×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

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

Recording changes on a 2D Print
5

Recording changes on a 2D Print

Recording changes on a 2D Print

(OP)
What is the industry standard, or standard on recording of what changed on a 2D drawing? For example, if we modify our print, we record every dimension and or note that gets changed on the print. This results in the tedious task of going in and ensuring you get everything recorded correctly.

RE: Recording changes on a 2D Print

Create some type of ECO form: the form indicates what has changed. indicates revisions, disposition of change, reason of change, etc.
The drawing has a revision table that tracks revision changes. It can reference the ECO number.
Yes, it gets tedious, but is important to track/document changes.

Chris, CSWP
SolidWorks
ctophers home

RE: Recording changes on a 2D Print

(OP)
We have an ECO form, and ECN process. The revision table do you have an example of what that looks like? I have attached an example of what we usually do on the right hand of our prints. I agree it is important to track and document changes. Just wondering if there was a better way than what we have been doing for years and years. Thanks for the feedback.

RE: Recording changes on a 2D Print

2
I see no reason why to clutter a dwg with detailed changes. List them on the ECO form. Ref the ECO number on the rev table.

Chris, CSWP
SolidWorks
ctophers home

RE: Recording changes on a 2D Print

(OP)
Thanks for sharing this image do appreciate it.

RE: Recording changes on a 2D Print

SDETERS,

This is how we do ours, we track all the changes with drawing markups & an ECR form, currently.

But as you can see we have changed that over the years.

At first there was only a change to the title block revision level, then we change to only a number, then we changed to a year based numbering system within our QMS.

JHD

RE: Recording changes on a 2D Print

Quote (ctopher)

I see no reason why to clutter a dwg with detailed changes. List them on the ECO form. Ref the ECO number on the rev table

I see no reason in having a different document that contains revision information where a revision block will fit almost all drawings.
This is how we do ours. 3D, 2D is in PLM, info is on the drawing.


Most developed firms use some kind of PLM software for data management. We use Siemens Teamcenter integrated into our company structure and Catia software. Every change notice is requested or approved in TC, and every revision is managed independently.
If you want hassle free work, use a PLM software.

RE: Recording changes on a 2D Print

I agree PLM is a way to go. Not every company has it.
If they don't use it, use a form to show changes. I have seen drawings where the entire first sheet is covered in change descriptions. Views are pushed to another sheet.
SDETERS, Do you have some type of PLM?

Chris, CSWP
SolidWorks
ctophers home

RE: Recording changes on a 2D Print

Quote (SDETERS)

What is the industry standard, or standard on recording of what changed on a 2D drawing?

ASME Y14.35. The latest revision is 2024 reaffirmed in 2019.

RE: Recording changes on a 2D Print

I have had it done different ways at different companies. Currently we just list the ECR in the revision block like this: REVISED PER ECR #####-##.
We have a few canned text lines that we use in the revision block.
Other companies have listed every change with a number for each change, like: C1 WAS 23.2; C2 WAS 12.4.
in both cases, we do use a revision triangle placed next to everything that changed in that revision. We only carry the current revision triangles to keep the clutter down.

"Wildfires are dangerous, hard to control, and economically catastrophic."

Ben Loosli

RE: Recording changes on a 2D Print

(OP)
@ctopher Yes we have Siemens NX with Teamcenter, Our ECN process is HCL notes, so we have two different systems. We are a small company with limited Teamcenter licenses.

We usually have everything spelled out as Looslib mentioned with every change.

The reason I am asking is because there are many different tools (Teamcenter visualization, NX track drawing changes for example) that when these tools are used the tools, will show the difference between the two drawings.

Great comments, I do appreciate all of the feedback

Thanks again

Shane

RE: Recording changes on a 2D Print

Quote (ctopher (Mechanical)6 Jun 24 20:29)


I see no reason why to clutter a dwg with detailed changes...

If I have a fabrication drawing, I want to tell the fabricator explicitly what changes I made. I do not want to release the ECR, as it may contain proprietary information. If you change half the dimensions and notes on a fabrication drawing, it really is time to create a new drawing.

--
JHG

RE: Recording changes on a 2D Print

Among automotive mega-corps, we just rev the print. Revision blocks disappeared with PLM's implementation, and there's no need to track individual changes. Everything from Adobe to the CAD modelers have macros to auto-compare revisions.

RE: Recording changes on a 2D Print

I loved it when we acquired a smaller company and I tried to trace back the changes thru their ECN forms. Most typical revisions said "Changed Dims". I kid you not.

----------------------------------------

The Help for this program was created in Windows Help format, which depends on a feature that isn't included in this version of Windows.

RE: Recording changes on a 2D Print

Did they retain copies of the old revisions? Better, were they shipping product but not keeping as-built lists of the revisions of the parts?

RE: Recording changes on a 2D Print

We have old drawings from an acquired company where some have no revisions, others only have revisions, no signatures. ECNs are gone. So, no history.
Very common where engineers design, but are not good at file management.

Chris, CSWP
SolidWorks
ctophers home

RE: Recording changes on a 2D Print

Quote (dgallup)

Most typical revisions said "Changed Dims". I kid you not.

That's a lot more specific than "General revisions".

