×
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

Outsourcing Checking
9

Outsourcing Checking

Outsourcing Checking

(OP)
About 2.5 - 3 years ago a team was started here to improve the quality of documentation and part of the approach was to introduce checking.  

The experienced, good, fast... checker we had was laid off last June and I got the job

This coincided with Manufacturing/operations finally deciding that they wanted everything checked not just some stuff, and so the work load doubled or more.

Since then there has been a massive backlog and/or stuff not getting checked.

We now want to outsource parts manufacture to Asia to save $ but, our drawings for the most part are still too poor for this.  

They now have a plan to 'outsource checking'.  Apparantly because they don't want head count to increase they don't just want to hire someone as a temp or contractor so...

So, does anyone know of any design houses or the like that do checking to ASME standards?

Also pointing out any of the obvious problems etc is fine by me.

Ken

 

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

RE: Outsourcing Checking

Isn't the classical method to simply send crappy drawings out, and fix them in response to manufacturer questions, or receipt of parts that look nothing like what is expected?

 

RE: Outsourcing Checking

This sounds like purchasing wants to outsource checking.
The problem I see is anyone outside your company does not know your products. They can check per ASME standards and certain specs are followed, but that's it. IMO, it will cost more to outsource than to hire someone to check. For outsource: all dwgs will have to be sent to check form-fit-function, not one or two dwgs at a time like purchasing will do.
Also, if your own inspection checks the parts, they will have to get up to speed with standards that the outsourced checker will add.
It will be a huge learning curve for all, possibly creating unseen issues later.

Chris
SolidWorks/PDMWorks 08 3.1
AutoCAD 06/08
ctopher's home (updated Apr 30, 2008)

RE: Outsourcing Checking

I agree with Chris, and would like to add that, if in that situation, I would choose a contractor with suitable experience, and keep the work in house, if possible, until you were comfortable with the results.  The problem with having it done off-site is trusting that it is indeed being done to the standards to the degree you require and as your company interprets them.  If you have a comprehensive DRM, on-site checking may not be necessary, but is still desirable.  As you are aware, the standards allow for much that isn't necessarily good practice ("TYP" for example "should not be used", but is not forbidden outright), and your interpretations may vary.

Believe it if you need it or leave it if you dare. - Robert Hunter
 

RE: Outsourcing Checking

(OP)
Mint, no the classical method here is produce a crappy drawing.  Have conversations with the machine shop on the prototype so that they get made right but not incorporate changes to the drawing, these changes often are remembered by the machine shop so the first few batches (sometimes for years) come in OK.  At some point staff at the machine shop change, or we change vendor...

Parts come in that don't work, original designer is usually long gone no one knows what they should be and we don't have any good parts in stock to match to...

Ctopher, yes it is purchasing/operations/manufacturing driving this.  In part because our CEO said we will outsource machining abroad rather than locally.  (We don't have our own machining, only assy.)  Engineering, at least on one side of the business, resent having their drawings checked although they've been playing nicer lately.

Agree with the problems you list/increased cost etc.

We barely do inspection so that wont be an issuewinky smile

 

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

RE: Outsourcing Checking

(OP)
ewh, we have a DRM but it's not as comprehensive as it would need to be to support this.

I agree it's a dumb idea, my boss thinks it's a dumb idea, but his boss suggested it at a senior staff meeting so we're probably going to try and make it work.

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

RE: Outsourcing Checking

2
In my experience our overseas vendor (China) quotes EVERYTHING that comes across their desk. They only ask questions if the tolerance is tighter than +/-.005" and then they ask if it can be changed to +/-.020". Otherwise the GD&T, if the print has any, is completely ignored and whatever we get, we get. We rejected several thousand dollars worth of product about 6 months ago and when we asked how they got the profile tolerance so screwed up, they responded saying they didn't know what that symbol meant. Obviously I'm only talking about the one vendor that we use so it could be atypical...or not.

Powerhound, GDTP T-0419
Production Supervisor
Inventor 2008
Mastercam X2
Smartcam 11.1
SSG, U.S. Army
Taji, Iraq OIF II

RE: Outsourcing Checking

(OP)
Powerhound, I can imagine that happening.  

A lot of our stuff is real precise, tighter than +-.005 due to function.

A lot of it is tight due to the people creating the drawings not understanding tolerance.

It sounds like it will be a contract with a supplier that we will then send most of our production machining to, not just the stuff from our site but from all our manufacturing sites.

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

RE: Outsourcing Checking

"Otherwise the GD&T, if the print has any, is completely ignored and whatever we get, we get."  and "...they responded saying they didn't know what that symbol meant"

Hunh.  Sounds like our experience with China also.

