Question 1

Metrology terminology in manufacturing: which term refers specifically to the measured size of the finished, produced part as verified by inspection instruments?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Drawings specify target dimensions and permissible variation. During inspection, the measured value obtained from calipers, micrometers, or CMM equipment is compared to the specification to determine acceptability. Given Data / Assumptions: There exists a nominal (called out) dimension with tolerances. A finished part has been manufactured and measured. We seek the correct term for the measured value. Concept / Approach: Terminology matters. The “actual size” is the measured dimension of the produced feature. “Basic size” is a theoretically exact size used as a starting point for limits and fits. “Dimensioned size” is the value shown on the drawing. “Production size” is imprecise jargon. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify the context: inspection of a finished item.Match the definition: measured value → actual size.Confirm difference from theoretical or nominal terms. Verification / Alternative check: Inspection reports list measured values under “actual” readings; conformance is determined by checking whether these lie within stated limits. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Dimensioned size: the nominal value printed on the drawing, not a measurement. Production size: nonstandard term. Basic size: theoretical exact size used for establishing limits, not a measured result. Common Pitfalls: Confusing “actual” with “maximum material condition” or “virtual condition”; those are feature states or boundaries, not measurements. Final Answer: Actual size

Question 2

Design practice: which methodology explicitly considers a part’s dimensions and tolerances and how that part functions and assembles relative to mating components in the product?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Robust designs account for variation. Geometric dimensioning and tolerancing (GD&T) offers a symbolic, standardized language to control form, orientation, location, and runout so parts assemble and function correctly despite manufacturing variation. Given Data / Assumptions: A product involves mating parts. Both size and geometry must be controlled. Functional requirements drive tolerancing decisions. Concept / Approach: GD&T ties permissible geometric variation to functional datums, enabling clear fit/function definitions, better interchangeability, and often larger, cost-saving tolerances compared to simple plus/minus size limits alone. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify need: relate part to mating components and function → GD&T.Recognize symbols: position, flatness, perpendicularity, profile, etc.Apply datums to reflect assembly constraints and inspection strategy. Verification / Alternative check: Tolerance stack-ups that include geometric controls typically show improved assembly yields and clearer acceptance criteria compared to size-only schemes. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Applying allowances: addresses intentional clearances/interference but not full geometry. Creating datum references: a component of GD&T, not the whole methodology. Angular dimensioning tolerances: a subset of tolerancing, not a comprehensive system. Common Pitfalls: Using GD&T symbols without establishing a sensible datum scheme; always start from function and assembly path. Final Answer: Geometric dimensioning and tolerancing

Question 3

Fits and tolerances: what term denotes the range of tightness or looseness that results from specified allowances and tolerances when two mating parts are assembled (for example, a shaft and a hole)?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Mating parts require controlled relationships to ensure function—rotation, sliding, or interference installation. Standards define how much clearance or interference is acceptable. Given Data / Assumptions: Two parts: typically a shaft and a hole. Drawing specifies limits and allowable variation. We need the term that encapsulates the resulting assembly condition. Concept / Approach: “Fit” describes the assembly condition (clearance, transition, or interference) produced by manufacturing variation within stated limits. Allowance is the intentional minimum clearance or maximum interference; limits are the permitted size extremes of each feature. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify that the question refers to the assembly condition between features.Recall definitions: fit vs. allowance vs. limits.Select “Fit” as it describes the range of tightness/looseness in assembly. Verification / Alternative check: Check ISO or ANSI fits tables (e.g., H7/g6) that classify fits by functional behavior—those are fit designations, not just limits. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Limits: size boundaries for individual parts, not the assembly relationship. Specifications: broad term; lacks specificity to assembly condition. Allowance: the minimum intended clearance or maximum intended interference, not the overall range. Common Pitfalls: Interchanging “allowance” and “fit.” Allowance is a single-value design intent; fit is a category/range outcome. Final Answer: Fit

