We have a document relating to each assembly and sub-assembly of a product; namely the 'Drawing List'. It simply details the revision of each drawing pertaining to that assembly.
When a drawing (part drawing, circuit diagram, parts list etc.) is revised, the relevant Drawing List is also updated once changes have been incorporated to reflect build standard.
Previously drawing lists have also detailed the revision of sub-assembly drawing lists. As one can imagine, in assemblies with many levels, this causes an undesireable and time-consuming revision roll all the way to the top level.
The Def-Stan we work to now suggests that the revision of sub-assembly drawing lists need not be detailed, but just referenced as 'latest issue' to avoid revision rolling.
To put the above in context with an example; one of our recent developments had been produced to revision A (top level drawing list revision). We have since had a design review and made modifications to a sub-assembly called up on that drawing list; the sub-assembly revision is now B; however, because no drawings on the top level have changed, the top level is still at revision A because the sub-assembly is now only referenced as latest issue. Therefore any more units produced should in theory still be produced to build standard A, though in reality they will be different from the previous units truly produced at build standard A before the design changes.
Of course, one can update the top level drawing list knowing that changes have been incorporated; but this relies on the individual and not the CM system. Previously, a revision was effectively forced - now it seems out of the loop so to speak.
If someone has worked with a system like such, how has one put this into practice and ensured that the drawing list of assemblies does reflect the actual physical unit? Perhaps I am overlooking something or have misunderstood.
We complained about the previous method with the revision rolling, but I am left questioning the practicalities of this new one!
Thanks in advance!