RE: Outsourcing Checking

Powerhound,
That has also been my experience.
I once had a part that was measured in microns. It was the size of a pin head. The dwg scale was 100/1. The guy in purchasing changed the tolerance to +/-.010 (the typ tol for someone that doesn't know what a tol is) without talking to engineering. This meant the part couldn't exist on the small side. But, it didn't matter, whatever to save $$ to them.
The part was sent to the China plant. 100% rejection on 50,000 parts.
The dwg was changed by purchasing (red-marked), appvd my prod and quality. Guess who got reamed?! Me! My name was on it. So, I refused to have my name on anything that I knew was outsourced (non-military).
It also depends on ITAR/Export laws who you send the dwg to.

Chris
SolidWorks/PDMWorks 08 3.1
AutoCAD 06/08
ctopher's home (updated Apr 30, 2008)

RE: Outsourcing Checking

(OP)
Gee, if only I could have anticipated some of these issueswinky smile.

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

RE: Outsourcing Checking

Kenat, sometimes I think you post questions just to share your pain with the rest of us to spread it around. :)  Man, I cannot imagine outsourcing checking, especially to a company in a region that is nortorously lacking in discipine in standards.  If outsourcing is a must, I would outsource to the guy you guys laid off (seriously).

Matt Lorono
CAD Engineer/ECN Analyst
Silicon Valley, CA
Lorono's SolidWorks Resources
Co-moderator of Solidworks Yahoo! Group
and Mechnical.Engineering Yahoo! Group

RE: Outsourcing Checking

(OP)
Ok, my post may have been a little unclear.  It's the machining that is being outsourced to abroad.

The checking needs to be done before we can do this.

We only have one half time half qualified checker (me).  We aren't allowed a direct hire or anything that looks like a direct hire, partially for financial reasons mainly for political reasons.  So we are looking to outsource the checking, but not as far as I know to China!  

I just found out that if we can find someone relatively local then it may turn out to be more like hiring a contractor, just by a different name!  The important thing is they aren't directly employed by us or through a job shop, they must be their own company effectively.

We may have someone in the works but I still have concerns.

As to sharing my pain, you may have a point!

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

RE: Outsourcing Checking

Kenat,

Don't send your machining abroad. Send it to me!
winky smile

The machine shop I work for just installed a huge horizontal mill pallet pool with 42 pallets, and a 5-axis vertical with 32 pallets. We feel that we'll be able to compete with China because we're eliminating setup time and doing most of the machining unmanned. We have excellent quality and we'll understand your drawings (for example, I will be taking the GDTP-S exam next month).

My advice to your company is to find a good shop that's taking similar steps and is located close to you. Give them lots of work, treat them right, and they will deliver the pricing and quality that you need.


Sincerely,
Josh Church
Vanderhorst Brothers, Inc.

RE: Outsourcing Checking

(OP)
Sadly not my decision on whether to outsource to china.  Letting a mere engineer have a say in such matters is madness.

The CEO has decided it's happening, who am I to argue.

I haven't yet found anyone who's convinced it's a good idea, it's a bit like the emperors new clothes.

Though one place in asia had claimed they can save us over $1,000,000 a year.

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

RE: Outsourcing Checking

I have seen products go up in price after being outsourced to anywhere. The guys in charge don't see the whole package until it's too late.

Chris
SolidWorks/PDMWorks 08 3.1
AutoCAD 06/08
ctopher's home (updated Apr 30, 2008)

RE: Outsourcing Checking

Quote (KENAT):

Though one place in asia had claimed they can save us over $1,000,000 a year.

I think they meant 1,000,000 yuan (~$10,000 USD)  bigglasses

KENAT-

I don't think that our illustrious CEO realizes exactly what he's getting, outsourcing to China. I know--I'm in the same building as him.

V

RE: Outsourcing Checking

IMO, for mass produced items that are injection molded, it makes sense, as long as you have a GREAT source to work with. The problem comes in communication.  Someone WILL have to flight out their frequently in order to keep track of things (mnthly).  China can do the work for a lot cheaper.  If you find the right company and establish a good relationship with them, you can make it work; as long as you keep on top of things.  Don't work with any vendor without personally inspecting the facilities.  

YOu may even want to make sure there offices are at the same location as the equipment.  It is far too easy to close an office, change a name and move to the building next door; all while still using the same shop floor in some other town.

There's plenty of not-so-good companies, but there are also good ones.  Do the research and be prepared to send someone how their frequently.  And don't use a U.S. broker as a middle man!  That will be death!

Matt Lorono
CAD Engineer/ECN Analyst
Silicon Valley, CA
Lorono's SolidWorks Resources
Co-moderator of Solidworks Yahoo! Group
and Mechnical.Engineering Yahoo! Group

RE: Outsourcing Checking

(OP)
VC66, I'm not sure I'm going to say much more about that, my manager sometimes frequents this forum!

fcsuper & others, I have no involvement or say in who gets picked etc.