Question 4

GD&T concept check: which term describes the state in which a finished feature contains the maximum amount of material allowed by its size tolerance (for example, smallest hole or largest shaft)?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Geometric tolerancing often references material condition modifiers to relate permissible geometric error to part size. Understanding these states is key for functional gaging and tolerance stack analysis. Given Data / Assumptions: A feature of size (hole or shaft) has stated limits. We consider the condition with most material present. Standard GD&T terminology is used. Concept / Approach: Maximum Material Condition (MMC) is the size at which a feature contains the most material: for a shaft, the largest permissible diameter; for a hole, the smallest permissible diameter. It is commonly marked with the MMC symbol in feature control frames. Step-by-Step Solution: For shafts: more material → larger size within tolerance → MMC at upper limit.For holes: more material → smaller size within tolerance → MMC at lower limit.Therefore, the correct term is Maximum Material Condition. Verification / Alternative check: Functional gages often simulate virtual condition boundaries based on MMC; parts that pass such gages will assemble in worst-case scenarios. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Machined material condition / Maximum machined indication / Machine mark indication: Nonstandard or incorrect terminology. Common Pitfalls: Confusing MMC with Least Material Condition (LMC), which is the opposite (smallest shaft, largest hole). Final Answer: Maximum material condition

Question 5

Standards vocabulary: what do we call the theoretically exact size from which the limits of size (upper and lower permissible values) are established for a feature?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Limits and fits systems are built around a reference size. This reference is not a measured value but a theoretically exact starting point used to derive permissible variation. Given Data / Assumptions: A feature has an upper and lower limit of size. Those limits are derived from a common reference value. We need the standard term for that reference. Concept / Approach: “Basic size” is the theoretically exact value from which tolerances are applied to produce limits. It underlies hole-basis or shaft-basis fits and is fundamental to tolerance charting. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify that the size in question is a theoretical reference, not measured.Recall definitions: basic size vs. actual size vs. nominal/dimensioned size.Select “Basic size” as the correct term. Verification / Alternative check: Review standards tables (e.g., ISO fits): basic size is the column heading from which tolerances are applied to obtain limits. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Actual Size: measured value on the produced part. Dimensioned size: the printed nominal; may equal the basic but not necessarily emphasized as theoretical reference. Production size: not a standard term. Common Pitfalls: Assuming “dimensioned size” and “basic size” are always identical; in GD&T contexts, “basic” may appear boxed to denote theoretically exact dimensions (for locations or profiles), which is distinct from limits-of-size basics. Final Answer: Basic size

Question 6

Acceptance criteria: to be considered acceptable, manufactured parts must remain within which specified bounds that define the permissible variation from the nominal values?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Quality control relies on numeric windows around target values. These windows ensure parts function and assemble even with inevitable process variation. Given Data / Assumptions: A drawing states nominal dimensions and allowable variation. Inspection compares measured values to the allowable window. We must identify the named bounds that measurements cannot exceed. Concept / Approach: “Tolerances” define permitted deviation from nominal. As long as the actual size and geometry remain within the upper and lower tolerance limits (including any geometric tolerances), the part is acceptable. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify the acceptance window concept.Relate to standard drawing callouts (e.g., ±, limit dimensions, geometric frames).Conclude that parts must remain within tolerances. Verification / Alternative check: Inspection reports flag out-of-tolerance conditions; any value beyond stated tolerances triggers nonconformance. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Boundary limits: ambiguous; could refer to derived boundaries (virtual condition), but acceptance is broadly governed by tolerances. Hole limits: applies only to a specific feature type, not all parts. Specification: too general; a specification contains tolerances but is not the numeric bound itself. Common Pitfalls: Ignoring geometric tolerances; a size may be within limits but fail position or form tolerances, still rendering the part nonconforming. Final Answer: Tolerances

Question 7

Dimensioning convention: when two lines meet at a right angle in a drawing, it is standard practice to omit the angular dimension at which angle value because it is assumed by default?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Drafting standards promote clarity by dimensioning only what is necessary to define the part. Redundant or obvious dimensions are omitted to reduce clutter and prevent conflicting information. Given Data / Assumptions: Two lines intersect at a right angle (orthogonal geometry). Standard orthographic drawing practices are followed. We want to know which angle is conventionally not dimensioned. Concept / Approach: Right angles are inherently assumed where edges are drawn perpendicular unless a non-right angle is required. By not dimensioning 90 degrees, the drawing stays clean, and attention is drawn to nonstandard angles which must be explicitly called out. Step-by-Step Solution: Recognize that most mechanical components use orthogonal faces.Right angles are implied by square corners unless indicated otherwise (e.g., chamfers, draft).Therefore, the conventional angle not dimensioned is 90 degrees. Verification / Alternative check: Check ASME or ISO dimensioning practices: only non-orthogonal angles are typically dimensioned; square symbols or notes may be used where needed. Why Other Options Are Wrong: 360: A full rotation; irrelevant to edge intersections. 180: A straight line; not an intersection angle between two distinct edges. 45: Often dimensioned explicitly for chamfers or miters. Common Pitfalls: Failing to indicate when a corner is not square; if a surface requires a draft angle (e.g., molded parts), explicitly dimension the non-90-degree value. Final Answer: 90

