Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations JAE on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Videos and Other Training 1
- Thread starter drawoh
- Start date
drawoh,
Let me know if you would consider online instructor-led training for your team. I have a 16-hour GD&T Fundamentals course that has become quite popular. It was designed to be largely "version independent" and focuses on core GD&T concepts that are common to 1994, 2009, and 2018. This course focuses on how to read the information on an existing GD&T drawing. Then there is a 16-hour Advanced GD&T for Design course that gets into the process for specifying GD&T based on the fit and function requirements of the part.
Evan Janeshewski
Axymetrix Quality Engineering Inc.
Let me know if you would consider online instructor-led training for your team. I have a 16-hour GD&T Fundamentals course that has become quite popular. It was designed to be largely "version independent" and focuses on core GD&T concepts that are common to 1994, 2009, and 2018. This course focuses on how to read the information on an existing GD&T drawing. Then there is a 16-hour Advanced GD&T for Design course that gets into the process for specifying GD&T based on the fit and function requirements of the part.
Evan Janeshewski
Axymetrix Quality Engineering Inc.
This guy seems good - here's the intro playlist:
His website: He's an instructor for drafting, CMM, and machining at a community college.
There are 73 videos in his GD&T playlist - I like that his #1 pick is a rant on unmentioned major changes from '94 to '09.
Still, if you have a YouTube account you can make your own playlist selecting from whatever videos you like. Dean's playlist is a bit disordered; I think he just wanted a filter for all of them.
His website: He's an instructor for drafting, CMM, and machining at a community college.
There are 73 videos in his GD&T playlist - I like that his #1 pick is a rant on unmentioned major changes from '94 to '09.
Still, if you have a YouTube account you can make your own playlist selecting from whatever videos you like. Dean's playlist is a bit disordered; I think he just wanted a filter for all of them.
- Thread starter
- #4
-
1
- #6
It looks like YouTube is going to recommend away -
Here's another series that looks polished and lengthy enough: from Martin MB Bak - I think he's an engineer; there's no associated web site.
There's an accent but his speaking is very clear and not too fast, not too slow.
Here's another series that looks polished and lengthy enough: from Martin MB Bak - I think he's an engineer; there's no associated web site.
There's an accent but his speaking is very clear and not too fast, not too slow.
Hi All,
I looked at a couple of the videos on the Martin MB Bak channel, and I would strongly suggest staying away. It's just some guy talking over a mishmash of uncredited material taken from Tec-Ease, ETI, ASME and ISO standards, and other websites or videos. If the instructor had any credentials then they would be mentioned. I expect that this channel will be shut down soon, for using copyrighted material.
Evan Janeshewski
Axymetrix Quality Engineering Inc.
I looked at a couple of the videos on the Martin MB Bak channel, and I would strongly suggest staying away. It's just some guy talking over a mishmash of uncredited material taken from Tec-Ease, ETI, ASME and ISO standards, and other websites or videos. If the instructor had any credentials then they would be mentioned. I expect that this channel will be shut down soon, for using copyrighted material.
Evan Janeshewski
Axymetrix Quality Engineering Inc.
That's a shame, except for ASME and ISO, as I think any organizations putting forward standards for communication and programming should allow free use of the contents, but with attribution (the way that the Free Software Foundation does) which I don't see any attributions.
The problem is, can anyone describe for anyone else how to use the contents of those standards without using content from those standards? I say not in an educational environment, because any other explanation is some other interpretation which might or might not represent the actual content. Such actual snippets are often posted here and ideas not contained verbatim often ignored.
Wholesale copying from 3rd parties without attribution and without permission is generally a bad practice.
There are education and criticism and parody exemptions to US copyright, though wholesale copying isn't allowed, but YouTube has a history of easily dropping the copyright claim hammer on anyone who isn't an advertiser, so that's an easy avenue.
Example: the Fran Lab channel got a copyright takedown for a NASA film that included the sound of wind which Sony decided they had a right to because 40 years after the NASA film was made someone on the Sony label recorded wind noise. Guess who spends more money with the big G.
