part description trouble 1

[PROEGUY]

our CM dept is insisting that a dimensional value be included in a part description. i don't think that's correct in that if the part changes physically (size change) the description of the part (embedded dimension) no longer matches the physical dimensions of the part. is there a spec (possible mil-spec as that's what we do) that could clarify this?
thanks for you time.

Sr. Pro/E Mechnaical Designer

 

[SDETERS]

My First question what Value do you use in the part description? Nominal Or Max Material or ...

I think for small standard parts washers for example in the IFI book they want the Size of the washer in the description. (ID OD Thickness) For an easy simple part this makes sense. For a more difficult part say a multiple stepped shaft what do you use for sizes in the description.

 

[MintJulep]

MIL-STD-100, chapter 300

http://elsmar.com/pdf_files/Military Standards/mil-std-100G.pdf

 

[drawoh]

PROEGUY,

I put dimensional values in part descriptions sometimes. Sometimes it matters to me. Why does it matter to your CM department?

What is your CM department? Coordinate Measuring? Configuration Management? Corporate Manufacturing? There must be some sort of context to this discussion.

JHG

 

[PROEGUY]

thanks for the reply's. CM = configuration mgmnt
CM said they need the dimensional info in the description so purchasing knows what to get. i believe the drawing should be the control for what purchasing needs to do any purchasing. BTW the part in question is a square heatsinking material which has its own part number and drawing calling out the size that it needs to be diecut to

Sr. Pro/E Mechnaical Designer

 

[KENAT]

If the milstd doesn't do it for you ASME Y14.100 has stuff on part naming too.

Posting guidelines faq731-376

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

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

 

[ewh]

I see no problem with including size in a part description.
Generally speaking, if form changes a new part number is assigned anyway. I agree that the drawing should control what is purchased, but a drawing tends to contain much more detail than whatever size you can squeeze into the title.

"Good to know you got shoes to wear when you find the floor." - [small]Robert Hunter[/small]

 

[fcsuper]

I also see no issue with providing a size in the description, as long as it is meaningful and required to differentiate it from similar parts. I do have a problem with CM trying in dictate engineering requirements. My personal choice would be to get your manager behind you and then push back on their request; not because the request is wrong, but because it is wrong for non-engineering group to determine engineering requirements.

Matt Lorono
Lorono's SolidWorks Resources & SolidWorks Legion

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/solidworks & http://twitter.com/fcsuper

 

[MechEng2005]

fcsuper: The part number is an engineering requirement?

 

[mcgyvr]

I put dimensional information in the description all the time.. If the dimension changes the the rev and description for the part change too anyways...
But you must be careful that the purchasing guy (or gal) doesn't shortcut the system and only provide the description to the vendor and not the associated drawing which might have other specs that need to be met also...

"WASHER FLAT #1/4, 17/64 ID, 9/16 OD .052" MAX. THICK STEEL ZINC"

 

[fcsuper]

MechEng2005,

I'm a little confused by your reply.

To address what I think you mean, naming of parts is covered by ASME Y14.100 Engineering Drawing Practices in section 5 "DRAWING TITLES".

To address what you actually asked, numbering of parts is also covered by ASME Y14.100 in section 6 "NUMBERING, CODING, AND IDENTIFICATION".

So the answer to both questions, yes.

Matt Lorono
Lorono's SolidWorks Resources & SolidWorks Legion

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/solidworks & http://twitter.com/fcsuper