Question 8

Tolerancing practice on angles: Have unilateral tolerances (all variation to one side of the target) traditionally been applied to angular dimensions, or are angles usually specified with symmetric (bilateral) tolerances?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Tolerance notation communicates acceptable variation. For linear and angular dimensions, the two common styles are bilateral (±) and unilateral (all plus or all minus). This question checks whether unilateral tolerances are the traditional norm for angles. Given Data / Assumptions: Angles on drawings are commonly given with bilateral limits, for example 45° ± 1°. Unilateral angular limits are possible but less typical, reserved for special functional cases. Geometric controls (e.g., perpendicularity) may further refine angular behavior without using direct angular size tolerances. Concept / Approach: Historically and practically, the symmetric nature of many angular functions makes ± tolerances convenient and readable. Unilateral tolerances are used when functional requirements demand only one-directional deviation (e.g., to ensure clearance in one direction). Therefore, asserting that unilateral tolerances have “traditionally been given on angles” does not reflect common practice. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify typical notation: angles listed with ± tolerance in general notes or next to the angle.Recognize unilateral as an exception used for special fits or functional needs.Compare with the statement claiming unilateral is the traditional default.Conclude the statement is incorrect. Verification / Alternative check: Survey sample drawing templates: general tolerance blocks often state “Angular ±X°,” confirming bilateral dominance. Why Other Options Are Wrong: “Correct” misstates convention. Claims about countersinks, geometric control, or reference angles do not overturn the general norm. Common Pitfalls: Assuming one-sided allowance practices for linear features directly translate to angles; conflating geometric controls with size tolerances. Final Answer: Incorrect

Question 9

Fits and allowances: “Allowance” is defined as the maximum clearance or the minimum interference specified to achieve a desired fit between two mating parts. Judge this definition.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: When designing mating parts such as shafts and holes, engineers specify fits that result in clearance, transition, or interference conditions. “Allowance” is a fundamental term that connects design intent to manufacturable limits. Given Data / Assumptions: Clearance fit: hole is always larger than the shaft across tolerance ranges. Interference fit: shaft is always larger than the hole across tolerance ranges. Transition fit: result can be either small clearance or small interference, depending on actual produced sizes. Allowance formalizes the extreme condition to guarantee the intended functional relationship. Concept / Approach: Allowance is the designed-in difference between mating features at the relevant limit condition. For clearance fits, the minimum clearance (often at the worst-case limits) is the allowance. For interference fits, the maximum interference (also at worst-case limits) is the allowance. This aligns the definition directly with functional assurance under manufacturing variability. Step-by-Step Solution: Establish the mating type (clearance or interference).Identify the relevant limit condition: minimum clearance or maximum interference.Define allowance as that limit difference, set by the limits/tolerances.Confirm that this matches the statement: it does—so the definition is correct. Verification / Alternative check: Check fit tables (hole-basis/shaft-basis). The allowance value extracted from limits matches the defined extreme outcome designers plan for. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Limiting the definition to specific basis systems or to transition fits misunderstands that allowance applies across fit classes. Common Pitfalls: Confusing allowance (design-intended extreme) with actual clearance on a given part; mixing up allowance with tolerance magnitude. Final Answer: Correct

