), 2692 (R) Y14.5-M, Y14.5.1-M

Form of line independent of datum

Derived feature (line)

Roundness 1101 (R) Y14.5-M

Real feature

1101 (R), 1660 (R) Y14.5-M, Y14.5.1-M

1101 (R), 1660 (R) Y14.5-M, Y14.5.1-M

(profile any line)

Derived feature

1101 (R), 1660 (R) Y14.5-M, Y14.5.1-

1101 (R), 1660 (R) Y14.5-M, Y14.5.1-M

Forme of line dependent of datum

(profile any line)

Profile any surface

1101 (R), 1660 (R) Y14.5-M, Y14.5.1-

1101 (R), 1660 (R) Y14.5-M, Y14.5.1-M

Flatness 1101 (R) Y14.5-M

1101 (R) Y14.5-M,

1101 (R), 3040 Cylindricity

Y14.5-M, Y14.5.1-M

1101 (R), 3040

Y14.5-M, Y14.5.1-M

Real feature

Cones 1101 (R), 3040 Y14.5-M, Y14.5.1-M

1101 (R), 3040 Y14.5-M, Y14.5.1-M

Profile any surface 1101 (R) Y14.5-M,

1101 (R) Y14.5-M,

Form of surface independent of datum

Derived feature

Flatness 1101 (R), 2692 (R) Y14.5-M, Y14.5.1-M

1101 (R) Y14.5-M,

Any surface 1101 (R), 1660 (R) Y14.5-M, Y14.5.1-M

1101 (R), 1660 (R) Y14.5-M, Y14.5.1-M

Real feature

Cones 1101 (R), 3040 Y14.5-M, Y14.5.1-M

1101 (R), 3040 Y14.5-M, Y14.5.1-M

Form of surface dependent of datum

Derived feature 1101 (R) Y14.5-M,

1101 (R) Y14.5-M,

* = ISO project (WD, CD o DIS) XXXYY = ISO number not exactly known (YY)

D1-47



1, 370, 10209-3, 10579, VIM, GUM B 89, B89.6.2,Y14.5-M, Y14.5.1-M,Y 14.24-M,Y14.34 M, Y 14.35 M, Y 14.100 M

ISO 14253-1:1998, ISO/TS 14253-2:1999

B89 ISO 14253-1:1998, ISO/TS 14253-2:1999 B89

ISO 14253-1:1998, ISO/TS 14253-2:1999

B89


3 4 5 6

Definition for actual feature characteristic or parameter

Assessment of the deviations of the workpiece – Comparison with tolerance

limits Measurement equipment requirements Calibration requirements –

Calibration standards

Limit gauges 938 (R)

B 4.2 1938 (R), 3670 B 4.2, B 47.1

1938 (R), 3670 (R) B 4.2, B 47.1

286-1(R), 1938(R) 8015 (R)

ISO 14660-1:1999, ISO 14660-2:1999

B 4.1, B 4.2, Y 14.5 M, Y

14.5.1M

Indicating measuring instruments

1938 (R)

B 4.2

463(R), 3599 (R), 3611,*9121, 6906(W) (R), 9493, ISO 10360-1:2000,10360-2, ISO 10360-3:2000, ISO 10360-4:2000, ISO 10360-

