Need some help - New job & I'm not producing drawings that are 'good enough'. 4

[ModulusCT]

Can someone please point me in the direction of some resource where I can brush up on my drafting practices? I have an ASME in mechanical engineering tech with a focus on design, and have spend the past 13 years doing design/drafting work for various companies. Before I took my most recent job, I did myself the disservice of working for a company that had very lax drafting requirements, for EIGHT years, and so now, in a new industry that is very much focused on the good drafting practices I find myself at a disadvantage.

Many of my mistakes have been silly -- actually stupid -- mistakes, like not putting 2X in front of a dimension that applies twice on the same view, or forgetting to put a centerline on a cylindrical part... things like that. But also, our checker, who has 35 years of drafting/checking experience in the aerospace industry has a very unique (to me at least) way of considering a drawing good. Many or most dimensions for features are taken from holes which are called out as datums. So, first, and angular dimension is usually necessary to create the first leg of the dimension that is parallel to the second leg of the angle dimension (which is parallel to the surface or line to be dimensioned. Then the distance dimension is taken from there. Completely new to me. In the past, all of my drawings have used a baseline sort of dimensioning scheme where things where dimensioned from the bottom left. It mainly has to do with the fact that the industry I'm in now makes a lot of parts with curves and angles and before I was working with parts that were mostly square.

Anyway, I've been given 30 days to 'significantly' improve the quality of my drawings... Else, I'm out of here. I'm pretty sure that I can eliminate a lot of my problems simply by being a better checker of my own work (something I've been lax about for some reason)... and yet, there seems to be things that I don't know about drafting that the checker believes should be basic things I should have learned long ago. My theory is that drafting practices are mostly tribal knowledge. There are many ways to correctly dimension a part. My challenge however, is to do it the correct way as this company sees it.

My problem is compounded a little by the fact that I'm using a new software package (solidworks)... I'm picking it up quickly, but still, there it is.

So I'm wondering... Is there a drafting for dummies out there somewhere in cyberspace I can study? Are there some checking guidelines I can follow to ensure that my drawings don't come back from the check even once with red on them?

Eliminating my silly errors are going to help a lot... I've been making too many of them. Mainly because of a poor attitude. Something only I can change... That's on me. And I've read recently that a good attitude, or rather, a bad one, can manifest itself in a drafters output in profound ways. I'm going to work on that. But proper drafting practices... Beyond looking at other drawings done at this place I work, I'm unsure where to go for advice. I've always used ASME Y14.5 as my go to guide for good drafting practices, but apparently, that's not really a guide for good drafting. That's a GD&T guide first and foremost. I know that standard well. Unfortunately, ASME 14.100 is not a wealth of information, but rather, just a general guideline. Nothing that will help me now.

Any questions for me, please ask... Any help is greatly appreciated. I do not under any circumstances want to be unemployed at the end of December. Please, if you have any guidance whatsoever, don't hesitate to lay it on me. I'm all ears/eyes.

Mod

I'm not a vegetarian because I dislike meat... I'm a vegetarian because I HATE plants!!

 

[MikeHalloran]

I have been given the '30 days to improve' ultimatum more than once.
Nobody can change that fast, if at all.
The goal of said change is always either fuzzily defined, or not attainable by Superman.
Use the 30 day period to find another job.

- I don't think _anyone_ can make a good drawing in Solidworks. You spend way too much time fighting the drawing editor, or learning, the hard way, the particular perverse way in which Dassault's programmers expect you do things.

That's not as easy as working the tutorials or reading the help files.

The last time I used SW, 2010, the tutorials were helpful with basics but seriously out of phase with changes to the menu structure, the general user interface, and even the words that were used to describe something.
... and the help function was a disaster, not being able to get you where you needed to be, given the most obvious of keywords.
I.e., I don't think you can learn SW to the skill level you need in 30 days; maybe a year.

I love Solidworks, really I do. I just think they don't reinvest enough money and time into cleaning it up with each revision. Given the price of renting the package, there should be enough money to do a better job of it.

- I'm equivocal about the situation with the checker. The best ones will help you succeed; some are just nasty, and only interested in helping you fail. Having a hostile relationship with a checker is not good for your career.

If there isn't a local/company/standard drafting manual for you to study, consider building your own, an example at a time, from your redlines. That may be the only way for you to capture the local/tribal knowledge.

I figure a new guy should get a little latitude, and nobody should get upset about mistakes based on ignorance of local custom. If you make the same mistake twice, then you need to be more critical of yourself.




Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA

 

[Belanger]

Others on here have referred to

http://www.draftingzone.com

before, although I've not really looked at it myself too deeply.

As for the dimensioning-from-holes idea compared to dimensioning-from-edges: That could indeed be a proper way to go if the function deems that the holes are the main driving force. Yes, often on squarish parts the thing nets up to the edges and is then attached with simple clearance bolts. But for curvy parts, I'm guessing that the holes are the main things that are the attachment features, and the edges are then "driven" by the holes' locations. This idea is very important in GD&T, but even in a non-GD&T environment this might be what your checker was thinking.

