×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Dates as per ASME Y14.100-2004

Dates as per ASME Y14.100-2004

Dates as per ASME Y14.100-2004

(OP)
Had anyone else not relaized that as per ASME Y14.100-2004 para 4.28, dates on drawings are to be written Year-Month- Day rather than Month-Day-Year? I have always written dates Month-Day-Year, am I the only one?

RE: Dates as per ASME Y14.100-2004

I use to write the date year-month-day but was told to change by management because it was not standard to everyday folks.

Best Regards,

Heckler
Sr. Mechanical Engineer
SW2005 SP 5.0 & Pro/E 2001
Dell Precision 370
P4 3.6 GHz, 1GB RAM
XP Pro SP2.0
NVIDIA Quadro FX 1400
      o
  _`\(,_
(_)/ (_)

Never argue with an idiot. They'll bring you down to their level and beat you with experience every time.

RE: Dates as per ASME Y14.100-2004

Yes, I have seen it. A lot of companies here in the USA refuse to follow it. We tried to follow it at my last company, no go.

Chris
Systems Analyst, I.S.
SolidWorks 06 4.1/PDMWorks 06
AutoCAD 06
ctopher's home (updated 06-21-06)

RE: Dates as per ASME Y14.100-2004

(OP)
Okay, so what you are saying is that this is one of those rules that a bunch of people, who live in their own private worlds, sat down and thought "How should we do this?" and without consulting anyone in the real world, came up with a way to do something that is completly different from the way everyone else in the world does it everyday. And as such, everyone has tried to make this work at some point and everytime they have just gone back to doing it "wrong" because they couldn't change everyone else's minds in order to do it "right".



Is that about how you all see it?

RE: Dates as per ASME Y14.100-2004

Yes. The people that write the standards wouldn't have a job if they didn't get together to change something.

Chris
Systems Analyst, I.S.
SolidWorks 06 4.1/PDMWorks 06
AutoCAD 06
ctopher's home (updated 06-21-06)

RE: Dates as per ASME Y14.100-2004



Back in the UK it was day, month, year.  I believe this goes for all of Europe, not sure about the rest of the world.

This could cause confusion when looking at US documents.

My guess is they chose Year Month Day because no one else does it this way and it would help avoid confusion!

Also if you have the date as part of the file name it sorts better this way.

Maybe there is an ISO convention they are trying to match.

RE: Dates as per ASME Y14.100-2004

We started using that format when the software we were using was storing it in that format. This way we could pull the date from the PDM system and use it directly to populate the drawing fields.

"Wildfires are dangerous, hard to control, and economically catastrophic."

Ben Loosli
Sr IS Technologist
L-3 Communications

RE: Dates as per ASME Y14.100-2004

Hmm.  I think the "year first" date format is/was/has always been a military requirement, at least for their internal reports (not sure it ever flowed down to the subcontractors, but I did see it on Level 1 drawings if memory serves)?  Thus its inclusion under the Y14.100 "tree" of specifications, which is the ANSI continuation of the old DOD-STD-100, which is the continuation of the predecessor MIL-STD-100.  Which is why we (a civilian company with nothing much to do with MIL/NAV/AF/NASA) call out Y14.5 on our drawings, not Y14.100...

RE: Dates as per ASME Y14.100-2004

Year(4 digit)-Month-Day is the most logical way (IMO) of writing a date. You wouldn't write time as min-sec-hour or sec-min-hour so why suddenly change the format (large to small) when writing a date.

http://www.w3.org/QA/Tips/iso-date

cheers
Helpful SW websites  FAQ559-520
How to get answers to your SW questions  FAQ559-1091

RE: Dates as per ASME Y14.100-2004

(OP)
CBL-
If only that was the way that americans as a whole wrote the date. I think it makes the most logical sense, but like anything else that is ingrained practically from birth, I can't see it changing any time soon.