However, I suspect I'll somehow share the blame if our drawings are too bad to allow it to happen.

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

RE: Outsourcing Checking

KENAT-

Nuff Said. Anyway, In regards to your question about outsourcing the checking of drawings. I've never seen it done. It seems too difficult to explain the functionality of everything in a particular assembly to someone outside the company. Especially if you're not willing to share proprietary info with them. You're wasting just as much time of an engineer's salary to explain to the  "outsourced checker" what needs to be for functionality's sake. You could just as easily hire someone. Should've never laid off the experienced checker. Things like that seem to always come around and bite.

I'll ask around here about it, but good luck either way.

V

RE: Outsourcing Checking

KENAT, What kinds of products are you guys involved in?

---SolidWorks 2008 SP3.0---

RE: Outsourcing Checking

(OP)
Atomic Force Microscopes.

Similar to stylus profilers but at a much smaller scale, measuring nanometer size features.

We produce them both for nanotechnology research type fields and for semiconductor.   

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

RE: Outsourcing Checking

(OP)
Hey Chris, I must have missed something, was the cass reference related to weight loss or relationship issues?  Ahh just looked in Pats Pub, I take it you're referring to the cactus incident, ouch.

baseball, if saner heads prevail I'll mention your shop.  Part of my bosses job when he first got her was to find alternative suppliers but because it wasn't his idea and for various other reasons the operations VP & others stopped it from going anywhere.  I notice next intent were one of your clients, I think they're someone we looked at.

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

RE: Outsourcing Checking

Yes, the cactus. ;)

Chris
SolidWorks/PDMWorks 08 3.1
AutoCAD 06/08
ctopher's home (updated Apr 30, 2008)

RE: Outsourcing Checking

2
KENAT I am not sure what you are trying to achieve here.

Yes you can contract out checking, you can contract out everything from walking your dog (if you have one) to building the house you live in, or given the time and drive you can do it yourself, businesses make decisions on what to do in house or outsource for a variety of reasons, however I am sure you are aware of that.

Any country that is cheaper than the country you live in gets bad press, that seems the same the whole world over. To assume that a product that is produced for less money in China than in the USA or Europe for example is bound to be inferior is totally wrong. It is highly likely that the car you drive, the electrical products in your house, your mobile phone, the computer you are sitting at, the bath you wash in and just about everything else are partly made in China and they all seem to work fine for me. There are huge rewards to be gained from outsourcing, especially to countries with a lower cost of living/ cheaper work force, but there are also risks, but again I am sure you are aware of that.

Here is the bit I don't understand, if you are as your handle says, "Probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet" then surely you should be getting your head down? You state that you are the only checker in the company but they are falling behind. Judging by your profile you spend a lot of time on here, in this thread alone you have made 11 posts so far and this is on a topic that in your own words "I have no involvement or say in who gets picked". What is the point?

You then go on to bad mouth the management on a public forum that you know they read, I am sure that goes down well!

To turn this around, if you spent less time concerning yourself with things out of your control and more time working on things you do have control over would that not help the situation? You might even find the company see what an impact you are having and hire more local staff rather than outsourcing, possibly overseas.

Like I said I am not sure what you are trying to achieve?
 

RE: Outsourcing Checking

ajack,

  Keep in mind that those of us that posted in regards to China spoke from personal experience, not from stereotypical notions of which we have no experience. I also added at the end of my post that it was only our vendor of which I was speaking, not the whole country, or countries with lower labor rates in general.
   

Powerhound, GDTP T-0419
Production Supervisor
Inventor 2008
Mastercam X2
Smartcam 11.1
SSG, U.S. Army
Taji, Iraq OIF II

RE: Outsourcing Checking

Wow, KENAT. You're brave.

Godspeed.

V

RE: Outsourcing Checking

Ajack1-

KENAT did not bad mouth anyone in his OP. He simply asked for advice as to whether outsourcing checking was a viable possibility. I believe some misunderstood the question, and began telling their experiences of vendors in China (shouldn't be a problem, as it still is relevant.) Once understood, all other posts were about the outsourcing of checking.

I don't believe criticizing him is any help. You do not work at the company that we do (yes I work at the same place), therefore, you don't know anything about it. I completely understand where KENAT is coming from, and I don't believe you post was, at all, helpful.

Quote (ajack1):

Like I said I am not sure what you are trying to achieve?

He's trying to achieve a guided answer from other professionals in the engineering field, to a question of which he doesn't have any experience. Seems like a good idea to me.

Back to the question. I asked around here, KENAT, and one guy said that it had been done at his last company with disastrous results. Same reasons as most pointed out above.