Question 10

General tolerances on implied right angles: Do implied 90° angles typically have a different general tolerance than other angles stated by a drawing’s general note, or are they treated the same unless otherwise controlled?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Drawings frequently show features at right angles without explicitly writing “90°.” These are implied right angles. The question is whether such implied angles usually receive distinct, special general tolerances compared to other angles in the same drawing. Given Data / Assumptions: General tolerance blocks often list a single angular tolerance (e.g., ±1°) unless otherwise specified. Implied 90° is a common default geometric relationship; it may be further controlled by geometric tolerances (e.g., perpendicularity) when function demands. No special notes are presumed that single out implied 90° for different general limits. Concept / Approach: By default, the drawing’s general angular tolerance applies to all angles not otherwise controlled. If tighter control is needed at 90°, designers apply GD&T (e.g., perpendicularity relative to a datum) or write a local note. Without such a note, an implied 90° is treated like other angular dimensions for general tolerance purposes. Step-by-Step Solution: Check the general tolerance note: one angular tolerance typically covers all unstated angles.Determine whether a special callout exists for the implied 90°.If none, it shares the same general tolerance as other angles.Thus the claim that implied 90° “typically” have different general tolerances is incorrect. Verification / Alternative check: Inspect sample title blocks: angular tolerances are global unless overridden; implied right angles are not singled out by default. Why Other Options Are Wrong: “Correct” contradicts common practice. Conditions about datums, projection method, or material category do not inherently change the general tolerance assignment. Common Pitfalls: Confusing GD&T perpendicularity control with a global special angular tolerance; assuming implied 90° always requires a unique limit. Final Answer: Incorrect

Question 11

Nominal size usage: Is “nominal size” primarily used for general identification of features and commonly expressed as decimal values on modern drawings?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Nominal size serves as the convenient identifier for features, part families, and catalogs (e.g., “20 mm shaft,” “8 mm hole”). While actual limits and tolerances govern manufacturing, the nominal value remains the nameplate reference used throughout design, purchasing, and communication. Given Data / Assumptions: Nominal size is not a measured result; it labels the intended size family. Modern CAD/drawing practices frequently use decimal notation for clarity and consistency. Fractional notation still appears in some industries (e.g., construction fasteners), but decimals are prevalent in precision manufacturing documentation. Concept / Approach: Because decimals avoid ambiguity and align with metric practice and many inch-based machining standards, “usually expressed in decimals” is accurate as a general statement for modern technical drawings. The key point is that nominal size is for identification; limits/tolerances define acceptable variation around that nominal. Step-by-Step Solution: Recognize nominal = identifier, not measured outcome.Note that decimal notation is the common convention in engineering drawings for readability and precision.Acknowledge fractional use in specific domains but not as the dominant practice in precision drafting.Conclude the statement is generally correct. Verification / Alternative check: Review standard title blocks and dimensioning policies in manufacturing firms; decimal dimensioning is the norm, with specified decimal-place precision tying to tolerances. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Restricting correctness to metric, inch, or threaded features misunderstands that decimal-based nominal identification is widespread across domains. Common Pitfalls: Confusing nominal with actual; assuming fractional callouts imply fractional tolerancing without explicit limits. Final Answer: Correct

Question 12

Form and position controls in GD&T: Are “tolerances of form and position” typically not used to control straightness, or is straightness itself a form tolerance?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Geometric dimensioning and tolerancing (GD&T) classifies controls into form, orientation, location, and runout. Understanding which group each control belongs to is fundamental for specifying and inspecting parts effectively. Given Data / Assumptions: Straightness is a form control. Form tolerances (straightness, flatness, circularity, cylindricity) do not require datums. Position, orientation, and runout controls may reference datums to define relationships among features. Concept / Approach: The statement claims form/position tolerances are typically not used to control straightness. This is incorrect because straightness is specifically a form tolerance and is directly used to control the shape of an axis, line element, or surface generator without needing datums. Position is a different category, but the question lumps “form and position” and denies their use for straightness, which misstates GD&T fundamentals. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify straightness as one of the four basic form controls.Recognize that GD&T symbols explicitly include straightness to control form.Compare this reality with the claim that form/position are not used for straightness.Conclude the statement is incorrect. Verification / Alternative check: Any GD&T symbol chart lists straightness under form, confirming its role as the direct method to control straightness. Why Other Options Are Wrong: “Correct” contradicts definitions. “Only controlled by size limits,” “perpendicularity,” or “datumed features” misidentify the correct control category. Common Pitfalls: Confusing straightness (form) with perpendicularity (orientation) or position (location). Final Answer: Incorrect

