GD&T Corrective Action.
GD&T Corrective Action.
(OP)
Hello everyone,
I need to know the way on how to initiate corrective action on drafters that do not use GD&T properly.
Thank you.
I need to know the way on how to initiate corrective action on drafters that do not use GD&T properly.
Thank you.





RE: GD&T Corrective Action.
V
Mechanical Engineer
"When I am working on a problem, I do not think of beauty, but when I've finished, if the solution is not beautiful, I know it is wrong."
- R. Buckminster Fuller
RE: GD&T Corrective Action.
There are many different ways to answer your question. A little more information is necessary.
V
Mechanical Engineer
"When I am working on a problem, I do not think of beauty, but when I've finished, if the solution is not beautiful, I know it is wrong."
- R. Buckminster Fuller
RE: GD&T Corrective Action.
Making training available also has it's place as does having access to the standards and reference experts etc. This could be extended to getting them certified (in GD&T not looney bin).
They may also need to have explained to them why to use GC&T, this should at least form part of training.
If after this, they are still do not gradually start to get better then perhaps disciplinary action should be considered especially if it's apparant that it's just because they don't like doing it/aren't making an effort or something; not that they are still learning.
This assumes that your company policy is to use GD&T and that they know this and that management will enforce it.
An alternative may be moving them into a position that doesn't require drafting.
A lot of our engineers don't like using it, as some of my posts allude to. They have had some training but it was a while ago and some of them haven't really applied it since. Our 'expert' got laid off in June and now I'm the 'expert'. This is a problem as I don't have any formal training and certainly no certification. Talk about blind leading the blind.
Compounding that we have limited management backing it's an uphill battle.
KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...
RE: GD&T Corrective Action.
Of course, as KENAT points out, this requires having a checker knowledgable in proper drafting and GD&T.
RE: GD&T Corrective Action.
Heckler![[americanflag] americanflag](https://www.tipmaster.com/images/americanflag.gif)
Sr. Mechanical Engineer
SWx 2007 SP 4.0 & Pro/E 2001
o
_`\(,_
(_)/ (_)
This post contains no political overtones or undertones for that matter and in no way represents the poster's political agenda.
RE: GD&T Corrective Action.
Some claim that they're too smart!
By the way, if anyone has a sure fire way, especially when management support is limited I'd love to hear it too.
KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...
RE: GD&T Corrective Action.
So,how you will start with the RCA itself ?
Drafter not paying attention on Y14.5 Std's,or ?
RE: GD&T Corrective Action.
Chris
SolidWorks 07 4.0/PDMWorks 07
AutoCAD 06
ctopher's home (updated 10-07-07)
ctopher's blog
RE: GD&T Corrective Action.
Are you asking how we'd write up the employee, what wording we'd use?
Not sure this is the correct forum and it may depend a lot on local employment rules and company disciplinary procedures etc.
Before you can discipline you must have made it known that it is a requirement that all drawings comply to ASME Y14.5M-1994 & related standards and make use of GD&T (you can arguably comply with the standard without using FCF etc due to all the shoulds instead of shalls and such like). If they did not claim when they joined the company that they already knew the standards then you probably need to make a good faith effort on the training too.
Assuming these are covered then first step might be writing them up for not complying with the company policy that all drawings comply to ASME Y14.5M-1994 & related standards and make use of GD&T.
The result of this would perhaps be requiring them to sign something saying that they understand that Y14.5M-1994 is to be followed (copy in their personel file) and require them to attend training (arranged by/paid for by the company).
If after this they don't comply then you ramp it up till the eventually get fired if they don't make a good effort to comply.
However, if you don't know if you have management support, why bother. You'll just upset people without achieving anything and may place your position in jeopardy. This is the situation I'm in.
KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...
RE: GD&T Corrective Action.
If you are looking for specific wording for your corrective action:
"Inadequate training in the application of ASME Y14.5M-1994 has resulted in..."
This makes it a training issue, stressing that training is required, new drafters won't fix the problem.
"Art without engineering is dreaming; Engineering without art is calculating."
Have you read FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?
RE: GD&T Corrective Action.
I have not seen any corrective action system relating to a drawings flaws, deficiencies or inappropriate GD&T.
It might not be a bad idea but I don't think the Design group would be too enthusiastic about it.
Dave D.
www.qmsi.ca
RE: GD&T Corrective Action.
Be patient with those that don't see things your way ... you might be wrong?
