Known as the "Doctor of Dimensioning," Alex Krulikowski is a noted educator, author, and expert on Geometric Dimensioning and Tolerancing (GD&T). He has more than 30 years of industrial experience putting GD&T to practical use on the shop floor. 

Alex has taught GD&T to tens of thousands through his workshops and seminars, and to countless others through his books, self-study courses, videos, and computer-based training programs.

The "Ultimate" GD&T reference tool is only available thru ETI

Economical Tool You Can't Afford To Miss
Carry this pocket-sized reference with you on the job and have a resource to all your GD&T questions at your fingertips. Order one for each member of your team!

To read more about it, Click here

Back to top

ETI's Discussion Board: Talk about GD&T issues with other peers and professionals.

ETI'S Discussion Board
ETI's website has an interactive forum that's easy to access and may give you a broader knowledge of GD&T-related topics.

To visit the board, click here.

Back to top

www.etinews.com

ETImail is a regular online publication devoted to Geometric Dimensioning & Tolerancing. Each edition features a host of GD&T resources and links, as well as dimensioning tips by noted GD&T author and ETI founder, Alex Krulikowski. We also invite you to visit our website, etinews.com. To view past issues of ETImail, see the archives.

ETImail is now available in PDF format. To read the PDF file, you will need Adobe Acrobat Reader.

Let us know what you think—take a short survey about ETImail.

A Tale of Two Cultures: Rewarding Skills That Enhance Job Performance Alex Krulikowski Companies whose employees have GD&T skills produce better designs for their customers. Some U.S. companies may need to follow the example of a different culture's perspective.

Last fall, I was teaching a GD&T fundamentals course to a group of designers, engineers, and quality employees at a well-known company in the United States. I was hired to teach geometric tolerancing because they were having difficulty with drawing quality and wanted to ensure that their employees understood GD&T on the drawings. I was exciting about teaching the class, because I knew that I could help this company.

GD&T training could help this company in two ways: first, by reducing the number of drawing errors made in engineering, which is the least expensive place to fix the errors. The second benefit of GD&T training is that it would help reduce drawing interpretation errors when the drawing is released from engineering, which is where an interpretation error costs the most. Figure one shows how much impact these drawing errors have on an organization.

The management seemed excited about the impact GD&T training would have on their organization. However, on the day I began teaching the class, I found that several of the students hadn't even known that they were attending the class until the day before it began. (This is not the first time I've experienced this.) I passed out the materials and we started the activities.

It was a three-day class, and the class format included a pretest before the instruction and a post-test afterwards. This pretest class average was 19.5, which was unusually low. The average pretest score is often around 30-35% for companies using GD&T. Although the average results were low, there were a few students that were in the 30-50% range.

The second day of the class was pretty typical. Some of the students were trying hard to learn as much as they could, while other students were attending but not working very hard to learn.

On the third day, most of the students seemed to be enjoying the hands-on practice. Some of the students were grasping the GD&T concepts well. However, some of the students didn't grasp the importance of GD&T and standards and didn't take the opportunity to learn as much as they could. Other students were nonchalant about the need to learn GD&T.

One student in particular seemed far ahead of the pack. He was a young engineer that had been with the company for about a year. I'll call him Mark. Mark scored the highest in the class on the pretest, with a score that was over double the class average. Mark also made many insightful comments during the class. His questions demonstrated that he understood the material and was trying to figure out how to apply the new concepts on the projects he was involved in. Because of his high pretest score and class participation, I thought Mark might be one of those exceptional students who would score in the high 90's in his post-test.

Midmorning, another employee came into the room and talked quietly to Mark. Mark then left the room with him. I assumed there was some question that Mark was needed to answer relative to his job and that he would return shortly. Sometime in the late afternoon I became curious about Mark. His class materials were still on the table in front of his empty chair and he had not returned. I also sensed that the students seemed a little distracted.

