Arguing Rigid vs Non-Rigid for inspection
Arguing Rigid vs Non-Rigid for inspection
(OP)
So I have inherited a few problems with a company I work for. All of the parts that we manufacture are thin sheet metal that can bend with even a 1 lb weight on them, they bend and deform in assembly that is their intent. The problem is that these parts have been manufactured since the 1970s and all of them are dimensioned as if they are rigid parts with no restraint note (even brand new parts come without a restraint note). The only reliable way to inspect these parts is in a restrained condition.
How can I argue to customers/engineers/auditors that the parts need to be restrained to be inspected and not be "in the wrong"? In Y14.5 it does not specify what is a rigid part and what is not. The only way is by the initial drawing to state a restraint note or not. But what if a part is truely non-rigid and no note is present?
How can I argue to customers/engineers/auditors that the parts need to be restrained to be inspected and not be "in the wrong"? In Y14.5 it does not specify what is a rigid part and what is not. The only way is by the initial drawing to state a restraint note or not. But what if a part is truely non-rigid and no note is present?





RE: Arguing Rigid vs Non-Rigid for inspection
On a theoretical/standards compliant basis, there should be a restraint note, probably with locations and values in line with what a factory worker can do to push the part into position. I've seen parts that this was ignored and the loads required to install parts correctly were conveniently measured in the thousands of pounds. Some were installed with come-alongs.
RE: Arguing Rigid vs Non-Rigid for inspection
RE: Arguing Rigid vs Non-Rigid for inspection
So...if your drawing imposes the Y14.5 standard then yes there should technically be a restraint note. Does the drawing mentions Y14.5? Or maybe any internal company standard where you could appeal to restraint? (Using a company document is a common way of "weaseling" out of mentioning restraint on the drawing.)
RE: Arguing Rigid vs Non-Rigid for inspection
RE: Arguing Rigid vs Non-Rigid for inspection
RE: Arguing Rigid vs Non-Rigid for inspection
The standard Y14.5M-1994 explicitly discusses Free State Variation (Section 6.8). Ideally, there should be a note on the drawings stating how the parts should be constrained. If the parts are to be inspected in free state, you should be able to make inspection fixtures.
--
JHG
RE: Arguing Rigid vs Non-Rigid for inspection
ElectroMechanical Product Development
(aka Electronic Packaging)
UMD 1984
UCF 1993
RE: Arguing Rigid vs Non-Rigid for inspection