I have thoroughly enjoyed this article. I also believe that 3D GD&T can accomplish the same job that 2D drawings with GD&T have been able to do. I am a young engineer that has some experience with 3D GD&T and found it useful. Of course like mentioned earlier in this post my suppliers did not have a system to read the new 3D GD&T and preferred 2D drawings. So 2D drawings is what they received. I wish I knew then about 3D adobe.
The real point that I would like to make is the perception of 2D drawings compared to 3D models. In the businessman's eyes paper and printers to plot will become a nuisance to the bottom line. In the future computer power will not be a discussion with regards to CAD capability. If you walked into any intelligent businessman's office and gave them an unbiased presentation of both 2D GD&T and 3D GD&T which one do you think that he will choose? I will concede that not all decision makers today will choose the 3D approach. But by the time that my peers have the experience and are able to sit and make those decisions, I can say with utter confidence that none will choose the 2D way. The current implementations of 3D GD&T may or may not have serious shortcomings but will be adapted in some form in the future. Today’s video gamer will one day be our boss and the neat graphics and pure sophistication of the software that he can purchase will influence their decision.
So once again Norm thank you for the article.
And Joe I concede that you have brought up some valid points and that you have a wealth of experience that I can not pull from but the future will be 3D GD&T no matter if you agree with it or not.
Re: Inspection
[re: NormCrawford]