5:2000,*-6, 13385, XX01,* XX19 B 89.1.10, B 89, B 89.1.6, B 89.4.1

ISO 3650:1998

B 47.1, B 89.1.2, B 89.1.9

463(R), 3599 (R), 6906(W) (R) , 7863, ISO 10360-1:2000,10360-2, ISO

10360-3:2000, ISO 10360-4:2000, ISO 10360-5:2000,*-6,*13385 B 89,B 89.1.2, B 89.1.10,, B 89.4.1

7863, ISO 10360-1:2000,10360-2, ISO 10360-3:2000, ISO

10360-4:2000, ISO 10360-5:2000,*-6, *13385 B 89, B 89.1.2, B 89.4.1

ISO 10360-1:2000,10360-2, ISO 10360-3:2000, ISO 10360-4:2000, ISO

10360-5:2000,*-6 B 89, B 89.4.1

8015 Y 14.5 M, Y 14.5.1 M

ISO 10360-1:2000,10360-2, ISO 10360-3:2000, ISO 10360-4:2000, ISO

10360-5:2000,*-6 B 89, B 89.4.1

ISO 10360-1:2000,10360-2, ISO 10360-3:2000, ISO 10360-4:2000, ISO

10360-5:2000,*-6, B 89, B 89.4.1

5460 Y 14.5 M, Y 14.5.1 M

ISO 10360-1:2000,10360-2, ISO 10360-3:2000, ISO 10360-4:2000, ISO 10360-5:2000,*-6,

B 89, B 89.4.1

12780-1 Y 14.5 M, Y 14.5.1 M

5460, *12780-2 Y 14.5 M, Y 14.5.1 M

463(R), 8512-1,8512-2,*9493, ISO 10360-1:2000,10360-2, ISO 10360-3:2000, ISO 10360-4:2000, ISO 10360-5:2000,*-6, *12780-3,XXX19