Finally, my curiosity got the best of me and I asked the class, "Has anyone seen Mark? We're getting close to the end of the class, and I'm just wondering if Mark will be back in time for the post-test?"

One student hesitantly remarked, "There was a work force reduction today, and Mark was laid off."

I didn't say anything. What could I say? I just kept thinking that this wasn't right. How could the employee with the most advanced GD&T skills-this young engineer with the highest quiz scores, who had mastered concepts easily, and who seemed to be the most promising in the group-be one of the employees being laid off by the company? It was frustrating to witness this obviously talented employee lose his place in the organization.

Many thoughts were racing though my head, one I recall is that they just laid off the person who could help them the most. I don't know what criteria they used for the head count reduction, but, Mark had the skills (or potential to gain them) that were sorely lacking in this company.

It appeared to me that employee skills were not highly regarded in that company or by many of the employees, and this problem is far too common in many companies I visit. Based on my experiences this is representative of the U.S. industrial culture. Many companies do not reward those who learn the skills needed to do a good job, and many employees only care to learn enough to get by. I don't mean to say that all students in my classes are not giving their best effort, but a significant number of them - enough to notice - only want to learn enough to get by.

A different approach
Now, let me describe a similar event that happened just a few months later. A good friend of mine was teaching GD&T tolerance stacks for an engineering contract shop in India. He told me the following story about his experience with the class, the culture and the company.

The students were excited about learning the new skills. The class was very attentive and everyone seemed to work hard. The company had passed out the books a day early so the students could take them home and study before the class the next day.

The first day, the students came to class prepared and we were able to cover the material at a good pace. They were eager learners and wanted to gain as much knowledge as possible.

The second day went equally as well, I never had so many good questions from a group.

On the third day of the workshop, a final exam was given. It consisted of doing a series of tolerance stacks. Upon completion of the exam, the students were very anxious to learn the results. I corrected the exams in class and gave each student his or her score on a piece of paper. I announced what the highest score was from the group and the students were anxious to know who had achieved it. I told everyone that the person with the highest score was Raj, and they immediately went to him and began shaking his hand and congratulating him.

This wasn't the end of the recognition for Raj. When a tolerance stack job was received in the department, it immediately went to him. When Raj's capacity to do stacks was full, the jobs went to the person from the class with the next highest score. The company valued and rewarded the skills of the employees.

The company also benefited because they produced better designs for their customers which translates into more business. By encouraging the skills, the company became more capable and competitive and was able to prosper.

Compare the value placed on learning skills in these cases
The contrast between how training was valued in India compared to the United States was remarkable. In our country, Mark's skills were not an important factor; in fact, he was laid off. In India, Raj's management acknowledged the brightest and most highly skilled employee and immediately rewarded him for his accomplishments. Even Raj's coworkers gave praise and acknowledged his accomplishments.

Organizations in the United States strive to save money and cut costs. One of the ways they attempt to do this is through reducing head count. In my opinion, reducing the employee payroll in the manner I witnessed is a simplistic measure that won't save in the long run, especially when the most skilled employees are part of the cut.

Real cost-savings result when a product is produced economically and efficiently. Designing a quality product requires skilled workers and the consistent use of standards.

Company management should reinforce and reward the efforts of employees who excel in company-sponsored training programs and who display skills that will enhance job performance.

Does your management value employee skills?
The real test to determine if skills are valued in your organization is to look at your compensation system. A good compensation system will serve three main objectives:

1. Employee procurement and retention
2. Consistency in application of the system
3. Reinforcement of positive behaviors

Figure 2 shows a list of questions that will help reveal if your management values employee training and skills.

Are you preparing yourself to be the best you can be?
Even if your management doesn't value training as much as it could, there are several reasons why you should. From a personal standpoint, there is a message here. As engineering jobs become more competitive, your skills will be an important factor in helping you to have a promising career. Don't wait for external rewards from your management, they may not come. Think about your future and strive to become more competitive. As good jobs become scarcer, your skills will be an important asset.