RE: GD&T Corrective Action.
If they have the training and don't care about using it, then you have a problem that management needs to attend to.
If management is not concerned about either training people or ensuring the proper adherence to standard practice, you are in a no-win situation (unless you can become the boss).
Regards,
RE: GD&T Corrective Action.
a)A minimum of 40 hours training by an expert, or give a one hour class each week by a knowledgeable person using viewgraphs taken from a commercial DRM.
b)Two hours of training for upper management as to why GDT is used by every major corporation in the world.
c)Have your suppliers attend and help pay for the training.
d)Have a knowledgeable drawing checker.
d)Every design must be reviewed around a table by Engineering, QC, and Manufacturing as a minimum. Design reviews can save thousands of dollars. Have the drafter/designer attend.
“A drawing must be read, not interpreted”
Gary
RE: GD&T Corrective Action.
I would like to second your recommendations for the implementations with one possible exception.
Years ago, I took a company sponsored course which used a self teaching manual. It contained the GD and T material and was followed shortly by a question and answer sheet which was covered by a flap. You could go back for a review if you missed the intent. At the end of the text with the book, there was a test given. If I remember correctly anyone not passing the test got to do another review. Somehow that method seemed better structured that to have someone lecture.
One question for you. Did your first exposure GD and T use the term within "True Location"? Jet engines?
RE: GD&T Corrective Action.
At my workplace I think I'd be more likely to get submitted to "Corrective Action" for using GD&T since few people around here would fully understand it (not that I have a complete grasp of it either).
The OP asked about people that "do not use GD&T properly." If by not properly it was meant that the dimensions are actually wrong or require additional expense (i.e. putting tight tolerances where they aren't required), then I don't think that GD&T is the factor. It would be no different than somebody putting 1 inch instead of 1 foot or applying a rectangular coordinate with an unnecessarily tight tolerance.
If that's the case, then I know what my employer would do if I continually made mistakes that significantly increased cost, difficulty, or impeded function... Provide me a correctly dimensioned drawing showing where the door was.
- MechEng2005
RE: GD&T Corrective Action.
RE: GD&T Corrective Action.
I will say I do think there is a place for disciplinary action but it should be pretty much the last step. It should only be used when the staff have been set up for success and don’t achieve it through sloppiness or just refusing to do it etc. (or I suppose in extreme circumstances if they just really suck).
For most Designers/Engineers having the training, being explained its value, being told they have to do it, having their work checked and having access to relevant resources (experts, training material, standards…) plus some of the other things people have suggested should be enough.
The disciplinary action will primarily be for not following the company policy, not for struggling with GD&T.
KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...
RE: GD&T Corrective Action.
RE: GD&T Corrective Action.
KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...
RE: GD&T Corrective Action.
What you said really rings half-truths here because if I hold up a job because the print is screwed up, I'm the one who catches the crap, not the provider of the print. This place is riddled with "we think we know what they meant" and it drives me nuts. We just had a major screw up here based on a bad customer print and the machinist almost got fired for it. When I found out about it I went to the head of Engineering and told him that if anyone gets fired, then everyone in Engineering should get fired (that includes me). I had thrown up my hands for all the resistance I got from even our QC department and I just let anything through that was submitted by our customers. This part was R&D'd and Engineering had it for weeks before it even went out to the floor and no one ever noticed the screw up on the print. Well, the machinist was no exception but unfortunately he was the one that actually had to make the part and he made it to an ambiguous print. When all was said and done, no one got fired and now it's on the customer to fix the print. In the meantime, we have redlined the print and are making the parts the way the customer "meant" for us to make them. I still haven't heard anything about going back to checking the prints before they get out to the floor so it's only a matter of time before this happens again.
I know it's a little different from approving in-house created prints but I would expect that everyone here where I work should be on-board with sending good information out to the floor right from the start instead of discovering an error in-process and holding up the job and taking a huge variance. I guess I'm just expecting too much from a bunch of old dogs that will not approve of learning new tricks.
Powerhound, GDTP T-0419
Production Supervisor
Inventor 2008
Mastercam X2
Smartcam 11.1
SSG, U.S. Army
Taji, Iraq OIF II
RE: GD&T Corrective Action.
that there all nuts, we be better off in firing the designers or some engineers instead.All this was a major blunder from the enginner team with a 140,000 scew up.
The master tool & die maker told us of the mistake only once at the begining of the project... we didn't listen to him.
RE: GD&T Corrective Action.
KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...