When it comes to GD&T training, I am often asked which units of measurement are preferred. The answer: It doesn’t really matter! The GD&T system works the same using inches or millimeters; the only thing that changes is the number.
The technical standard ASME Y14.5M-1994 uses SI units (millimeters). Paragraph 1.1.2 phrases it this way: “The International System of Units (SI) is featured in this standard because SI units are expected to supersede United States (U.S.) customary units specified on engineering drawings. Customary units could equally well have been used without prejudice to the principles established.”
This may be humorous to those companies that have always used inches and continue to do so. (Weren’t we all told back in the late 1970s that everything would soon be metric?) The millimeter is widely used by countries besides the United States, and within the U.S. many industries have made the complete changeover to metric (including the automotive industry). But other industries, such as the aircraft industry, continue to use inches, as do smaller suppliers and machine shops.
Obviously, dimensions and tolerances given in one system can be easily converted to the other, but several things need to be addressed when doing this. First, keep in mind that rounding error may occur. Second, there are different customs to follow when displaying millimeters on a drawing than for inches. One custom is that a number less than one millimeter is to be preceded by a zero (such as 0.5 mm) but a number less than one inch should not (such as .500 in). Other minor differences are spelled out in the Y14.5 standard in paragraphs 1.6 and 2.3.
Finally, I should mention that our training is available in either system of units. Our GD&T seminars are based on the ASME standard, so our training manual was originally developed using millimeters. But we recently finished converting the manual to inches. So if your company engages us to do GD&T training, the same class can be taught using either system!
8 Comments
Submit a Comment
Meet The Expert
Watch John-Paul talk about the benefits of GD&T training courses.
I am trying to find the paragraph or the standard that says to use 3 place decimals in basic dimensions for imperial (inch) units. The company I work for uses 2 place decimal basic dimensions on 3 place decimal hole callouts.
Thanks for any help
Since your question is about basic dimensions, there is actually no requirement about the number of decimal places. In the standard ASME Y14.5-2009, paragraph 2.3.2, subparagraph (d), it states:
“There is no requirement for the basic dimension value to be expressed with the same number of decimal places as the tolerance.”
Then they give an example that shows 1.00 as a basic dim even though the geometric tolerance is .005.
Earlier in 2.3.2, it does say that the tolerance values and the dimensions shall have the same number of decimal places, but basic dimensions don’t have such a rule.
We have received a drawing from one of our customers and it is showing all metric dimensions.
One of our Manufacturing people asked me if there are any requirements, such as ISO or ASME, that require metric drawings to also show the inch equivalent value along side the dimension. I do not know of any requirement to do so, do you know of any such requirement?
Hello Ray… No, there is no requirement that a drawing showing dimensions in one system of units must also show the equivalent in the other system of units.
Sometimes both are given, where the “equivalent” alternate-unit dimension is given in brackets immediately after a given number. Of course, this opens up the issue of rounding error. But the answer to your main question is no. If you have access to the 2018 standard, check out paragraphs 4.2.3 and 4.2.4.
What can you say about a company that puts in their tolerance box that the tolerances according to Y14.5 but translates tolerances differently, xx”=.010 .xx =.15mm
The Y14.5 standard allows tolerances to be expressed via a general note or in the title block; it’s in paragraph 5.1.1(e) of the 2018 edition. But it doesn’t give any other details beyond that.
It sounds like your question has to do with using inches and millimeters on the same drawing.
If so, then what you’ve shown isn’t really per the standard. There should be one system of units that dominates the drawing, and that should be spelled out in the title block or notes. It is legal to have some dimensions that use the other system, but those would have the abbreviation IN or mm after the number. See paragraph 4.2.4.
But feel free to reply here if I’m not hearing your question correctly.
Is there a logical reason why the rules for inch and metric vary with regards to expressing trailing zeroes, or is it simply a matter of custom?
I don’t really know the reasons behind that. For now I’m inclined to say that it’s just different customs that developed.