Whenever you attend training of any nature, answer the questions in the chart in Figure 3. This will help you to understand the value of the training and help to apply the training to your job.

The rest of the story...
I have since heard from Mark. He is working at another automotive supplier and doing well. He is using and expanding his GD&T skills and believes that knowing GD&T is important to his job. I'm certain that he'll use his skills well and that he'll be an excellent addition to his new company.

ETImail's Standards in the News takes a look at real-life issues involving standards. This month: lack of standards slow up technological advancements.

Excerpt from the infoworld.com website

LACK OF STANDARDS HINDERS ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORDS
This issue of Standards in the News features an article by Grant Gross about the problems in the development of an electronic health records system.

The health care industry needs to use IT better, but many doctors and hospitals are concerned about implementing technology such as electronic health records without interoperability standards in place, members of a new U.S. government task force focusing on health IT said Monday.

While some large hospitals and medical practices have moved to electronic health records, many other hospitals and doctors fear that electronic health record software they buy now might not work with standards eventually adopted by the health care industry or the government, said Dr. Mark Leavitt, medical director of the Healthcare Information Management Systems Society. Without widespread adoption, the cost of electronic health record technology remains high, and smaller hospitals and practices are hesitant to use the technology until the cost goes down and the industry has interoperability standards, he added.

Full story

Excerpt is from the article, "Lack of Standards Hinders Electronic Health Records," by Grant Gross, IDG News Service, in the January 10, 2005, issue of InfoWorld online. Copyright © 2005, IDG Network

Back to top

The ETI Mailbag

Alex,

We have been having some discussion at my company about reporting GD&T readings related to profile of a surface. The feature is bilateral, so we understand the concept of an evenly spaced tolerance band across the surface of the part. Readings are being taken in the following scenario: profile of a surface should be .02 (bilateral), so .01 on each side of nominal, readings are taken with varied results from +.008 to -.005. Here is the question: should the results be reported as .016 (doubling the largest reading and keeping the band bilateral), or should it be reported as .013 the maximum range?

JoAnne P.

To check a surface toleranced with profile, I recommend using a measurement plan. One aspect of the measurement plan is to document a set of points to be measured for the profile specification. The number of points will vary based on the area and importance of the surface. This way each inspector (at any location) will be measuring and reporting on the same surface points. The inspection report should document two parameters of the profile specification.

The variation from the true profile for each point should be reported (i.e. Point xx= +.008, Point xx = -.005, etc.) and final designation should be made on part acceptance based on the fact that the maximum variation of any point cannot exceed the profile tolerance zone. Then anyone from engineering, manufacturing, etc. will be able to understand and interpret the data.

Best Regards
Alex Krulikowski

I have a query about inspection of total runout of any shaft.--- [Can you explain] how to inspect total runout on OD of a shaft? Which instrument is to be used? We can use a dial & bench center for circular runout, but [please explain] how to inspect total runout and how to move a dial simultaneously along the shaft. Please guide me.

Walve Nandkumar

First of all, total runout is a very difficult and expensive control to inspect. It should not be specified very often on drawings. With that being said, here are some suggestions on how to inspect total runout.

Often, a special gage is built that has three elements:

1. a set of gage features to hold the part to establish a datum axis
2. a stand to hold a dial indicator (and translate along the part surface)
3. a mechanism to correlate the rotation of the part and the translation of the dial indicator

As far as checking total runout with open inspection tools and methods, I believe it is very difficult (maybe impossible) to do a credible job. A setup could be created with various inspection equipment, but I am not familiar with how this would be accomplished. Perhaps one of the readers of this newsletter has some expertise they can share with us. If so, I will publish the information in a future issue.

I am under the impression that a CMM could be used to inspect total runout, but I am not familiar with the methods used. Again, if a reader has some information, please write to ETImailbag and I will publish the techniques in a future issue.

