you can do what you ask.. without movement.Good morning, I am new in the injection molding environment and I would like to ask you an opinion/choice. in the piece that I attached there is a way to create the side holes (no need to be precise) without using movements ? thanks a thousand
what you say is convenient to the molder but is misleading and dangerous to the designer. the example is that of a couple in which I have to guarantee or interfere or play. Secondly when you make a cp/cpk on important odds or even criticism by putting a tolerance ± I can't understand where my process goes.generally the designer performs the 3d model of the piece with the nominal quotas, and then makes a nice design 2d adding the tolerances, which until they are centered (example 10 ±0.1) little change, but if they have different deviations (example 10 +0.1/0) you have to intervene on the model to fix it and this procedure is not easy especially on a step file.
therefore my advice is to consider what is said and model with the nominal quota 10.05 ±0.05
So I should make two models and two drafting: one for the molder and one for quality control? in the example you brought the h7 is on a drafting and g6 in another. suppose that the designer of the detail is replaced with another, if he sees a h7 straightens the ears and checks the coupling, if he sees a 100.0175 ± 0.035 (it7 0.035 mm) he thinks of a sadistic designer. . .I understand your problem and you're not wrong, but for those who build the mold it's not easy to handle.
If they are interattentive positions the problem does not exist, but if they are walls with relative beams and against rays the modification is very challenging if not rebuild the model.
Let us make an example:
on a coupling h7/g6
100 h7 (0.04/0)
100g6 (-0.01/-0.03)
If the 3d is built at 100.02±0.02 and at 99.98±0.015 I think the result is identical.
worsening for the molder because it tightens the field of tolerance...but this is a solveable problem.
many cads have the automatism to center and balance tolerances, a reason there will be.
bhe.. No.So I should make two models and two drafting: one for the molder and one for quality control? in the example you brought the h7 is on a drafting and g6 in another. suppose that the designer of the detail is replaced with another, if he sees a h7 straightens the ears and checks the coupling, if he sees a 100.0175 ± 0.035 (it7 0.035 mm) he thinks of a sadistic designer. . .
in the reality in which I work, with molds also from hundreds of thousands of €, we discuss in advance with the moldist, quota per quota, disform to disform, injection and so on.
in other realities that I worked for I felt the designers say 'se rangia el moldista' and then find pieces that did not mate because the sforms were made starting from one edge instead of another.
the position of the extractors must also be discussed.
In my view, therefore, there must be maximum cooperation between the various bodies in compliance with their competences.
p.s. I absolutely do not want to turn on flames nor show who has it anymore ... collaboration and mutual respect are my motto.