Open Source Drafting Standard 1

[swoop360]

New to posting, so if this deviates from applicable standards I apologize.

Has anyone considered making an open-source drafting standard? Obviously it would build off of what is already done from ASME and the others, but it would be contained in an online wiki. That way it could be community supported, flexible and quick to react--similar to the flexibility that wikipedia benefits from.

Additionally, because it would be free (hopefully) adherance to the standard would be more accepted and you would not come across a shop complaining they do not have the standard specified.

I would like to gauge the interest from the big players on these boards (KENAT, ewh, etc...)

 

[MechNorth]

ISO & ASME gain two very important things from the sales of standards;
1) A reputable source for the latest standard
2) A source of revenue
3) Political currency and authority

As a result, you would never foreseeably get them to give up copyrights, and any wiki posting their intellectual properties would be quickly and successfully challenged.

That being said, I used to work with another organization that established industry voluntary standards, and was very successfull in changing their philosophy from charging for the developed standards to making them freely available to all members. The economic reality there was that the sales of standards generated little revenue whereas membership did. As members were the ones donating time & resources to establish the standards, and they were the primary users of those standards, it became an issue that members had to pay again to get a copy of the standards. Different situation.

Jim Sykes, P.Eng, GDTP-S
Profile Services

http://www.profileservices.ca

TecEase, Inc.

http://www.tec-ease.com

 

[swoop360]

While I originally suggested it (and was seconded by MadMango), I now question the feasibility of having a community supported supplemental document to the existing drafting standards. I think we would be entering a grey area regarding copyrights since the supplemental resource would contain enough detail to render the purchased version useless.

That being said, if the examples are nothing like the ones provided in the standard but the methods are used as per the standard would that work? I would think yes, because you are not infringing upon the copyright of the document by using their methods in your daily work nor, to my knowledge, to they prevent you from discussing and demonstrating how to use the standard (otherwise this forum should have been shut down a long time ago). I know that with wikipedia they can get away with using company logos because they are using them not for profit. Their idiom can be seen here (I used the RIM logo as an example, but GO ANDROID!):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Research_In_Motion_Logo.svg

Perhaps the same can be used for detailing point by point through the standard.

 

[drawoh]

swoop360,

The real problem here is that the GPL is a copyright. Someone owns the document, and decides what will go into the document. You have the right to copy it, print it out, and modify it to create your own document.

I write my own drafting standard, and I publish it under the GPL. You guys all say "Wow!" and start copying it, printing it, and calling it up on your drawings.

At some point, you decide you want changes to the document. You politely ask me to make changes. Perhaps I do it. Perhaps I don't. There is no difference between what I would be doing, and what the ASME and ISO are doing right now. Reviewing and updating engineering standards is not trivial. It takes time and money, much of which is raised by selling copies of the standards. If you search GNU's website, you will find requests for money. You would certainly find one on mine if I were doing this.

The other way around getting your own changes would be to fork the standard and create your own version. We have the swoop360 standard, the MadMango standard and the MechNorth standard, and who knows what else. How are the fabricators going to learn all of this stuff?

A friend of mine took a UNIX administration course. On the first day, the instructor announced that the great thing about UNIX is standards. "There are so many to choose from."

Let's not go there!

JHG

 

[MadMango]

I just found this while searching for something else. It could be an example of how to format things.

http://www.pmpa.org/technology/design/toc.htm

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

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

 

[KENAT]

MM There's some good stuff in there, but also a few things that don't really follow the ASME stds that well as is typical for something prepared by manufacturers.

Ctopher linked something vaguely similar before too: thread1103-197339

Posting guidelines faq731-376

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

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