Question 13

Datum reference frames in GD&T: Is defining a datum reference frame a necessary step when applying GD&T principles to control relationships among features?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: GD&T relies on a common coordinate framework—the datum reference frame (DRF)—to define how a part is oriented and located during inspection and assembly. While some controls do not need datums, most relational controls do. Given Data / Assumptions: Form tolerances (e.g., straightness, flatness) can be datumless. Orientation (e.g., perpendicularity), location (e.g., position), and runout typically require referencing a DRF. The question addresses applying GD&T principles broadly to control relationships among features. Concept / Approach: To control relationships such as “this hole must be positioned relative to that surface,” a DRF is established using primary, secondary, and tertiary datums. These define a reproducible origin and axes for both manufacturing and inspection, ensuring consistent interpretation. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify whether the tolerance controls a relationship among features (e.g., position, orientation).If yes, specify appropriate datums to form a DRF.Apply the GD&T callout with datum references to ensure unambiguous inspection.Thus, defining a DRF is necessary in the general application of GD&T to relational controls. Verification / Alternative check: Check inspection setups: fixtures emulate the DRF to validate conformance, demonstrating the DRF’s central role. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Limiting the need to profile or runout is incorrect; many GD&T controls rely on DRFs. Metric vs. inch drawings are irrelevant. Common Pitfalls: Omitting datums on positional tolerances; selecting unstable datum features; failing to define the datum hierarchy (primary, secondary, tertiary). Final Answer: Correct

Question 14

Role of datums: Are datum surfaces and datum features used as references to control the size, form, orientation, or location of other features on a part?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Datums are foundational in GD&T. They provide a common, repeatable reference from which to control and measure features. This ensures consistency across design, manufacturing, and quality teams. Given Data / Assumptions: Datums are theoretically exact references derived from selected physical features (datum features) on a part. Controls such as position, perpendicularity, parallelism, and runout reference datums to define relationships. Both manual and automated inspection rely on these references. Concept / Approach: By establishing primary, secondary, and tertiary datums, a datum reference frame (DRF) is created. Tolerances applied with respect to this DRF specify exactly how features must align or be located. This makes drawings unambiguous and reproducible, especially when parts interchangeability and assembly fit are critical. Step-by-Step Solution: Select stable, accessible features to serve as datum features.Define datums (A, B, C) from these features to build the DRF.Apply GD&T callouts (e.g., position) referencing the appropriate datums.Inspect parts relative to the same DRF to verify conformance. Verification / Alternative check: Review any GD&T example: the feature control frame references datums to specify relationships, proving datums control other features. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Limiting datums to cylindrical parts, CMM use, or assembly drawings ignores their universal role across part types and inspection methods. Common Pitfalls: Choosing small or unstable surfaces as datums; failing to communicate datum precedence; omitting datum identifiers in feature control frames. Final Answer: Correct

Question 15

Benefits of GD&T: Can geometric dimensioning and tolerancing (GD&T) simplify the inspection process by clarifying intent and providing datum-referenced criteria?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Inspection efficiency is influenced by how clearly requirements are communicated. GD&T transforms ambiguous coordinate notes into precise, function-based controls, reducing misinterpretation and streamlining verification. Given Data / Assumptions: Feature control frames describe allowable variation relative to datums. Datums establish consistent measurement references across processes and facilities. Functional tolerancing matches inspection to real-world fit and performance. Concept / Approach: By defining geometric zones (e.g., position tolerance zones) referenced to a datum structure, GD&T enables inspectors to set up parts quickly and evaluate compliance against unambiguous criteria. This reduces rework from interpretation differences and aligns design intent with manufacturing capability. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify key functions (e.g., hole must align with mating pin).Assign appropriate GD&T control (e.g., position) with datum references.Set up inspection using fixtures or CMM aligned to the datum reference frame.Measure and compare features directly to the geometric tolerance zone, simplifying pass/fail decisions. Verification / Alternative check: Case studies show fewer drawing disputes and faster inspections when GD&T replaces ad hoc coordinate tolerancing, particularly for patterns of holes and assemblies with critical alignment. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Restricting the benefit to aerospace, CMM use, or castings is incorrect; GD&T improves clarity and inspection across industries and methods, including gauges and manual metrology. Common Pitfalls: Applying GD&T without proper datum selection; over-tolerancing; omitting inspection plans that reflect the DRF. Final Answer: Correct

