Re: Dimensional Data - wrong assumptions


Dennis Storzek
 

On Mon, Sep 7, 2020 at 10:55 AM, Dave Parker wrote:
So, it seems that the initial idea was not include the "X", but instead the two sets of width and height figures would be differentiated only by the order presented.  Again referring to FOFC 9, I can find a couple of examples of this, but it looks like many roads went ahead and used the "X" to make it unambiguous as to which was which.
Dave,
As I mentioned before, the 1946 CBC presents the same drawing as was presented in the 1922 CBC, but adds the following note in text below the drawing with its included notes:

"Note 1 - 1936 Revision Provides for EXW Stenciling and Notes are Amplified."

The ARA itself may have realized two sets of identical dimensions showing different numbers was confusing and made the change itself in the first couple of years.

This discussion has been informative. Thanks for taking the time to clip parts out of the ARA proceedings and post them.

Dennis Storzek 

Join main@RealSTMFC.groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.