John-Paul Belanger
Certified Sr. GD&T Professional
Geometric Learning Systems

 

[TheTick]

Either you want to make good drawings or you don't. If you're after "good enough", then you don't.

 

[MadMango]

First off, every company has their own idea of best practices and drawing standards. Best advice is to look at existing drawings that have passed the Checker's muster, and let them lead by example, and pay attention. Then double check your work and put your work aside for a day or so. Before you submit, triple check your drawings upside down. Perhaps even ask the Checker if your drawings are for manufacturing or inspection, in some companies I have been at drawings can't fit both roles.

"Art without engineering is dreaming; Engineering without art is calculating."

Have you read faq731-376 to make the best use of these Forums?

 

[MikeHalloran]

Further to what MadMango said, "upside down" is a good way to check drawings, literally. I.e. spread a print out on your desk, then walk around to the other side and examine it from there. The different perspective will help you sort out the actual content and presentation of the drawing from what you _think_ is there.



Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA

 

[ModulusCT]

Well thanks for all the advice guys... I'm going to follow all of it if I can. If there are any other suggestions please don't hesitate to lay it on me. I wish there was some kind of online resource I could tap into that discussed good drafting practices. I mean, this forum is one of course, but some video tutorials or something would be really helpful. Although, I've been doing this line of work for over 13 years now, so it's unlikely that any video is really going to provide information that will help.

I really like the idea of checking multiple times, at different times of day, upsidedown and updating my resume in the mean time. I'm going to do these things. Thanks again for all the suggestions, and wish me luck! I'm going to GA to visit family for Chirstmas, I really hope I don't have a recent loss of a job on my head for that. My Thanksgiving has already been ruined because of this... I have to make this happen... anyway I can.

I'm not a vegetarian because I dislike meat... I'm a vegetarian because I HATE plants!!

 

[KENAT]

http://files.engineering.com/downlo...&file=DESIGN_TIPS_031_-_Checking_Drawings.pdf

is the relevant link from Drafting Zone I believe.

There have been relevant threads before, take a look.

thread1103-151962
thread1103-287599
thread1103-340919

Somewhere I swear I spelt out the steps I take in checking a drawing but I can't find it now.

Posting guidelines faq731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

(probably not aimed specifically at you)
What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484​

 

[asmeY145Manswer]

Modulus CT (and I know you are from Connecticut)

If you are really so worried about your drawings, and I don't think you should be, then realize this! If you cannot communicate all of your ideas on a good sized napkin with a pencil, because that's how most prototypes, and early concepts start out anyway, then what the hell good are all these engineering drawings anyway? And to whom?

You mean to tell me that that drawing must conform to something that, you never intended in the first place?

And if I was you, I wouldn't be too worried about loosing my job in December!

You say you know a lot about ASME Y14.5M 2009. Well, that is the latest, and greatest, drawing practice. And you know that?

So why, for God's sake, be worried about an ignorant 'Drawing Checker', that doesn't know that, and probably doesn't know yet that the world is not flat?

And finally, if you are having problems with Solidworks, and I am really a ProE guy, you can get lots of help on utube. It will tell you how to do anything you want in solidworks. Just type it into google.

 

[fcsuper]

MikeHalloran,

To your comment "I don't think _anyone_ can make a good drawing in Solidworks", I would have to ask, compared to what? AutoCAD? No 3D CAD application suits everyone's drafting needs (or everyone's interpretations of ASME), but you will be a far cry closer with SolidWorks than many of the other options available, even compared with much pricy applications. However, with that said, I understand more than most that there are still some ASME gaps in Drawings functionality, and we are working very hard to fill those. If you are experiencing limitations with SolidWorks Drawings functionality, I would very much like to talk to you.

To your comment, "I don't think they don't reinvest enough money and time into cleaning it up with each revision". Quality in SolidWorks has been improving drastically since 2009. Quality used to be an issue mentioned often by customers, but nowadays, customers don't usually even bring it up as a concern when we talk with them. If you like, we can discuss this offline as well, particularly if you are still experiencing serious quality issues.

Since we aren't allowed to post emails on this site (for good reason), you can find me on the SolidWorks Forums, or you can initially contact me via Twitter @swsuper and I'll send my contact info to you.




Matt Lorono, CSWP
Product Definition Specialist, DS SolidWorks Corp
Personal sites:
Lorono's SolidWorks Resources & SolidWorks Legion

 

[fcsuper]

ModulusCT,

I've found Tec-ease to be a great source with lots of clear and well explained examples.

http://www.tec-ease.com/gdt-tips.php

Matt Lorono, CSWP
Product Definition Specialist, DS SolidWorks Corp
Personal sites:
Lorono's SolidWorks Resources & SolidWorks Legion

 

[kvj]

I strongly agree with MadMango about using examples of the checker's approved drawings as a resource of how it should be done to pass muster with him. Check, check, recheck then check again.
If the corporate atmosphere there allows, I wouldn't hesitate to bounce a question or two off the checker so he knows you're thinking about it and trying to do it their way.
It sounds like you're in the mode of learning how to teach yourself. I have watched the Youtube vids in the past and found some to be very helpful especially when the vid tells you that little nugget of information that isn't mentioned in SWK literature.
As far as the 30 day threat, screw em. Sound like some pricks to work with. Start looking AND learning new methods in SWK while your there, you may need that knowledge at a new job.