Question 16

Functional tolerancing and fit: In production drawings and GD&T practice, individual tolerance values are assigned by considering the part’s functional requirements, intended fit with mating components, and downstream manufacturing/inspection needs.…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Tolerancing is the bridge between design intent and manufacturability. Engineers select specific dimensional and geometric tolerances so that parts assemble and function as intended across real-world variation. The claim that tolerances are based on the part's function and fit is a foundational principle in GD&T and traditional limit-dimensioning. Given Data / Assumptions: The part must mate with other components in an assembly. Functional performance, safety, and durability are primary goals. Manufacturing capability and inspection method influence feasible tolerances. Concept / Approach: Functional dimensioning assigns tolerances that guarantee performance. Fit classes (clearance, transition, interference) define how shafts, holes, bearings, and fasteners interact. Geometric controls (flatness, perpendicularity, position) manage form and location so assemblies work despite variation. Cost rises as tolerances tighten; therefore, designers choose the loosest tolerances that still satisfy function and fit. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify critical interfaces (e.g., hole–shaft, seal–bore) and define the required fit type.Translate functional needs into size limits (upper/lower) and geometric controls (e.g., position at MMC).Check manufacturing process capability; adjust tolerances to match proven capability while preserving function.Define inspection strategy to verify that the assigned tolerances can be measured reliably. Verification / Alternative check: Run a tolerance stack-up on the assembly to confirm that all worst-case combinations still meet the functional requirement. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Incorrect: Ignores the core purpose of tolerancing—ensuring function and fit under variation.Applies only to aerospace parts / Used only for threads and shafts: Functional tolerancing applies to all industries and components, not a limited subset. Common Pitfalls: Overtightening tolerances without functional justification, driving cost needlessly.Omitting geometric controls and relying only on size limits, which may not protect functional relationships. Final Answer: Correct

Question 17

Definition of tolerance in drawings: Tolerance is the total permissible variation (upper limit minus lower limit) allowed for a specified dimension on a part drawing. Evaluate this definition.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Every manufactured dimension varies. Engineering drawings control that variation using tolerances. The statement describes tolerance as the total allowed spread between the maximum and minimum permissible sizes—a standard definition in both limit dimensioning and plus/minus practices. Given Data / Assumptions: A dimension has specified limits (e.g., 10.00 +0.05 / -0.02) or a symmetric plus/minus (e.g., 10.00 ± 0.03). Manufacturing and inspection can achieve and verify these limits. Units and datum references are properly documented on the drawing. Concept / Approach: Tolerance = upper limit - lower limit. For 10.00 ± 0.03, tolerance = 0.06. For limit dimensions 10.05 / 9.98, tolerance = 0.07. This total variation ensures interchangeable parts even when produced by different lots, machines, or suppliers. Step-by-Step Solution: Extract upper and lower permissible sizes from the drawing callout.Compute tolerance as upper - lower.Confirm that the tolerance supports the required fit and function in the assembly.Align inspection gauges and sampling plans to these exact limits. Verification / Alternative check: Cross-check using a tolerance stack-up: if each contributor uses the stated total variation, the assembly requirement should still be met at worst case. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Incorrect: Conflicts with the accepted definition of dimensional tolerance.Only refers to surface finish / Applies only to metric: Tolerance applies to size and geometry in any unit system; surface finish is a separate specification. Common Pitfalls: Confusing tolerance with allowance (intentional fit difference between mating parts).Assuming measuring device resolution equals achievable tolerance. Final Answer: Correct

