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.

 

[designmr]

CheckerRon, I reading thru a MIL-DTL-31000C, right now....Amazing the contract people are not even sure what a Level 3 drawing should actually look like...Seem they are going to try and push a explode isometric assy drawing on them......I don't think that is going to work. After a year (I have been with this company only 5 month) of people working on this program, their spending these last couple months trying to put a level 3 drawing package together....what a mess.

Thanks

 

[ctopher]

I suggest getting a copy of the contract for your files and read through it. Don't rely on purchasing, contracts or sales to do engineering work.

Chris
Systems Analyst, I.S.
SolidWorks 06 4.1/PDMWorks 06
AutoCAD 06
ctopher's home (updated 10-27-06)

 

[KENAT]

As a minimum I would expect that the level 3 would require all relevant ASME/ANSI drawing standards (probably by calling up Y14.100) to be followed.

By my understanding of the section of 14.24 I put a few posts ago, an exploded iso assy view alone would not be adequate.

You may be lucky (if that's the right term). Some branches of the service are apparently stricter than others from what a colleague told me, with Navy being the strictest. My colleague has worked on contracts where the drawings were rejected and the program delayed accordingly.

I'd read that contract carefully and ask the office giving the contract for clarification if necessary, I doubt if trying to force them to take something will work out for you (by which I mean your company not you personally).

Ctopher - thanks I'd forgotten that 3rd reason.

 

[swertel]

Have you been able to find a copy of DOD-D-1000? I am lucky to have made a personal hard copy long ago, but have yet to be able to find it online anywhere.

Assist doesn't have it. IHS doesn't have it. GlobalSpec doesn't have it.

--Scott

http://wertel.eng.pro

 

[designmr]

Swertel...thanks, yes I found a DOD-D-1000B, here at work...plus download Mil-DTL-31000C off the internet...

thanks

 

[CheckerRon]

To DESIGNMR: LAST WORD: I found my copy of Mil-DTL-31000 Rev. C, and Paragraph 3.6.2 TDP Elements covers what used to be levels 1, 2 and 3.
¶ 3.6.2.1 is equivalent to DoD-D-1000 Level 1,
¶ 3.6.2.2 equivalent to Level 2,
(and for your application)
¶ 3.6.2.3 covers the former Level 3 requirements.
The verbage is quite similar to the old DoD-D-1000, level 3, thus the strict requirements ARE still there.

 

[pingpong1]

Ahhh the Web is a wonderful thing. You can find a copy of Mil Spec DOD-D-1000 and its companion Amendment 4 at the following Site:

http://www.product-lifecycle-management.com/military-standards-title.htm

 

[ctopher]

Good link.
Some of the specs are out of date.
This one will tell you what they are superseded by.

http://assist.daps.dla.mil/quicksearch/

Chris
SolidWorks 06 4.1/PDMWorks 06
AutoCAD 06
ctopher's home (updated 10-27-06)

 

[swertel]

Thanks, pong1. I've been trying to find an online source for DOD-D-1000 in case I ever lost my hard copy.

--Scott

http://wertel.eng.pro

 

[KENAT]

designmr

Did you ever get to the bottom of this? I'd be interested to find out what happened/how it went.

 

[designmr]

Thanks for asking, basically since this company has spent months feeling drawings are NOT need (though the customer is expecting Level 3 drawings). They decided to push thru isometric type drawings, and hope the customer will find them satisfactory. I believe it is a way to buy time, myself.

An isometric drawing does not tell someone how to build a assembly (unless the assembly has 2 or three parts) maybe.

Crazy company this one.....

 

[KENAT]

You may under some circumstances get away with just isos, but just exploded isos are another matter. Contravenes the standards.....

If they're trying to buy time does that mean some one is beavering away on proper level 3 drawings? I'm guessing not.

Good luck

 

[designmr]

Since time is unfortunately not on our time. I'm trying to do as many proper level 3 assembly drawings, but in this group, they are use to do ISOMETRIC drawings...And you hit it, they are EXPLODED ISOMETRIC drawings, which does make it worse. Which shows one set of fasteners set, NO detail of how the fasteners are arranged....

Can you imagine working at a company that the OWNER, would rather have the shop make a product, then have engineering go after and try and capture the design??? This main job, was NOT captured properly (especially with TONS of last minute changes), now the UNIT is GONE, and drawings still need to be created...OUCH...

Thanks again...

 

[KENAT]

Can you imagine working at a company that the OWNER, would rather have the shop make a product, then have engineering go after and try and capture the design???

Imagine it, I live it day to day at my current employer.

 

[designmr]

TOTAL craziness......no wondering the shop keeps complaining the drawing package are ALWAYS WRONG with errors.

I've only been here 6 month, so I just DON'T GET IT....

I guess scrape parts and re-work is fine.....

Thanks, Kenat

 

[KENAT]

designmr so did the customer take them?

 

[designmr]

Hey Kenat....seems this company has a GREAT sales team. Because so far the customer has been looking at exploded isometric ONLY assembly drawings, go figure.

To me they are NOT even close to what a level 3 drawing should be. Oh well.

Thanks for ask though.

 

[designmr]

I need a NEW JOB......(and yes I am LOOKING......)

 

[KENAT]

I just asked because the exploded view thing came up again here. My manager sent out a memo based on an email I'd sent which explains our interpretation of what the standards say.

The following memo is a result of a meeting held between YYYY and I. The anticipated result of this memo is to satisfy the requirements of the designated commercial engineering design standard (ASME) we are following and the needs of engineering.

The wording in the DRM on exploded views, based on the standard is:

"On assembly drawings exploded views shall not be the primary view, as they do not show components in the assembled state (ASME Y14.24 section 4.1.3 (d)). As such exploded views shall be the least preferred method for showing assemblies on drawings and shall only be used when they offer significant advantages over other types of views and then only in addition to suitable orthographic views."

For a legacy drawing using only exploded views, undergoing a relatively minor revision such that a complete redraw is not justifiable then keeping the exploded views offers a "significant advantage" and is permissible. However, it may be necessary for orthographic views showing the item fully assembled to be added, this should take only a few mouse clicks in most cases. Please let me know if you have any questions.

Regards!

XXXX

 

[designmr]

Makes all the sense in the world....Unfortunately we know that making good readable assembly drawings take time ($$$$$$), this company does NOT want to spend the money, so isometric assembly are the way it will be done.
I am surprised the customer (military) will except them...Guess things maybe have changed????

Thanks again,