Use of AR in Field of view
Use of AR in Field of view
(OP)
If a part in the parts list is shown as AR, does the AR need to be shown next to the item bubble in teh Field of Drawing where a QTY normally would go?
Similar question... if the QTY of an item (bolt in a pattern for example) is obvious, does the QTY need shown next to the item bubble?
Thanks in advance.
Similar question... if the QTY of an item (bolt in a pattern for example) is obvious, does the QTY need shown next to the item bubble?
Thanks in advance.





RE: Use of AR in Field of view
I only put quantity's next to balloons when the same item is being used in different applications.
E.g. if the same screw is being used to hold 2 completely different components to the base component then I'll put a balloon with qty at each place.
This has been discussed before on this forum at length, the ASME stds don't say much on it I think at least some of the below threads are relevant.
thread1103-327176: Balloon quantity standard ??
thread1103-206191: Methods of justifying split ballooning
thread1103-203140: Standard for BOM Ballons>
thread1103-233746: Find Number Ballons - Quantity Required
thread1103-164780: Ballons on Assembly drawings
What is Engineering anyway: FAQ1088-1484: In layman terms, what is "engineering"?
RE: Use of AR in Field of view
Yes, the QTY should be noted next to the item callout. Not all drawings make it obvious, and "obvious" may not be obvious to everyone.
"Know the rules well, so you can break them effectively."
-Dalai Lama XIV
RE: Use of AR in Field of view
I like how everybody assumes that AR means "As Required".
A lot of this depends on what CAD software you are running, and how you have set up your models. We set up adhesives and other chemicals as an empty part models. This causes the material to be added to the parts list. Then I put a note on the drawing tell them to apply "LUBRICATING THREADLOCKER" or whatever. My terminology conforms to whatever is on the bill of materials. I do not use item numbers. Epoxy and other adhesives should be applied as per the manufacturer's instructions. I don't have a convenient way to attach item balloons.
I provide quantities if it makes the drawing clearer. This is well supported in SolidWorks.
Your top priority is to provide clear instructions.
--
JHG
RE: Use of AR in Field of view
Tunalover
RE: Use of AR in Field of view
Frank
RE: Use of AR in Field of view
What I have noticed is that manufacturing process planning has a tendency towards forcing design engineering to process on the drawing. So the thread locker should spec exactly how many milliliters should be applied to each and every screw and what the raw stock lengths of parts should be prior to machining the parts. These same guys tend to fight creating their own manufacturing standards because they don't want to be held responsible for the results, and want flexibility to make on-the-fly interpretations.
Again, for example, I worked with a threaded-in-bushing. The materials have weak interaction with thread locking compound on both sides; an aluminum part and a bronze bushing. So a high strength thread locker was called out. A smaller screw threaded into the bushing and a nominally lower strength locker was called out to retain the greater interacting steel screw. Manufacturing simplified the bill by using low strength on both sides. It made the joints equal and about half the time trying to remove the screw would instead remove the bushing with it.
This ridiculous behavior shows up especially poorly in sheet metal, where it's as if the design engineer should know how the nesting software will lay out the final parts and therefore be able to predict how many square inches of sheet, including lost material that can't be used, will go into each part.
tl;dr Don't use AR on the drawing if you can include notation for a process document that will tell how to tell an amount is sufficient, preferably by result. In other words, use AR if pouring on a gallon of the stuff can be determined as required by the new hire assembler.
RE: Use of AR in Field of view
Tunalover
RE: Use of AR in Field of view
Funny thing, they aren't alone. A guy I worked with was in a garden tool assembly plant that used a high-performance adhesive to hold the rubber handles on. Manufacturing engineering set up a dispenser to do just one drop, which no doubt spread to several square inches in the interference fit and retained the handles quite well. The guy in charge gets a panicked call that the factory suddenly ran out of the adhesive (they had a month's supply just a week before) so what was engineering going to do about that? Turns out the line worker just couldn't see how so little glue would work and liberally coated the handles, leading to a large amount of squeeze-out, getting glue everywhere and ruining the tools, and running through the adhesive at maybe 100 times the designed rate.
Reasonable people can look at the bottle and have some idea what to do. Even so, AR is often an invitation to get a pie in the face delivered with a note "You didn't say -not- to."
RE: Use of AR in Field of view
RE: Use of AR in Field of view
The AR is the quantitiy required, it's not the application instruction as such.
What is Engineering anyway: FAQ1088-1484: In layman terms, what is "engineering"?
RE: Use of AR in Field of view
From what I can read there is no black and white answer as to requiring the AR to be located near the item bubble. I can see reasoning on both sides, which is maybe why there is no definition for it. One of the do whatever your company feels comfortable doing.
We have been including the AR on the applicable bubbles, and all of a sudden checkers decided they don’t want to see it, so are having us remove it. I am of the opinion that it does not matter, and don’t require extra work to remove them if they are there.
RE: Use of AR in Field of view
RE: Use of AR in Field of view