RE: Dates as per ASME Y14.100-2004

Some places use day-month-year. If you see 11-12-06, would you call it Dec 11 or Nov 12 if you didn't know the system?

RE: Dates as per ASME Y14.100-2004

Does Y14.100 say if the year is to be 2 digit or 4?

If 2 digit then for the next few years there will still be some possibilty of confusion.

Ken

RE: Dates as per ASME Y14.100-2004

(OP)
It specifies a 4 digit year

RE: Dates as per ASME Y14.100-2004

ASME Y14.100, 4.28:
The method of specifying dates on drawings shall be
numerical by year-month-day for entry in the “DATE”
block. For example, June 10, 1989 would be indicated
as 1989-06-10, 89-06-10, 19890610, 890610, 1989/06/10,
or 89/06/10.

"Wildfires are dangerous, hard to control, and economically catastrophic."

Ben Loosli
Sr IS Technologist
L-3 Communications

RE: Dates as per ASME Y14.100-2004

Figured it had it covered.

RE: Dates as per ASME Y14.100-2004

   The yyyy/mm/dd format is an ISO procedure as far as I know.  I was told about it back in the seventies.  

   I do not trust any other numerical date format.  The European system is dd/mm/yyyy, and the American system mm/dd/yyyy.  Much of the time, I cannot tell them apart.  

   The yyyy/mm/dd format sorts nicely on a computer.

                        JHG

RE: Dates as per ASME Y14.100-2004

Quote:

Yes. The people that write the standards wouldn't have a job if they didn't get together to change something.

Membership on the ASME Y14 standard committees is completely voluntary - ASME does not compensate committee members for their time, nor do they cover travel expenses.  In fact, many committee members pay all of their own travel expenses to attend meetings.  Membership on one of the Y14 committees is a big time commitment.  Typically, an active committee will meet in person for three or more days at a time, two or more times a year depending on deadlines.  Some committees have multiple teleconferences between in-person meetings.  The Y14.5 committee meets for five days at a time with some members doing preliminary work a couple of days ahead of the regular meeting.

The ASME committees are comprised of people who have a wide range of experience in the area covered by their particular standard.  They work in industry, education and government. All of the members I know are dedicated to improving the standards for the benefit of all of us; none are interested in wasting their time making trivial changes.  If you are not happy with any of the standards, contact ASME about becoming a member of one of the standard committees - they're always looking for qualified members.

RE: Dates as per ASME Y14.100-2004

Another format for writing dates used in US auto industry (GM standard, I believe):
08AU06 for August 8, 2006.
Abreviations used for the months: JA, FE, MR, AP, MY, JN, JL AU, SE, OC, NO, DE.
 

RE: Dates as per ASME Y14.100-2004

gearguru,

   How about 06B05 for 2006 February 05?

   I have seen this one.

                        JHG

RE: Dates as per ASME Y14.100-2004

DRAWOH is correct, the YYYY/MM/DD convention is the metric standard, defined in SI Metric (Systeme Internationale).  Why that convention was chosen rather than smallest to largest, I have no idea, but presumably those able-minded people on the standardization committees around the world adopted it for a reason.  

Which brings me to ERE's point.  People who volunteer their time, resources and often personal funds to participate on various standards development committees should be appreciated, even when their logic is beyond immediate grasp.  I've personally logged thousands of hours of personal time working on international standards, and I know many other people who do the same.  When standards are developed, even those for use inside a single nation, the efforts and inputs of countless representatives are considered, weighted and negotiated before settling on the final result.  

I would presume that most comments about those who develop the standards are tongue-in-cheek, but just the same, the next time someone offers a glib comment about their efforts, think about life without ASME, ANSI, ISO, CSA, DIN, JIS, and every other industrial design standard their is out there...  thumbsup2

Jim Sykes, P.Eng, GDTP-S
Profile Services
CAD-Documentation-GD&T-Product Development
www.profileservices.ca

RE: Dates as per ASME Y14.100-2004

MechNorth,

   As I noted above, the ISO date format sorts nicely on a computer.  I have taken advantage of this several times.

