×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Contact US

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Engineering Revision Control Procedures

Engineering Revision Control Procedures

Engineering Revision Control Procedures

(OP)
We are revamping our engineering practices here, and a common case came up that brought a question to mind.
Our engineering team works closely with our programming team on new products. There is a lot of back and forth with the drawings and designs.

In this particular case the drawing was created and communicated to programming, who noticed a missing dimension and release date.
It is preliminary and technically unreleased. That being said, is a revision necessary when adding the dimension, or could it still qualify as initial release?

Or was it simply an engineering mistake to send the drawing to programming without a release? Granted it's being released to another engineering department, and has not
hit the floor or the schedule.

How much flexibility is there in the drawing standards for compartmentalization? Could we streamline the engineering process between departments by stamping our
drawings "Preliminary" to avoid multiple revisions during the release process?

Thanks for any advice.

RE: Engineering Revision Control Procedures

You could hire a checker.

Failing that, once it gets out of your personal control, there could be an infinity of incorrect copies that are guaranteed to surface at the most inopportune time.

I'd issue a revision. Whether you allow informal/minor revisions for typos and such is something to be included in your revised design standards.

Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA

RE: Engineering Revision Control Procedures

There's always the question over what release is relevant, and what bug fixes or other rectification gets applied to make sure that the identified issue has been negated.

A lot of it depends on how formal and involved your release process is (i.e. if its all paper based, and involves wet signatures of artefacts then there's usually a push for 'just release it with the same revision' rather than push for a new release). It also, as you noted, depends on who the artefact gets released to as to whether a new iteration gets released.

'Was it simply an engineering mistake' - Probably. That doesn't change the issue, rather the need to iterate has been identified for a particular reason, regardless of how it came about.

This is a software centric basis for identification of revisions, and a means to identify a minor versus major release. I agree with the assertion though, that a change requires a revision iteration, although I'm aware that the practicalities of doing so may not be easy.

EDMS Australia

RE: Engineering Revision Control Procedures

Depending on the level of trust in your organization you could implement a 'None' revision to correct an inconsequential error (spelling mistake 'Weld' replaces 'Wled' or remove stray geometry, change drawing size or border)where an end user could use either print (rev A or rev None directly after rev A) without issue.

Screw up once and include a consequential change under the 'None' revision (12" was 10") and you lose that trust

I've worked in companies where we ran numerical revisions during the development process and switched to alpha for release

RE: Engineering Revision Control Procedures

(OP)
I understand the need purposes of revisions after release, but this hasn't been released to the floor yet. To me its a simple compartmentalization of
enginnering. Viewing the entire engineering department as an entity vs. needing revisions between your drafter, detailer, and process engineer.
Upon looking through the ASME Y14.35M on Revision standards, it leaves quite a bit open to interpretation. Especially with these inconsequential
drafting errors like misspellings or missing constraints which are present in the solid model, but not on the drawing. I've seen it at other
companies I've worked for where these drafts of the drawings were passed around with a stamp across "PRELIMINARY" and revisions were never rolled.

This leads me to my next question, if our ISO requires a revision roll for these, what would be the process for changing the standard?
Signatures from auditors? Mass Emails to customers? etc.

RE: Engineering Revision Control Procedures

Logically, if you change your internal standards, you need to update external copies, too.
Easy if you keep track of who got what.

Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA

RE: Engineering Revision Control Procedures

For documents that haven't been released yet but need to be shared outside of the owning department, we "stamp" them with a preliminary notice or watermark and the date and time. That way, anyone can easily see if they have the most current version (not revision).

For other quick fixes, like typos, we actually prepend the document with a NOTICE. The notice gets added to the first sheet of the document so it can't be ignored, and the notice states the clerical changes were made to the document. The document is fixed and re-released under the same revision. I don't like it, and I motivate the company to not abuse it, but it has its place in certain circumstances. One hard rule is that notices are for clerical errors only. The procedure defining the use of notices is explicit regarding their application.

--Scott
www.aerornd.com

RE: Engineering Revision Control Procedures

Swiftest,

When you do a formal revision, you should describe what you did.

REV-A ADDED MISSING DIMENSION. NO CHANGE TO PART.

--
JHG

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members! Already a Member? Login



News


Close Box

Join Eng-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close