V

RE: Outsourcing Checking

Hmmmmm...who gave ajack1 the star for his valuable and helpful post? :S

Powerhound, GDTP T-0419
Production Supervisor
Inventor 2008
Mastercam X2
Smartcam 11.1
SSG, U.S. Army
Taji, Iraq OIF II

RE: Outsourcing Checking

Powerhound we currently outsource work to China and it has allowed us to win contracts we would not have otherwise been able too, so I to am speaking from experience. If you simply google China and checking I am fairly sure this would lead to disastrous results, however with time and effort it can be very beneficial to both parties, as to who gave me a star I have no idea.

Vc66 you are correct I do not work with you or KENAT, I was not aware this was
the criteria to be able to post on this topic. I do however have over 34 years of experience in engineering and I also own a company that outsourses work to China (but not checking) so I felt my experience might be useful, the fact that you didn't find it so is your opinion to which to are perfectly entitled.

I wasn't aware I criticised KENAT and I do not believed I ever said he bad mouthed anyone in his original post, however I do believe he did in later ones.

As with most posts on this forum, except where you can give a definitive answer to a question, we all post our opinions, some you will agree with some you will not.
 

RE: Outsourcing Checking

ajack1,
 Nobody here is disagreeing with you about your success doing business abroad, what they are disagreeing on is your chastisement of KENAT where none was due.

You said:
"...the fact that you didn't find it so is your opinion to which to are perfectly entitled."

The fact that I have had bad experiences with outsourcing to China is not an opinion, it's a fact. Are your positive experiences with China your opinion or are they a fact? There's no question that outsourcing is beneficial when the conditions are favorable. Either you did your homework and got the wrinkles ironed out beforehand or the company you work with is just plain good...or both.

You said:
"...I do however have over 34 years of experience in engineering and I also own a company that outsourses work to China (but not checking) so I felt my experience might be useful,..."

Can you help me out and point out which part of your post you thought to be useful?

Powerhound, GDTP T-0419
Production Supervisor
Inventor 2008
Mastercam X2
Smartcam 11.1
SSG, U.S. Army
Taji, Iraq OIF II

RE: Outsourcing Checking

Powerhound you said

"The fact that I have had bad experiences with outsourcing to China is not an opinion, it's a fact. Are your positive experiences with China your opinion or are they a fact? There's no question that outsourcing is beneficial when the conditions are favourable. Either you did your homework and got the wrinkles ironed out beforehand or the company you work with is just plain good...or both."

They are fact; we took on a project that involved outsourcing to be able to get it within budget. Yes I did my homework and tried to get all the wrinkles ironed, to not do so would be crass stupidity IMO, however I fully appreciate that as with most things this still leaves an element of luck, all you can ever do is cut this down to a minimum. It is not quick or easy; I spent many hours and a lot of money getting things in place. To just think you can google China and checking (for example) and throw all your problems at them will not happen, however given the time and drive it can work and is the only way to win certain contracts, if you are not prepared to do it someone else will.

As to the advice I thought might be useful, I guess that is as a company owner. Looking at the situation KENAT describes, I would see him as part of the problem, not all but part, as checking is holding up workflow. If I then saw the numbers of posts he has put on here (and I am possibly incorrectly in assuming) during work time I would take a very dim view of that as in his own words "I have no involvement or say in who gets picked". So again I ask what can be achieved other than getting even more behind with his work?

You seem to have a military background looking at your handle, so let me ask you this. If a soldier was given a task to do and it turned out they didn't do it because they had been discussing an issue with others that they had no control or involvement in what would be the outcome?
 

RE: Outsourcing Checking

Guys,

It seems like KENAT is saying that he has no control over where the machining goes (since this is not the area he works in). The solution for checking, on the other hand, might depend on his input. So I don't think he's part of the problem at his company; I think he's trying to be part of the solution by offering the best input he can for a permanent checking system, and he thought that perhaps other engineers on this board had seen checking outsourced before.

Further, it seems to me that the legitimacy of the time KENAT spends on this board is between him and his boss. I know that I personally use my break time and personal time to visit the board. I imagine that many of the others here do the same thing, but some might have permission to use it on company time. It's pointless for us to start questioning each other's use of time; it gets us nowhere.

The original post asked if anyone knew of a company that provided checking services. There were plenty of side notes given regarding checking, outsourcing, offshoring, layoffs, etc., but the bottom line is that none of the responders knew of such a company. Isn't the thread effectively over?

Sincerely,
Josh Church
Vanderhorst Brothers, Inc.

RE: Outsourcing Checking

It sounds to me like ajack was having a bad day, and KENAT was an easy target.

First, he seems to claim relative knowledge of the problem, but not specific "...(but not checking)", then becomes himself defensive over a defense of the OP ("...I wasn't aware I criticised KENAT") and decides, hey, that's a good idea ("...I would see him as part of the problem").  Come on, that seems like criticism to me.  It is also way too much ado about nothing.  He does not work for you and you really don't really know his situation.