Those offended can also issue a DCMA notice, which essentially says there is a violation of Federal copyright statutes, but just advertising on YouTube works and, unlike a false or failed DCMA claim (which the Sony one seems to clearly be), there's no chance for a counter suit.
However, that might not work - I think he's Danish, so the YouTube takedown is the most likely to be effective.
The problem is, can anyone describe for anyone else how to use the contents of those standards without using content from those standards? I say not in an educational environment, because any other explanation is some other interpretation which might or might not represent the actual content. Such actual snippets are often posted here and ideas not contained verbatim often ignored.
Wholesale copying from 3rd parties without attribution and without permission is generally a bad practice.
There are education and criticism and parody exemptions to US copyright, though wholesale copying isn't allowed, but YouTube has a history of easily dropping the copyright claim hammer on anyone who isn't an advertiser, so that's an easy avenue.
Example: the Fran Lab channel got a copyright takedown for a NASA film that included the sound of wind which Sony decided they had a right to because 40 years after the NASA film was made someone on the Sony label recorded wind noise. Guess who spends more money with the big G.
Those offended can also issue a DCMA notice, which essentially says there is a violation of Federal copyright statutes, but just advertising on YouTube works and, unlike a false or failed DCMA claim (which the Sony one seems to clearly be), there's no chance for a counter suit.
However, that might not work - I think he's Danish, so the YouTube takedown is the most likely to be effective.
R. Dean Odell
Mechanical
I recommend onsite or virtual training if possible. Lots of companies like GD&T Basics and Axymetrix will provide training that can get a whole design/drafting department on the same page.
Aside from formal training, there is no substitute for reading the Y14.5 standard. If your company won't buy a copy, I would (and have) check ebay for a used copy.
I think videos are a good supplementary resource to the standard and/or formal training.
R. Dean Odell
Our company is looking into training. I suggested onsite. Virtual training for GD&T is not good IMO. People tend to not pay attention and don't learn. Onsite they can use one of our drawings for example and add GD&T.
Chris, CSWP
SolidWorks
ctophers home
Chris, CSWP
SolidWorks
ctophers home
I had not looked at e-bay for a while on this - they appear to have a handful of 2009 (2@ $150-$200), 1994 (3@ ~$50), 1982 (2@ ~$20), and a 1973 ($20) version. (This list is good for the next 5 seconds. Mis-listings might also exist.)
The big problem is that few organizations flip entirely to a new version so they still need to retain copies for at least a decade, by which time, seen in the prices, the value plummets.
I've checked Abe Books, Powell's, Thrift Books, et al and these standards are rarely available.
I expect that individual buyers are not likely to shed copies considering the very high prices that ASME charges for them.
---
Employees failing to pay attention to training is an indication of poor prep work by employers and likely a culture that doesn't see/suffer from tolerance related problems and is unlikely to be in contact with suppliers who depend on whatever is being taught.
Often training budget is allocated and supervisors are expected to spend it - the results don't matter. HR likes to show that their company provides training to the board of directors - again, the results don't matter. One can tell this as training is one of the first items slashed for cash-flow.
The big problem is that few organizations flip entirely to a new version so they still need to retain copies for at least a decade, by which time, seen in the prices, the value plummets.
I've checked Abe Books, Powell's, Thrift Books, et al and these standards are rarely available.
I expect that individual buyers are not likely to shed copies considering the very high prices that ASME charges for them.
---
Employees failing to pay attention to training is an indication of poor prep work by employers and likely a culture that doesn't see/suffer from tolerance related problems and is unlikely to be in contact with suppliers who depend on whatever is being taught.
Often training budget is allocated and supervisors are expected to spend it - the results don't matter. HR likes to show that their company provides training to the board of directors - again, the results don't matter. One can tell this as training is one of the first items slashed for cash-flow.
- Thread starter
- #13
drawoh - I was referring to the general case that I have seen in several organizations; I expect you'd be kicking the chair legs of any nodders. In addition to those drawings, adding in process measurement examples would also add to the value of the course.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question
- Question
- Question
- Question