I wish I had more insights to offer, but total runout is not a very common specification, and I have not had a lot of exposure to the inspection methods other seeing dedicated gages built for specific applications.

ETI appreciates your questions and comments. Send your GD&T questions to: ETImailbag.

TAPPING INTO ONLINE RESOURCES
The Internet's potential as a resource for any and all topics is amazing. More and more sites and e-zines pop up every day. This issue of ETImail takes a look at two valuable sources for industry-related news.

Engineeringtalk.com
The Engineeringtalk email newsletter is a place where Product Design and Automation Engineers can find information from manufacturers and distributors. Based in the U.K., the site adds more news from suppliers all over the world as soon as it's announced. News can be browsed by date, manufacturer, and product category.

According to editor Chris Rand, "At this moment we have 27942 news releases from 3067 suppliers - that's the equivalent content of a huge pile of over 399 magazines. We hope the website will help you find whatever you're looking for!"

Visit Engineeringtalk.com

Tenlinks.com
This helpful site is geared towards CAD, CAM, and CAE professionals. The Tenlinks site has organized lots and lots of information into directories that cover products, services, articles, and resources for the technical community. Tenlinks also publishes press releases of current events.

Visit Tenlinks.com

Along with their partner sites, Tenlinks also offer a large variety of free resources and enewsletters:

TenLinks Daily - Offers CAD/CAM/CAE news delivered via email every day. They scan hundreds of sources to find the latest and most important news and articles and send them to your inbox.

CADdepot.com update - Features the latest CAD software titles updated each week, including the "Tool of the Week" and selected timely features from the TenLinks.com and CADdigest.com news and information archives.

CADdigest.com weekly - Publishes the best CAD, CAM & CAE articles from all over the Web and delivers to your inbox every Wednesday.

3DCADTips.com - Provides a free, independent and objective information resource for 3D CAD users, administrators, and managers developed exclusively by eDocHelp and in partnership with many other 3D CAD sites.

FreeCAD.com - Offers CAD, CAM and CAE programs available for download.

Upfrontezine.com - Provides information for the computer-aided design industry.

ETImail Feedback Have comments about anything you've read in ETImail? ETI will post your comments here and provide a forum for more discussion about GD&T topics.

ETI Mailbag feedback:

In your last news letter volume 1, issue 12 you responded to Joe Jackson's question in answer 3 by referring to figure 4-11 and 4-13 as examples for a centerline plane. Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't figure 4-11 refer to a datum axis, which represents a centerline and its true counterpart is cylindrical instead of two planes.

Thanks!

Art Kietlinski
Industrial Measurement Tech II

Yes, you are correct. Figure 4-11 is a figure involving a diameter and an axis. I should have stated figure 4-13 & figure 4-14.

Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I'm glad to know you read ETImail very thoroughly!

Alex

Subscriber comments:
The questions posed by readers are very interesting and a great way to be updated and refreshed in the world of GD&T.
— Kenneth R.

Thanks to ETImail for spreading knowledge of GD&T and opening our eyes.
— Walve Nandkumar

I just receive a course about GD&T with Alex and I was very impressed about the subject. I would like to receive articles about it.
— Antonio Rodriguez

Thanks for your work, GD&T should be required training for all DRE's.
— William Force

ETI would like to hear from you. If you have an opinion about any ETImail article or feature, please write to our ETImailbag.

Back to top

We would appreciate it if you'd keep us in mind when you need GD&T training, consulting, or GD&T products. Feel free to contact us by email or by phone at 734-728-0909 or 800-886-0909.

To subscribe to ETImail, click here.
To contact us with questions, comments, or story ideas, click here. 
To unsubscribe from ETImail, click here.

The contents of this newsletter may be reproduced if our Reprint Policy is followed.

Copyright © 2002 Effective Training Inc. All rights reserved.