B 89, B 89.1.10, B 89.4.1, Y 14.5 M, Y 14.5.1 M

12180-4 Y 14.5 M, Y 14.5.1 M

12181-1 Y 14.5 M, Y 14.5.1 M

5460, * 12481-2 Y 14.5 M, Y 14.5.1 M

463(R), 4291 (W), 4292 (W),ISO 10360-1:2000,10360-2, ISO 10360-3:2000, ISO 10360-4:2000, ISO 10360-5:2000,*-6,,*12181-3

B 89, B 89.1.10, B 89.3.1, B 89.4.1, Y 14.5 M, Y 14.5.1 M

12180-4 Y 14.5 M, Y 14.5.1 M

5460

Y 14.5 M, Y 14.5.1 M

ISO 10360-1:2000,10360-2, ISO 10360-3:2000, ISO 10360-4:2000, ISO 10360-5:2000,*-6,

B 89, B 89.4.1

ISO 14660-1:1999, ISO 14660-2:1999

Y 14.5 M, Y 14.5.1 M

5460 Y 14.5 M, Y 14.5.1 M

ISO 10360-1:2000,10360-2, ISO 10360-3:2000, ISO 10360-4:2000, ISO 10360-5:2000,*-6

B 89, B 89.4.1

ISO 10360-1:2000,10360-2, ISO 10360-3:2000, ISO 10360-4:2000, ISO

10360-5:2000,*-6 B 89, B 89.4.1

5460 Y 14.5 M, Y 14.5.1 M

ISO 10360-1:2000,10360-2, ISO 10360-3:2000, ISO 10360-4:2000, ISO 10360-5:2000,*-6

B 89, B 89.4.1

ISO 14660-1:1999, ISO 14660-2:1999

Y 14.5 M, Y 14.5.1 M

5460 Y 14.5 M, Y 14.5.1 M

ISO 10360-1:2000,10360-2, ISO 10360-3:2000, ISO 10360-4:2000, ISO 10360-5:2000,*-6

B 89, B 89.4.1

5460

Y 14.5 M, Y 14.5.1 M

ISO 10360-1:2000,10360-2, ISO 10360-3:2000, ISO 10360-4:2000, ISO 10360-5:2000,*-6

B 89, B 89.4.1

*12781-1 Y 14.5 M, Y 14.5.1 M

5460, *12180-2 Y 14.5 M, Y 14.5.1 M

463(R), 8512-1,8512-2,*9493, ISO 10360-1:2000,10360-2, ISO 10360-3:2000, ISO 10360-4:2000, ISO 10360-5:2000,*-6, *12781-

3,XXX19 B 89, B 89.1.10, B 89.4.1, Y 14.5 M, Y 14.5.1 M

12180-4

Y 14.5 M, Y 14.5.1 M

12781-1 Y 14.5 M, Y 14.5.1 M

5460, *12180-2 Y 14.5 M, Y 14.5.1 M

463(R), ISO 10360-1:2000,10360-2, ISO 10360-3:2000, ISO 10360-4:2000, ISO 10360-5:2000,*-6, *12180-3

B 89, B 89.1.10, B 89.4.1, Y 14.5 M, Y 14.5.1 M

12180-4 Y 14.5 M, Y 14.5.1 M

463(R),3611, ISO 10360-1:2000,10360-2, ISO 10360-3:2000,

ISO 10360-4:2000, ISO 10360-5:2000,*-6 B 89, B 89.1.10, B 89.4.1

5460 Y 14.5 M, Y 14.5.1 M

ISO 10360-1:2000,10360-2, ISO 10360-3:2000, ISO 10360-4:2000, ISO 10360-5:2000,*-6

B 89, B 89.4.1

ISO 14660-1:1999, ISO 14660-2:1999

Y 14.5 M, Y 14.5.1 M

5460

Y 14.5 M, Y 14.5.1 M

ISO 10360-1:2000,10360-2, ISO 10360-3:2000, ISO 10360-4:2000, ISO 10360-5:2000,*-6

B 89, B 89.4.1

5460 Y 14.5 M, Y 14.5.1 M

ISO 10360-1:2000,10360-2, ISO 10360-3:2000, ISO 10360-4:2000, ISO

10360-5:2000,*-6 B 89, B 89.4.1

463 (R),ISO 10360-1:2000,10360-2, ISO 10360-3:2000,ISO 10360-

4:2000,ISO 10360-5:2000,*-6 B 89, B 89.4.1

5460 Y 14.5 M, Y 14.5.1 M

ISO 10360-1:2000,10360-2, ISO 10360-3:2000, ISO 10360-4:2000, ISO 10360-5:2000,*-6

B 89, B 89.4.1

(R) = to be revised (W) = project

D1-48



1, 370, 13209-3, 10579, VIM, GUM B 89, B89.6.2,Y14.5-M, Y14.5.1-M,Y 14.24-M,Y14.34 M, Y 14.35 M, Y 14.100 M


Chain link n. 1 2

Geometrical characteristic of feature Geometric sub-characteristic of feature or parameters Product documentation

Indication - Codification Definition of tolerances

Theoretical definition and values

Parallelism (0°) 1101 (R) Y 14.5M 1101 (R) Y 14.5M

Perpendicularity (90°) 1101 (R) Y 14.5M 1101 (R) Y 14.5M Real feature

(line or plane)

Angularity 1101 (R) Y 14.5M 1101 (R) Y 14.5M

Parallelism (0°) 1101 (R), 2692 (R), 10578 Y 14.5M, Y 14.5.1 M

1101 (R), 10578 Y 14.5M, Y 14.5. 1M

Perpendicularity (90°) 1101 (R), 2692 (R), 10578 Y 14.5M, Y 14.5.1 M

1101 (R), 10578 Y 14.5M, Y 14.5.1 M

Orientation

Derived feature

Angularity 1101 (R), 2692 (R), 10578

Y 14.5M, Y 14.5.1 M 1101 (R), 10578

Y 14.5M, Y 14.5.1 M

Real feature Position 1101 (R), ISO 5458:1998 Y 14.5M, Y 14.5.1 M

1101 (R), ISO 5458:1998, 10578 Y 14.5M, Y 14.5.1 M

Position 1101 (R) Y 14.5M

1101 (R), 10578 Y 14.5M, Y 14.5.1 M

Coaxiality 1101 (R) Y 14.5M

1101 (R), 10578 Y 14.5M, Y 14.5.1 M

Concentricity 1101 (R) Y 14.5M 1101 (R), 10578 Y 14.5M, Y 14.5.1 M

Location Derived feature

Symmetry 1101 (R) Y 14.5M 1101 (R), 10578 Y 14.5M, Y 14.5.1 M

Circular run out

1101 (R) Y 14.5M

1101 (R) Y 14.5M

Total run out

1101 (R) Y 14.5M

1101 (R) Y 14.5M

Datums associated with real features

1101 (R) , 5459 Y 14.5M, Y 14.5.1 M

5459 Y 14.5M, Y 14.5.1 M

Datums Datums associated with derived features

1101 (R) ,2692 (R) 5459 Y 14.5M, Y 14.5.1 M

5459 Y 14.5M, Y 14.5.1 M

Datum targets 1101 (R) , 5459 Y 14.5M, Y 14.5.1 M

5459 Y 14.5M, Y 14.5.1 M

Datums

Datum systems 1101 (R) , 5459 Y 14.5M, Y 14.5.1 M

5459 Y 14.5M, Y 14.5.1 M

M-System –Ra, Rz,...

1302 Y 14.36

468 (W), ISO 4287:1997, ISO 4287:1997 Technical Corrigendum 1:1998,ISO

11562:1996, ISO 11562:1996 Technical Corrigendum 1:1998

B 46.1

M-System –S, Sm, Tp

1302 Y 14.36

468 (W), ISO 4287:1997, ISO 4287:1997 Technical Corrigendum 1:1998, ISO

11562:1996, ISO 11562:1996 Technical Corrigendum 1:1998

B 46.1

Motif Method – R, Rx, AR

1302 Y 14.36

ISO 12085:1996, ISO 12085:1996 Technical Corrigendum 1:1998

B 46.1

Rkm Rpk, Rvk, Rm1k, Rm2k

1302 Y 14.36

ISO 11562:1996, ISO 11562:1996 Technical Corrigendum 1:1998, ISO 13565-1:1996,

ISO 13565-1:1996 Technical Corrigendum 1:1998 , ISO 13565-2:1996, ISO 13565-

2:1996 Technical Corrigendum 1:1998, ISO 13565-3:1998

B 46.1

Rpq, Rvq, Rmq

1302 Y 14.36

ISO 11562:1996, ISO 11562:1996 Technical Corrigendum 1:1998, ISO 13565-1:1996,

ISO 13565-1:1996 Technical Corrigendum 1:1998, ISO 13565-2:1996, ISO 13565-

2:1996 Technical Corrigendum 1:1998, ISO 13565-3:1998

B 46.1

Roughness profile

Areal characteristics

M- System –Wa , Wz, ..

1302 Y 14.36

ISO 4287:1997, ISO 4287:1997 Technical Corrigendum 1:1998, ISO 11562:1996

Technical Corrigendum 1:1998 B 46.1 Waviness profile

Motif Method W,AW, Wx, Wte

1302 Y 14.36


B 46.1

Primary profile M- System – Pa, Pt, ..

1302 Y 14.36

ISO 4287:1997, ISO 4287:1997 Technical Corrigendum 1:1998, ISO 11562:1996, ISO 11562:1996 Technical Corrigendum 1:1998

B 46.1

Surface texture

Surface defects ISO 8785:1998 B 46.1

ISO 8785:1998 B 46.1

Edges 13715 13715

* = ISO project (WD, CD o DIS) XXXYY = ISO number not exactly known (YY)

D1-49



1(R), 370, 10209-3, 10579, VIM, GUM B 89, B89.6.2,Y14.5-M, Y14.5.1-M,Y 14.24-M,Y14.34 M, Y 14.35 M, Y 14.100 M

ISO 14253-1:1998, ISO/TS 14253-

2:1999 B89 ISO 14253-1:1998, ISO/TS 14253-2:1999

B89 ISO 14253-1:1998, ISO/TS

14253-2:1999 B89


3 4 5 6

Definition for actual feature characteristic or parameter

Assessment of the deviations of the workpiece – Comparison with

tolerance limits Measurement equipment requirements

Calibration requirements – Calibration standards

5460

Y 14.5M, Y14.5.1M 463 (R), 8512-1, - ISO 10360-1:2000,10360-2, ISO 10360-3:2000, ISO

10360-4:2000, ISO 10360-5:2000,*-64,*-5,-6 B89, B 89.4.1, B 89.1.10

5460

Y 14.5M, Y14.5.1M 463 (R), ISO 10360-1:2000,10360-2, ISO 10360-3:2000, ISO 10360-

4:2000, ISO 10360-5:2000,*-6 B89, B 89.4.1, B 89.1.10

5460 Y 14.5M, Y14.5.1M

463 (R), ISO 10360-1:2000,10360-2, ISO 10360-3:2000, ISO 10360-4:2000, ISO 10360-5:2000,*-6 B89, B 89.4.1, B 89.1.10

ISO 14660-1:1999, ISO 14660-2:1999 Y 14.5M, Y14.5.1M

5460 Y 14.5M, Y14.5.1M

ISO 10360-1:2000,10360-2, ISO 10360-3:2000, ISO 10360-4:2000, ISO 10360-5:2000,*-6 B89, B 89.4.1

ISO 14660-1:1999, ISO 14660-2:1999 Y 14.5M, Y14.5.1M

5460 Y 14.5M, Y14.5.1M

ISO 10360-1:2000,10360-2, ISO 10360-3:2000, ISO 10360-4:2000, ISO 10360-5:2000,*-6 B89, B 89.4.1

ISO 14660-1:1999, ISO 14660-2:1999 Y 14.5M, Y14.5.1M

5460 Y 14.5M, Y14.5.1M

ISO 10360-1:2000,10360-2, ISO 10360-3:2000, ISO 10360-4:2000, ISO 10360-5:2000,*-6 B89, B 89.4.1

463 (R), ISO 10360-1:2000,10360-2, ISO 10360-3:2000, ISO 10360-

4:2000, ISO 10360-5:2000,*-6 B89, B 89.4.1, B 89.1.10

ISO 14660-1:1999, ISO 14660-2:1999 Y 14.5M, Y14.5.1M

5460 Y 14.5M, Y14.5.1M

ISO 10360-1:2000,10360-2, ISO 10360-3:2000, ISO 10360-4:2000, ISO 10360-5:2000,*-6 B89, B 89.4.1

ISO 14660-1:1999, ISO 14660-2:1999 Y 14.5M, Y14.5.1M

5460 Y 14.5M, Y14.5.1M

ISO 10360-1:2000,10360-2, ISO 10360-3:2000, ISO 10360-4:2000, ISO 10360-5:2000,*-6 B89, B 89.4.1

ISO 14660-1:1999, ISO 14660-2:1999 Y 14.5M, Y14.5.1M

ISO 10360-1:2000,10360-2, ISO 10360-3:2000, ISO 10360-4:2000, ISO 10360-5:2000,*-6 B89, B 89.4.1

ISO 14660-1:1999, ISO 14660-2:1999 Y 14.5M, Y14.5.1M

5460 Y 14.5M, Y14.5.1M

ISO 10360-1:2000,10360-2, ISO 10360-3:2000, ISO 10360-4:2000, ISO 10360-5:2000,*-6 B89, B 89.4.1

5460 Y 14.5M, Y14.5.1M

463 (R), *9493, ISO 10360-1:2000,10360-2, ISO 10360-3:2000, ISO 10360-4:2000, ISO 10360-5:2000,*-6, XXX19 B89, B 89.4.1, B 89.1.10

5460 Y 14.5M, Y14.5.1M

463 (R), *9493, ISO 10360-1:2000,10360-2, ISO 10360-3:2000, ISO 10360-4:2000, ISO 10360-5:2000,*-6, XXX19 B89, B 89.4.1, B 89.1.10