Many of us spend work time on this forum, some like myself with supervisor knowledge.  Actually, anymore, all of us are probably being watched.  I feel that I am actually more productive when I have the ability to take small breaks away from the task at hand, especially when I use that time constructively (such as participating in these fora).
KENAT is a valuable member of this site.  Many times he has come up with thoughtful solutions to some tricky situations, and I value his presence here as I am sure others do.

Sorry about the segue, carry on...
 

Believe it if you need it or leave it if you dare. - Robert Hunter
 

RE: Outsourcing Checking

(OP)
Wow, 2 days away and look at all the posts.

ajack, you actually make some salient points in your post(s) though a bit hard to take in parts.

In principle I can see the business case in farming out work to a lower cost of work country.  For many things this apparently works fine/well.  Most of my concern is rooted in the fact that we have relatively low production rates (from single figure to mid double figures per month, at least at my site) and have a great range of parts, many of them fairly complex/high precision.  We have trouble sending some of this stuff to new sources in the same state, I believe, perhaps unfairly, that this will be amplified by sending it to Asia with the language issue, distance, time difference and possibly different drawing standards/units of measure etc.

The checking is not getting farmed out to China, as far as I know.  However, we are looking at farming out checking and I was trying to get some input on if anyone has done this, any issues to think about and perhaps even some references.  I wasn't really looking for input on the outsourcing of machining issue though I am guilty of getting side tracked by it.

I have no input in the machining outsourcing issue.  I have some say in who does the checking.

As to time spent on Eng-Tips, you know what sometimes I probably do spend more time here than may be appropriate, I have before reigned myself in and maybe it's time to do so again.  

Then again, when I started this thread it was the morning after staying till 11:30 the night before trying to get something (not checking) done to support a colleague who was out Friday.  Based on hours I'd done well over my 40 that week by the time I put the OP, even allowing for Eng-Tips time which my direct Boss has said he's OK with.  In fact he told me to spend some time looking into the contract checking issue and this post was part of my effort on that.

As to bad mouthing management/letting my identity be something of an open secret, you're not wrong, it's not exactly my smartest move.  I sometimes get carried away, so far I've gotten away with it but that may not last and is something I'm working on.

Regarding being part of the problem, well if you're not part of the solution you're part of the problem right?  As I haven't yet worked out a complete solution to having all our drawings meet a minimum level of quality that allows them to be worked to by any competent machine shop to produce good product then yes, I suppose I'm part of the problem.  

As to holding things up, according to our current procedure drawings can be excused check at the discretion of the relevant Engineering Director (I've even suggested this for specific packs before now).  However, Operations are tired of getting poor drawings which cause them problems and so are refusing to accept drawings that aren't checked.  I won't go into more detail as berating management etc. may not be a particularly smart move as you pointed out, however it's basically a fight between engineering and operations with me caught in the middle.

Out of interest Ajack, on the side topic of outsourcing machining.  Was one of the steps you took to "get all the wrinkles ironed" perhaps ensuring that the product documentation you were sending them to manufacture to was complete, accurate, legible etc?

As to the other, thanks seems that at least some of you get where I'm coming from though hearing the opposing view point isn't necessarily a bad thing.

Well with the length of this post it's adding fuel to the 'too much time on Eng-Tips' theory so I best be off.
 

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

RE: Outsourcing Checking

Hello.  A few comments that may help.

Outsourcing checking of drawings can be done, I suggest search for engineering companies that have automotive or aerospace experience.  They will have staff familiar with all manner of drawings and how to interpret GD&T.  It does not require knowledge of the parts' function anymore than machining the part does.  Yes, I worked for such a company, and we occasionally took on such jobs, mostly for a select few automotive tier 1 suppliers.  In our case, it involved a bit more than just checking, but certainly checking of their existing drawings was about 50 - 60% of the work.

Please note that outsourcing of this work will seem expensive when your boss sees a cash cost.  On the positive side, with a good team this sort of work can be done very quickly as it's essentially proofreading.

In my experience, outsourcing low to mid volume complicated machined parts to China can not be successful for the amount of effort and time your company is willing to put into it.  Very fine details, surface finishes, plating thicknesses, deburring in odd but critical locations: this type of specialized attention to detail will not be done no matter how well documented.  Of course there are exceptions, but I stress "for the amount of effort and time your company is willing to put into it".

Another factor working against successful outsourcing to China of low to mid volume complicated machined parts is personnels' job longevity and training.  As explained to me, professional staff move about every 2 years, it's about the only way to advance in a company.  Therefore, any specialized knowledge and training they may have gained on your parts will leave within two years maximum.  Then, of course, your company has to deal with non-conforming product, severity depending on when it is discovered and time to correct...