Question 18

Precision versus cost: Does increasing dimensional precision (tighter tolerances) generally make parts less expensive to manufacture, or does it typically increase manufacturing cost?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Precision carries a cost. Tighter tolerances often require slower machining, specialized tooling, more capable equipment, additional in-process controls, and stricter inspection. Therefore, increasing precision usually increases, not decreases, manufacturing cost. The statement claiming the opposite is generally false. Given Data / Assumptions: Production processes have natural capability (process spread) that may or may not meet tighter limits. Inspection time and scrap risk rise as tolerances tighten. Functional requirements dictate the minimum necessary precision. Concept / Approach: Cost drivers include machine time, tool wear, setup complexity, environmental controls, and inspection methods. As tolerance narrows, yield can drop and rework increases. Best practice is to apply only as much precision as the function and fit require, avoiding unnecessary expense. Step-by-Step Solution: Determine functional and fit needs to set the minimum necessary tolerance.Compare tolerance with process capability; if inadequate, plan process upgrades or accept higher cost.Quantify inspection requirements (e.g., CMM time, gauge R&R) and include them in cost.Iterate design/process to balance performance and affordability. Verification / Alternative check: Use process capability indices (Cp, Cpk) to evaluate whether tighter tolerances are economically achievable. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Correct for additive manufacturing only / True only for soft materials: The cost trend applies broadly across processes and materials.Cost is always unaffected by precision: Contradicts industry experience and cost models. Common Pitfalls: Specifying extremely tight tolerances without functional justification.Ignoring inspection cost, which can rival machining cost at tight limits. Final Answer: Incorrect

Question 19

ISO system of fits: Confirm that the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) maintains its own preferred metric system of limits and fits for holes and shafts.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Designers frequently use standardized fit systems to specify how holes and shafts mate. The ISO system provides a comprehensive metric framework using tolerance grades (IT) and fundamental deviations (letters such as H, h) to define clearance, transition, and interference fits consistently across industries. Given Data / Assumptions: Metric dimensions are used in the design. Fit class communicates intended functional relationship between mating parts. Suppliers and inspectors recognize ISO fit notation. Concept / Approach: The ISO system assigns standardized tolerance zones to holes and shafts. For example, H7/h6 indicates a commonly used clearance fit. Using standardized fits simplifies global communication, tooling selection, and quality verification by referencing established limits rather than ad hoc values. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify mating features (e.g., hole and shaft) and required functional fit.Select an ISO tolerance grade and deviation (e.g., H7/h6) that produces the desired allowance.Apply the callout on the drawing; derive limit sizes from the standard tables.Verify process capability to achieve the selected grades consistently. Verification / Alternative check: Compare against national standards; ISO fits align with widely adopted industry practice for metric systems. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Incorrect: ISO indeed maintains a metric fit system.Applies only to inch threads / Used only in automotive: The ISO system is metric and broadly applied, not limited to threads or one industry. Common Pitfalls: Mixing inch-based ANSI fits with metric ISO fits within one assembly, causing confusion.Choosing overly tight grades without necessity, increasing cost. Final Answer: Correct

Question 20

Meaning of geometric tolerances: Geometric tolerances (GD&T) define the maximum permissible variation in the form, orientation, location, or runout of features from the ideal geometry implied by the drawing. Judge this statement.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Geometric dimensioning and tolerancing (GD&T) supplements size limits by controlling shape and spatial relationships. Symbols such as flatness, perpendicularity, position, and total runout specify how far a real feature may deviate from the theoretically exact geometry and datum references shown on the drawing. Given Data / Assumptions: Features of size and datums are identified on the drawing. Functional relationships (e.g., coaxiality, perpendicularity) matter to assembly performance. Inspection methods (CMM, gauges) are available to verify geometric controls. Concept / Approach: Geometric tolerance zones (planes, cylinders, boundaries) bound allowable deviation of form and position. For example, a position tolerance limits how far a hole's axis may wander from its true position while still ensuring assembly with a mating pin. This framework protects function with fewer overly tight size limits. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify critical features and their functional datums.Select appropriate geometric controls (e.g., flatness for sealing surfaces, position for holes).Define tolerance zone size and material condition modifiers (e.g., MMC) when beneficial.Specify inspection plan capable of validating the geometric requirement. Verification / Alternative check: Perform an assembly tolerance study to verify that the GD&T scheme ensures fit and function at worst case. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Incorrect: Misstates the purpose of geometric tolerances.Applies only to surface roughness / Used only for castings: GD&T is independent of surface finish and applies to all manufacturing processes. Common Pitfalls: Using size tolerances to control relationships better handled by GD&T.Omitting datum references, making geometric controls ambiguous. Final Answer: Correct

Tolerancing Questions