English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

The inconsistencies between tolerances for aluminium profiles as specified in EN 755-9:2016 along with EN 12020-2:2016 and tolerance concepts defined in ISO 1101:2017 are demonstrated. It is shown that the standards defining requirements for extruded profiles have been developed without considering provisions in the ISO GPS system. A number of ambiguities in EN 755-9 and EN 12020-2 that were overcome in the ISO GPS system are shown. For example, broad application of plus/minus tolerancing for step dimensions does not provide unique verification of aluminium alloy-extruded profiles. It is pointed out that some terms univocally defined in the ISO GPS system are used incorrectly in both standards. It makes it difficult for a customer to verify on CMM whether or not extruded profiles satisfy the requirements specified in the order. Finally, significant changes regarding geometrical tolerancing in standards for the aluminium alloy-extruded profiles are proposed.

Tolerances for aluminium alloy-extruded profiles according to EN 755-9 and EN 12020-2 versus definitions of tolerances according to the ISO GPS system