RE: Outsourcing Checking

(OP)
Thanks pierdesign.

We've found a firm that we're looking at that has had contracts with aerospace/defense/automotive so have some pedigree in areas working to ASME standards.

When you did it did they basically just send you the packs and you got on & did it or did you work at their site, or did you have a kick off meeting and occasional follow ups as required or some other way?

If they were going to come and be in the office (at least some of the time) I wouldn't be too concerned but it seems they'll be doing it remotely from the Illinois if I recall correctly.  I have a hard enough time getting all the information I need a lot of the time and am concerned we will have trouble getting them the kind of data packs they'd need.

We'd be looking for them to check not only completeness and standards compliance but also tolerance, at least basic interfaces.  We may also want some manufacturability review.  

To do this thoroughly I find I often need some understanding of the function, especially If I don't have all the other data such as dimensions/tolerance info of off the shelf parts etc.

Thanks, Ken (on lunchwinky smile)

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

RE: Outsourcing Checking

To do a thorough job and to your company standards it needs to be done in-house. Unless that's the problem and I'm not taking about costs$. I'm not trying to offend anyone but as the old saying goes "if you want it done right then you need to do it yourself". Maybe I stand alone on this.

Brent

---SolidWorks 2008 SP3.0---

RE: Outsourcing Checking

I also believe that this task is best left to those who know the functional intent.  A drawing can be completely compliant to the standards and still not give you what you need, if you don't have the appropriate dimension scheme specified.  This is what you can expect by outsourcing.  To bring someone up to speed out of the loop is costly as well.  Therefore, I would do everything in my power to block this directive.  Checking is to be a preventive measure put in place to capture errors early in the design process before they get down stream and cost ten times more for each step in the process that the error slipped by.  Preventive actions rarely have an actual dollar value associated to them, but corrective actions do and you will be dealing with a lot of them if your organization chooses the over seas and outsourcing route.  Look up the "Rule of Tens" as it applies to product development.  To me the only people who should be checking are people who truly know what the functional intent is, have validated the dimension scheme thru tolerance analysis and can spell GD&T correctly.  Perhaps the engineers themselves could actually do this before signing off on a spec instead of passing off there responsibility.  Now there is a novel idea, can't believe someone hadn't thought of it before.

Once you have specifications that will indeed produce what is needed then perhaps if justified you can send it over seas.  This however would be my last resort always.  I for one believe that should we here in the western part of the world stop employing the build-test-fix process and get on board with actual use of the many successful product development practices and dimensional management tools correctly and effectively we then wouldn't have to even be considering the alternatives.  We could actually build products right the first time, instead of trying to recoup our costs later because of our missed opportunities resulting in poor specs not to mention the scrap, rework and re-tooling.  Maybe then the dollar in my pocket and yours could be worth something again.

This is my opinion and it comes from experience, do what you will but if just one of you doesn't give in and keeps the work here, than I believe I have accomplished at least something.

RE: Outsourcing Checking

(OP)
BARM/Xplicator, I tend to agree with most of what you say, or at least sympathize.

I did have one chuckle though Xplicator

Quote:

To me the only people who should be checking are people who truly know what the functional intent is, have validated the dimension scheme thru tolerance analysis and can spell GD&T correctly.  Perhaps the engineers themselves could actually do this before signing off on a spec instead of passing off there responsibility.

In fact I'm still laughing.  The engineers here, for the most part, seem to think that minor concerns like having good product documentation that addresses tolerances etc, isn't their job/is below them/wasn't covered in their degree... so they shouldn't concern themselves with it.

That and the fact that I barely meet some of the above requirements.

Oh well, hopefully tomorrow I'll actually get to some checking having spent most of today doing CAD modeling that no one else here is apparently capable of.  

(Oops, is the above me being indiscrete again.)
 

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

RE: Outsourcing Checking

Kenat,

I company I used to work for (Belcan), has done some outsourced checking, so you could check with them.  I worked at the office in Florida, so I can't speak for the other offices, but they had good checkers.

-Dave
Everything should be designed as simple as possible, but not simpler.

RE: Outsourcing Checking

Kenat,
You're welcome, my sarcasm regarding my fellow engineers for whatever reason is reality in a lot of situations.  Some, if not most, seem to think that once they hand off the requirements there responsibility is done.  Its probably because they don't really understand variation analysis and GD&T thus revealing that they aren't as smart as they think they are.  The only thing that concerns them is schedule; not if the spec defines and communicates what is needed so they just have a sign-off party and move on, how sad! This is a direct  resultant of a poor product development process.  

