Assembly Drawing, LEVEL 3 5

[designmr]

I have a question on Level 3 assembly drawings. The company I work for is really not into creating level 3 drawings. So with a contract with a military customer, the customer request level 3 drawings.

The company I work for typically does their assembly drawings as isometric explosion view.

My question, does level 3 drawings prohibit the use of isometric explosion views to depict an acurate assembly type drawing. I do not think so, but not sure if there is a spec that specifies this.

Thanks.

 

[Tunalover]

designmr-

On one of your posts you said: 'An isometric drawing does not tell someone how to build a assembly...'.

Don't fall into the mindset that a drawing is a manufacturing document. It is first and foremost an engineering document and, as such, should describe only the end-item requirements. It should not describe how to get from point A to point B (there are exceptions for special processes not widely practiced in similar manufacturers).

People add reams of notes saying how to do things (I call these instructions) ala "INSERT SCREW, FIND NO 4, INTO HOLE. ENGAGE NUT ON SCREW." Sometimes people do it because they don't know any better. Sometimes they do it because the manufacturing function lacks the people to write work instructions or because Mgmt tells them to do it.

To tell a manufacturer how to get from A to B is essentially telling him how to do his job: it ties his hands, stifles his ingenuity and creativity, and drives up costs. Not to mention that the drawing becomes a living, breathing, heavy creature that is constantly undergoing change and eating up engineering hours!

Whew,...,sorry but I've fought this battle with so many for so long it aint funny!







Tunalover

 

[designmr]

Good points TunaLover, so do you think that Level 3 drawings are ok as just an Isometric exploded view and a parts list? I'm asking because that is the way the company I works for is desplaying their level 3 assembly drawings.

thanks

 

[Tunalover]

designmr-
I wouldn't because an exploded isometric view alone does not depict the end-item. I would use an exploded view only for reference (non-binding, doesn't count). Just place the note REFERENCE in the view caption.
Tuna





Tunalover

 

[ctopher]

I agree with Tunalover.


Chris
SolidWorks 06 5.1/PDMWorks 06
AutoCAD 06
ctopher's home (updated 01-18-07)

 

[KENAT]

That's exactly what I think. Fine for reference, ocasionally I'll include it however do the 'cost benefit analysis". Not just for making it in the first place but for maintaining it at the next rev, this is where our CAD sometimes falls down.

And from my understanding of the standard, certainly not just an exploded iso.

I'm also with tuna on generally keeping instructions off drawings. They should normally be phrased as requirements or in a separate work instruction created by manufacturing.

 

[designmr]

Well we ALL agree, but this company I work for, is ONLY putting out Exploded isometric assembly drawings as Level 3 to our military customers.

On the small assemblies I try and show views and details of assemblied items (hardware and such), though I am told quit spending time on those type of drawings.

Maybe they are trying to buy time since we ran out of time by months on getting the customer a good package like the customer wanted and were expecting. We all know that a level 3 package, should be understandable by anyone else to manufacture, not just the company who initially designed and build it.

Like I said before the owner of this company (who calls the shots on EVERYTHING), has always thought drawings are a waste of time.....

Thanks again everyone.

 

[Tunalover]

designmr-
It goes to show you how many people in this business (especially management) think they know as much (or more) than the designer/ME. I call this "confident cluelessness."

Does the contract state that the product and drawing package will undergo a Physical Configuration Audit (PCA). If so then tell your boss (the owner) that if the auditor is anything more than a rubber stamp he'll end up rethinking his expertise on engineering documentation over six figures worth of drafting hours.





Tunalover

 

[designmr]

Thanks, Tunalover, but this owner always throws out, he has over 50 years experience in the business so NOBODY tell him he is wrong (unless they want to be let go....pretty sad.

 

[Tunalover]

You have my condolences. I'd seek other, less dictatorial employment.


Tunalover

 

[ctopher]

I worked for a company like that once ... once.

Chris
SolidWorks 06 5.1/PDMWorks 06
AutoCAD 06
ctopher's home (updated 01-18-07)

 

[designmr]

Tunalover and Ctopher....I am looking (this place is stuck in the past).....And soon I can say "I worked for a company like that once...once"

 

[KENAT]

designmr, I wouldn't get caught up with

(this place is stuck in the past)...

My place which deals with nanotechnology is arguably stuck in the future. However we encounter similar problems.