Good Luck!!!

 

[ModulusCT]

Thanks guys for all the help and suggestions.

My own personal opinion is that the tec-ease website is a better than draftingzone, mainly because much of the material is free, including the tutorial videos which is very helpful. Thank you to fcsuper for that.

@asmeY145Manswer - How could you have known what state I'm from?? ;-) Losing my job in December would be bad because it's a very expensive month, and like most people, me and my family live paycheck to paycheck... Also, having been there only 3 months, I'm not sure if I would get any medical benefits after being let go.

@Kenat - Thanks for those links... I'll be looking them over in the coming days.

@Kvj - Yes, I'm making the most of my time at work... It may not last, but that doesn't mean that I can't learn a lot about solidworks and about drafting / GD&T and other related topics in the mean time. I'm making the most of every day.

Again, thank you guys... Your support is appreciate more than you know.

I'm not a vegetarian because I dislike meat... I'm a vegetarian because I HATE plants!!

 

[3DDave]

With 30+ years, I support the suggestion to start a job search. Anymore, this should be a constant effort anyway.

As to drafting standards, 'Y14.5 is the home to conventional drafting practice, so the 2X thing and such is available there.

Those aside, there are a variety of ways to document parts, but the key is that each of those ways controls the variety of parts that are accepted per the drawing. To suggest there is some way that is certainly better needs to be backed up with manufacturing cost data and engineering performance predictions. Unless the checker is producing evidence of both, he's just going by a convention, which should be in the company drafting standards manual they gave you on day one. No book? They don't take their drafting standards seriously.

The ordinary answer to this would be for the checker to tell you why he expects things to be dimensioned the way he does, preferably with written backup. Most have no clue about the manufacturing costs or engineering performance predictions and just wing it based on some past experience where they were criticized without suitable explanation.

The knowledgeable contributors to this are the engineers and the inspectors. The engineers because they need to limit the range of items that can be built to ones they need and inspectors because they need to perform the checks to see that parts fit within the required engineering range.

The checker should be making sure that words are correctly spelled, that the parts are completely described, that the drawings are legible and readily understood. The last thing a checker should be concerned with is how a part is dimensioned.

In some organizations the engineers and inspectors skip doing this part of their job, claiming that it is just drafting. Maybe the organization is like that, in which case you won't learn good drafting practice there either.

Best of luck.

 

[ewh]

The checker should be making sure that words are correctly spelled, that the parts are completely described, that the drawings are legible and readily understood. The last thing a checker should be concerned with is how a part is dimensioned.

I have to disagree with this statement. I have seen many drawings done by engineers where it seems that they were more concerned with fab methods that with part requirements. Once it is pointed out to them that while it may be easier for the fabricator when dimensioned in that way and most of the parts they get back will not serve the function that they were intended for, they agree that there are better ways to define them. Checkers are a last opportunity to ensure that the drawing is dimensioned such that it will not be unnecessarily expensive while meeting the design requirements.
Engineers define part requirements. Designers/drafters create the drawing which defines the part to meet those requirements. Checkers ensure that the drawings will produce acceptable parts for minimum cost.
In your statement, it seems as if you don't even need checkers, as peer review can accomplish the same thing.

“Know the rules well, so you can break them effectively.”
-Dalai Lama XIV

 

[CheckerHater]

In your statement, it seems as if you don't even need checkers, as peer review can accomplish the same thing.

You said it!

 

[KENAT]

Thanks ewh, I nearly posted similar last night but is was late and I wasn't feeling eloquent.

If a checker is just "making sure that words are correctly spelled, that the parts are completely described, that the drawings are legible and readily understood" then you aren't getting much value from it.

We had a post about checker qualifications a while back, to my mind a checker should be able to give input both on manufacturing and be a dimensioning & tolerancing expert and as such give good input.

Posting guidelines faq731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

(probably not aimed specifically at you)
What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484​

 

[CheckerHater]

I have a question for Kenat.

Let’s say, we have perfect checker equally versed in drafting standards, machining and inspection.

In the drawing where interests of manufacturing, quality control and “function” are conflicting, which one should take the precedence?

I think I can guess your answer, so my second question will be: why bother to learn the other two?

Unfortunately my major problem with checkers was that they almost never understood how the design worked. What’s left? Spell-check.

 

[KENAT]

Function - but within limits.

I don't care how cheap a part is if it doesn't work.

I don't care how 'good' a part is if I can't afford it.

Placing function first doesn't mean ignoring manufacturing, in some cases you have to change how the function is achieved to meet costs/make it manufacturable. Sometimes you have to question the level of function required...

Posting guidelines faq731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

(probably not aimed specifically at you)
What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484​

 

[Belanger]

CH -- you have a problem with checkers?

John-Paul Belanger
Certified Sr. GD&T Professional
Geometric Learning Systems