I could go on, but feel I am getting off the OP.  If for what ever reason you are forced to outsource. I would highly recommend combining the checking with performing tolerance analysis studies as well, this way the outsource would have to understand the function and ensure that the specs meet the requirements.  It will cost more but definitely be worth it in the end.  Otherwise as I said earlier you will more than likely get compliant prints that compromise the integrity of the product.

As always hope this helps.

RE: Outsourcing Checking

(OP)
Gunman, thanks, I'll look into them.

Xplicator, for us tolerance check usually forms a major part of the checking process, we rarely just check for completeness/format/standards compliance.

This is part of the reason it's so time consuming, and hence I have a backlog.

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

RE: Outsourcing Checking

Good for you, seriously.  If thats the case then I would search for sources who provide tolerance analysis as a primary service and ensuring the spec dimension schemes match the results including ASME standard compliance as a sub-deliverable.

RE: Outsourcing Checking

KENAT,

Have you approached your company about hiring a recent grad?
The grad doesn't need to be a graduate engineer. They will work at the lower end of the pay scale, learn from you, provide backup to you etc.
Don't forget how you got your start in the working world. Perhaps it's time to give someone the same opportunity you were given.

My 2 cents,
Brent

---SolidWorks 2008 SP3.0---

RE: Outsourcing Checking

(OP)
BARM, a graduate is not appropriate for the checking role.  Qualifications for checker were discussed in an earlier thread of mine thread1103-193286: Drawing Checker/Approver Qualifications.  In fact I am barely qualified for the position.

I remember how I got my start and it wasn't full time checking.  I did in fact do a little checking on ECO incorporation but it was laughable as I had no idea what I was looking at and was all but a waste of time.

I have however suggested getting new grad or even high school grad enrolled part time in our local community college studying design/drafting or similar to train up as drafter/designer but it is unlikely to go anywhere.  We are not really hiring and apparantly for cheap labor our preference is foreign interns who are here for 6 months or a year at a time.

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

RE: Outsourcing Checking

Hello.  Sorry for late response.

"... or did you have a kick off meeting and occasional follow ups as required ...  Yes, this way.

"We'd be looking for them to check not only completeness and standards compliance but also tolerance, at least basic interfaces.  We may also want some manufacturability review."  Yes, this is what we did.  It was actually rather simple and we had some fun at it too tearing into someone else's design.

"To do this thoroughly I find I often need some understanding of the function, especially If I don't have all the other data such as dimensions/tolerance info of off the shelf parts etc."  You say this because it's your or partially your own design and are intimately aware of failure modes.  These should have been caught in design; a checker can interpret whether a part or component interferes based on data provided regardless of function or failure mode.  Someone detached from the design usually will be more thorough.  However, if you cannot provide full specifications of the parts' assembly components, no one can adequately do the job you require.

However, complete data packs is an oxymoron.  If you know data is missing identify it and ask your outsource checker+ to design it in and proceed accordingly.  At least there will be completeness, hopefully correct or adequate.


We did about 80-90% of the work at our office with occasional site visits.  Memory isn't exact, but the project entailed interpreting unto reverse modeling legacy CAD models, their legacy drawings including GD&T, redoing or improving the drawings and design of automation assembly fixtures picking up on some of the feature datums.

A drawing checker interpreting GD&T does not require knowledge of part function anymore than a machinist does.  He is proofreading the physical QC checking of the fabricated part.  Our team lead came from aerospace where he had been a machinist, a CMM programmer, a CAD designer; in other words he could read these sorts of drawings like a newspaper article, spot inaccuracies and recommend better dimensioning and control schemes.  Which we did, as part of the project, concurrently designing the automation assembly fixtures.

RE: Outsourcing Checking

(OP)
pierdesign,

The quality/completeness of some of the packs being proposed to go to this out source checking is very low. So

Quote:

However, if you cannot provide full specifications of the parts' assembly components, no one can adequately do the job you require.
will almost certainly be an issue.
Thanks for the feedback though.  

I can see how a more or less complete pack could be sent out for review, in fact this sort of gets done on some military jobs.

However, when the pack is far from complete e.g. little or no assembly drawings or formal assy documentation, incomplete part drawings, lack of full definition for many off the shelf components etc. I'm not sure I can see how it will work.

This is where being in the office, being able to talk to people face to face, look at hardware, imply stuff from other designs etc. helps fill in the gaps.

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

RE: Outsourcing Checking

(OP)
Well the latest, some of you pre-empted our management.  Apparantly checking is looking at being outsourced to India after all.  Should be interesting...

I find it particulary amusing/interesting that the senior management of a company hadn't heard of checking 3 years ago is now so expert in it and its implications/requirements etc that they have forseen all potential pitfalls of out sourcing it abroad and are going full steam ahead by the sounds of it! winky smile

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

RE: Outsourcing Checking

Sounds like Management, finance, purchasing and marketing had a meeting...without engineering, again.