   Given the ambiguiuty of the European and American systems, and the number of people who do not know the difference, a proposed new date format should be visibly different from the existing ones.  YYYY/MM/DD accomplishes this nicely.  

   I do not find ISO to be at all inscrutable on this one.  It makes a whole lot of sense, and there is no need to make excuses for them.  

                     JHG

RE: Dates as per ASME Y14.100-2004

(OP)
Those that have used this system of dating, have you had any problems with vendors or other companies misinterpreting you? The arguments for doing it make sense, but I'm concerned that we will run into problems with other companies.
 

RE: Dates as per ASME Y14.100-2004

aardvarkdw,

    I have had no complaints about this style of dating.  On the other hand, I have had few situations where people absolutely had to understand my dates.  

    Also, I write out the month in text, whenever possible.  The text strings "2006" "Aug" and "14" can be written out in any order and they will make sense to a person who reads english.

                      JHG

RE: Dates as per ASME Y14.100-2004

I have used this system for more years than I care to remember and have never had a problem. I refuse to sign any document which uses an all numerical date other than YYYY-MM-DD.

Providing the year is shown with all 4 digits, there should be no misinterpretation. I have yet to see any document or correspondence (official or otherwise) using a YYYY-DD-MM notation.

cheers
Helpful SW websites  FAQ559-520
How to get answers to your SW questions  FAQ559-1091

RE: Dates as per ASME Y14.100-2004

I'm in Canada, where the date format is officially YYYY/MM/DD, but because our industries are so tied in with US industries, we get a mixture of all sorts of units up here (though I see that more US companies are switching to metric on a regular basis).  To avoid the problem, I always make sure that I include "(YYYY/MM/DD)" under the column in the title or revision block, and use the full month name in any non-drawing documents.

Drawoh, I wasn't making excuses for the ISO committee that standardized this date format, I was supporting them.  Not everyone can, or will, see the logic of a standardization committee's decision and will therefore prematurely rule it silly, pointless, or just outright incorrect because it isn't what they're used to.  Logic is never simple, and rarely the same between people.  You might have seen this in the migration from board-drafting to computer 2-D to 3-D Solid modelling, or from traditional linear tolerancing to GD&T... inevitably somebody can't or won't wrap their head around it despite the logic behind the migration being obvious to seemingly everyone else.  I was also trying to compliment the actions of standards development organizations; the participants indirectly take a lot of abuse by people who aren't involved.  While the committee's logic may not be readily apparent to all, they have at least established a path that we can all walk without having to blaze a new trail every time we step onto it.  
It can be quite intellectually and personally satisfying to help develop standards that become widely implemented; everyone should give it a try some time.    2thumbsup

Jim Sykes, P.Eng, GDTP-S
Profile Services
CAD-Documentation-GD&T-Product Development
www.profileservices.ca

RE: Dates as per ASME Y14.100-2004

I like the date shown here (upper-right corner) of this post. Is clear to me.

Chris
Systems Analyst, I.S.
SolidWorks 06 4.1/PDMWorks 06
AutoCAD 06
ctopher's home (updated 06-21-06)

RE: Dates as per ASME Y14.100-2004

The y14.100/metric date makes a lot of sense for a number of reasons.  Unfortunately it's not what most of us are used to.

Spelling out the month or indicating the date format can be good in some situations but not all.

I guess if you reference Y14.100 on your drawing and put the date in the format described there in there can be no argument.

RE: Dates as per ASME Y14.100-2004

"YYYY/MM/DD accomplishes this nicely"  

At least until someone starts useing "YYYY/DD/MM" :)

RE: Dates as per ASME Y14.100-2004

Thats why you say somewhere something like "DRAWING IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASME Y14.100" on the drawing

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources