I have to say Amen, Greg. Improper tolerancing is expensive and too few mechanical engineers really learn that in school. Unfortunately, often the young engineer learns tolerancing by doing it incorrectly.
Thanks for your post Charles! We have 4 colleges/universities in the immediate La Crosse, Wisconsin area. While we are actively involved with these institutions through internships and other programs we have not considered a manufacturing focused engineering lecture series. Great idea...thank you for your suggestion.
Charles, I completely agree with you. I'm mentoring and managing several young engineers now and unfortunately they were not taught basic tolerance capabilities for each manufacturing process. I also agree that these basic manufacturing tolerances should be taught in all engineering colleges.
T J McDermott; CAD is a tool for a draftsman (or draughtsman) to create a drawing. Computer hackers create garbage. In my AutoCAD course I was taught what the most frequent mistakes made in CAD were. On my first job in CAD, they were all there. The most common mistake = all drawinga are drawn full size, but they are scaled to fit the paper size to be printed on. The first drawing that I worked on would have needed a 300 ft sheet of paper.
And mechanical engineers (in my experience) do not understand that emergency stop and end-of-travel sensors are normally closed circuits.
I tried to explain to a mechanical engineer that a dimension of 1.000 mm was wrong. I couldn't get him to understand that the default tolerance was +/- 0.0005 mm ! and the proper dimension should have been 1 mm, since it was not a critical part. This engineer also dimensioned a 14 foot long square tube frame as 168.000 inches !
Thanks for the article. I have seen otherwise capable engineers specify ridiculous tolerances over and over again without realizing the cost attached to those tolerances or the assembly problems they produce. I had one engineer that specified a 7.000" part to fit into a 7.000" slot. Not only was the part in no way not critical, but the parts wouldn't fit if one came from the cold warehouse. No matter how hard I tried, he just couldn't understand why it was a problem.
This author should make a tour of some of his local colleges and talk to engineering students who are overloaded with theoretical mechanics classes and don't get ANY exposure to manufacturing. As a result, too many new engineers don't know how to design for manufacturability. This kind if insight is invaluable.
In a bid to boost the viability of lithium-based electric car batteries, a team at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory has developed a chemistry that could possibly double an EV’s driving range while cutting its battery cost in half.
Using Siemens NX software, a team of engineering students from the University of Michigan built an electric vehicle and raced in the 2013 Bridgestone World Solar Challenge. One of those students blogged for Design News throughout the race.
Robots that walk have come a long way from simple barebones walking machines or pairs of legs without an upper body and head. Much of the research these days focuses on making more humanoid robots. But they are not all created equal.
For industrial control applications, or even a simple assembly line, that machine can go almost 24/7 without a break. But what happens when the task is a little more complex? That’s where the “smart” machine would come in. The smart machine is one that has some simple (or complex in some cases) processing capability to be able to adapt to changing conditions. Such machines are suited for a host of applications, including automotive, aerospace, defense, medical, computers and electronics, telecommunications, consumer goods, and so on. This discussion will examine what’s possible with smart machines, and what tradeoffs need to be made to implement such a solution.