Chris
SolidWorks/PDMWorks 08 3.1
AutoCAD 06/08
ctopher's home (updated Apr 30, 2008)

RE: Outsourcing Checking

KENAT,

You had better get your blood pressure script updated!

Believe it if you need it or leave it if you dare. - Robert Hunter
 

RE: Outsourcing Checking

India??? Oh Boy!
I feel sorry for you and your Boss, KENAT.
 This is not exactly software or PC design your out sourcing.  It will be interesting to hear what the foreign product looks like.

By the way, regarding pierdesign's comment above that a checker doesn't require knowledge of a part function to interpret GD&T. Without that knowledge, the GD&T and dimensioning method could be totally misapplied and how would one know?
 A checker is nothing like a machinist. He/she needs to be a designer first---then a checker.

A GOOD checker has 2 initial questions regarding any part drawing they are asked to review:
What does it do?
What does it mate to?

  

RE: Outsourcing Checking

(OP)
That can't be a good sign, when the guy that got let go feels sorry for the guy that didn't!

Now sounds like the India checking isn't quite a fait accompli but we'll see.

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

RE: Outsourcing Checking

CheckerRon,

Quote:

A checker is nothing like a machinist. He/she needs to be a designer first---then a checker

   I strongly agree.  GD&T conformance is a minor detail compared to dimension errors, bad tolerances and general disfunctionality.  

   There is one other detail here which has not been mentioned yet.  If your drawings are checked in house by an experienced designer, your drafters, designers and managers get direct feedback on the quality of the work, and on their conformance to in-house standards.  You don't need to wait until three or five years after you hired someone to find out that they have not the faintest idea of how to do their job.

   How are these people in India going to sign off the drawings?  
                              JHG

RE: Outsourcing Checking

(OP)
One of the things I like about checking is the feedback loop, you learn to make better drawings by having yours corrected and having to make corrections.  We already miss part of this because a lot of the time redlines get incorporated by junior staff or interns, rather than the original engineer.  As such some of the engineers drawings aren't getting much better.

Also like you say if managers want to know how people are complying with standards/quality requirements then you have some information.

As to how people in India or any out source sign off drawings.  Our initial thoughts/plans were that the drawings would get redlined, the redlines would get incorporated in house and at some point someone familiar with the product would check to see no new problems got introduced.  There first few packs would be scrutinized closely and if they looked good they might be asked to incorporate redlines on later packs.

Now it sounds like the whole shooting match might get sent out from the start, and I'm not confident what they will do will get adequate review.

I don't see any way it's going to be easy or perhaps good, right now I'm just trying to minimize the pain.

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

RE: Outsourcing Checking

Quote:

...a lot of the time redlines get incorporated by junior staff or interns, rather than the original engineer.

KENAT,

   If I were one of your designers, this would piss me off.  Aside from the fact that the feedback probably is good for me, there is design intent.  Perhaps the checker did not understand it.  What are the chances of a drafter or intern understanding or even caring about what I was doing?

   The nature of mechanical design is that every part and every requirement can connect to everything else.  This is especially true when you try to reduce the size, the weight, and the fabrication and assembly costs (DFMA?).  Too many people who look over our shoulders are narrowly focussed.  

                        JHG

RE: Outsourcing Checking

(OP)
drawoh, the actual designer/Engineer is (meant) to be given a chance to see that any changes made are OK and my preference is that they make them.  

However, most of them don't value the check feed back and see incorporating redlines as wasted time/beneath them so are happy for someone else to do it - I think some don't even look at the changes made.  I don't think they're ever forced to have an intern do it, usually they're glad to let them do it.

If an error gets introduced they're also sometimes only too happy to blame the checker - just ask CheckerRon!

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

RE: Outsourcing Checking

I've just got myself in a similar position.  I'm a checker for processing on aircraft parts a new company which is trying to establish a manufacturing house in Romania.  The talent pool is not there yet but it will be.  They have been trying to get the place up and running for approx 3 years.  It is working but sometimes they fall and skin their knees and we have to pick them up.  If your management is serious and they have the patience it will become a good deal.  Remember we are at 3 years now.

But if it is like my last company and all they hire are kids good luck!  You will need 2 full time checkers and have to check the simple stuff 2 - 4 times and more on the more complicated stuff.

One thing you have to do is make sure you update all the drawings that you send to the shop,  Production time is pretty valuable.  You don't want the same mistakes 2 years from now.
 

RE: Outsourcing Checking

(OP)
"One thing you have to do is make sure you update all the drawings that you send to the shop"

That's one of the major factors that kicked this whole thing off.  Legacy drawings, and frankly a lot (most) of the newer stuff that bypasses me/previous encumbant is not of a good enough quality to allow outsourcing like this.

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

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