5459, XXX26 Y 14.5M, Y14.5.1M

5460, XXX27 Y 14.5M, Y14.5.1M

463 (R), *8512-1, -2, ISO 10360-1:2000,10360-2, ISO 10360-3:2000, ISO 10360-4:2000, ISO 10360-5:2000,*-6

XXX28 B89, B 89.4.1, B 89.1.10

5459, XXX26 Y 14.5M, Y14.5.1M

5460, XXX27 Y 14.5M, Y14.5.1M

ISO 10360-1:2000,10360-2, ISO 10360-3:2000, ISO 10360-4:2000, ISO 10360-5:2000,*-6, XXX28 B89, B 89.4.1

5459, XXX26 Y 14.5M, Y14.5.1M

5460, XXX27 Y 14.5M, Y14.5.1M

8512-1, -2, ISO 10360-1:2000,10360-2, ISO 10360-3:2000, ISO 10360-4:2000, ISO 10360-5:2000,*-6, XXX28 B89, B 89.4.1

5459, XXX26 Y 14.5M, Y14.5.1M

5460, XXX27 Y 14.5M, Y14.5.1M

463(R) , ISO 10360-1:2000,10360-2, ISO 10360-3:2000, ISO 10360-4:2000, ISO 10360-5:2000,*-6, XXX28 B89, B 89.4.1, B 89.1.10

ISO 4288:1996, ISO 4288:1996 Technical Corrigendum 1:1998,

ISO 11562:1996, ISO 11562:1996 Technical

Corrigendum 1:1998 B46.1

2632-1 (W), -2 (W), ISO 4288:1996, ISO 4288:1996 Technical Corrigendum 1:1998

B46.1

1878, 1879 (W), 1880 (W), 2632 (W), -2 (W), ISO 3274:1996, ISO 3274:1996 Technical Corrigendum 1:1998, ISO

11562:1996, ISO 11562:1996 Technical Corrigendum 1:1998 B 46.1

2632-1 (W), -2 (W), ISO 5436-1:2000, ISO

12179:2000 B 46.1, B 89





B46.1

ISO 3274:1996, ISO 3274:1996 Technical Corrigendum 1:1998, ISO 11562:1996, ISO 11562:1996 Technical Corrigendum 1:1998

B 46.1

ISO 5436-1:2000, ISO 12179:2000 B 46.1, B 89



ISO 4288:1996, ISO 12085:1996, ISO 12085:1996 Technical


ISO 3274:1996, ISO 3274:1996 Technical Corrigendum 1:1998 B 46.1

ISO 5436-1:2000, ISO 12179:2000 B 46.1, B 89


Corrigendum 1:1998, ISO 13565-2:1996, ISO 13565-2:1996 Technical Corrigendum 1:1998,

ISO 13565-3:1998 B46.1


B46.1

1880 (W), ISO 3274:1996, ISO 3274:1996 Technical Corrigendum 1:1998, ISO 11562:1996, ISO 11562:1996 Technical Corrigendum

1:1998 B 46.1

ISO 5436-1:2000, ISO 12179:2000 B 46.1, B 89


Corrigendum 1:1998, ISO 13565-2:1996, ISO 13565-2:1996 Technical Corrigendum 1:1998,

ISO 13565-3:1998 B46.1


B46.1


1:1998 B 46.1

ISO 5436-1:2000, ISO 12179:2000 B 46.1, B 89


B46.1



B46.1


1:1998 B 46.1

ISO 5436-1:2000, ISO 12179:2000 B 46.1, B 89



ISO 3274:1996, ISO 3274:1996 Technical Corrigendum 1:1998 B 46.1

ISO 5436-1:2000, ISO 12179:2000 B 46.1, B 89


B46.1

ISO 3274:1996, ISO 3274:1996 Technical Corrigendum 1:1998, ISO 11562:1996, ISO 11562:1996 Technical Corrigendum 1:1998 B 46.1

(R) = to be revised (W) = project

D1-50


gdt versus gps

Documents