RE: Recording changes on a 2D Print

dgallup,

A very long time ago, I set up a set of document management scripts on a UNIX server to manage 2D CAD, PCB files, and other stuff. I set it up so that you had to specify a valid ECR to check out a finalized document. A manager proceeded to generate black ECR so that he could modify stuff, and someone wrote "AS PER ECR-XXXXX" in the revision block.

A lot of people with work to do, have tunnel vision.

--
JHG

RE: Recording changes on a 2D Print

So long as the ECR/ECN trigger others to review and make necessary changes to their parts/assemblies then the process fulfilled its purpose. Revisions happen bc of fit, form, function, cost, and/or quality. I've never needed nor cared to know the reason revisions were created, and production/quality/warranty data tells me what worked/didnt if humans cant. Obviously a complete print database should include every revision but I could care less if old ECRs/ECNs disappeared.

I'm a big advocate for process and documentation but at some point you need to ask whether you're adding value or simply wasting time.

RE: Recording changes on a 2D Print

The use of complete on-drawing history is useful when the controlling company has only the master print, keeps no history prints, and wants no other paper to search for.

As they are mainly used I agree that the ECR/ECN process is to get all affected parties to a unified understanding of changes they need to make now.

Sometimes the reason for revision is handy when figuring out why a product changed performance and one can look and see that a specific problem was addressed and maybe a searchable database of those could be used if a similar problem arises elsewhere and the old guy who cane up with the original fix is retired or dead.

Also, I am a proponent of using a Wiki for all product development which would record all the relevant discussions, test reports, proposals, reasons for accepting or rejecting proposed solutions, the entire drawing history from scanned napkins forward. This rather than or in addition to a typical PDM system. If Wikis had an approval system then even the PDM system would not be required.

RE: Recording changes on a 2D Print

For the past 20 years the company I am at has not used a revision history tabulation on drawings. The revision is used to get the redline and ECN from the ERP database where everything is scanned/converted or directly saved as a PDF. At first this seemed a little odd, but soon it showed it is very efficient and effective with absolutely no downside. A PDF of the redline is supplied to any fabricator/machine shop that asks for specific change details. Very few of our shops ask for the PDF and in 20 years we have had zero errors attributed to a mismanagement of a change/configuration. Dropping the revision block saves editing time, errors of typing, and provides more space on a drawing to place views. I would not go back to using an on-drawing revision history block.

RE: Recording changes on a 2D Print

Title block with signatures/department approvals were eliminated also. Title block has the component name, rev, standard tolerances, and number sheets, and a standards reference (if applicable). All signatures/approvals are electronic approval and do not appear on the drawing. This has saved space too. Some items of traditional drafting form and style are dogma. If no major benefit is provided, some items are a waste of time and effort to do and maintain.

RE: Recording changes on a 2D Print

If you have a good document storage system, the chore of bubbling revisions all over the drawing is mostly for the readers' convenience. The document storage system covers past revisions. The ECR/ECN system covers the thoughts and specifics of the revisions. For example, if a casting drawing was revised to include draft angles that did not have before, then putting a revision bubble next to every drafted surface edge is silly. The ECN only needs to say "added draft angles per sand cast vendor <vendor name> actual practice".

When a drawing gets more than a few revision bubbles, I sometimes note it as "general revision" and that essentially warns the reader to re-read / re-process / review the entire newly revised drawing. That's not done often (partly considering the definition of new drawing vs. revision being a change in form/fit/function). But sometimes it's the right thing to do.

RE: Recording changes on a 2D Print

Another change that has worked well where I work: all drawings are on 'B size' sheets. No C, D, E size allowed. Occassionally, an A size is used for a presentation or manual illustration. B size is printable on all the office printers/copiers and can be filed in standard filing cabinets, etc. PDFs of the drawings can be viewed easily without extensive zooming and panning. If more sheets are required to provide the necessary views/clarity, then sheets are added. We don't stress about adding views - CAD simplifies view/detail creation/projection. For the type and size equipment we make - blood separation and freezing systems, this works perfectly. The systems range from lab bench-top to large floor-standing gear. The B size requirement is enforced even with contract engineering firms - some who initially scoffed at the requirement or tried to continue to supply drawings on C,D, and E sheets. But once they worked with our system, they got it and realized why it works so well. Just another part of traditional drafting that I have found is no longer a benefit in this age of powerful and flexible CAD. 20+ years on this and no issues found - started doing this with ProE 17 or 2001 and have continued with all versions of Solidworks and Inventor, and AutoCAD.

RE: Recording changes on a 2D Print

^ I think most engineers at my company do that already (use an A or B unless it simply won't fit) but it's interesting to see that as a policy.

RE: Recording changes on a 2D Print

I highly recommend consideration of the B size limit. Unless you have a large format printer/copier (or budget for outsourced printing) to allow printing a C, D, or E size sheet full size then the perceived benefit of the large sheet sizes is lost once you print the drawing to fit on standard office size paper. All the text and details are too small to see without magnification or you will end up printing sections of the drawing full-size just to be useful. And when viewing the drawing on a monitor constant zooming and panning will be necessary to be able to see details and read text.

RE: Recording changes on a 2D Print

(OP)
Brian Malone, what limits the scale of your views when you toss everything on your B size print? Do you have a standard text size that you use, What is the text size, Just curious how this works. Kind of an interesting concept.

RE: Recording changes on a 2D Print

SDETERS,

2mm fonts work on A sized prints. 2.5mm fonts work on B prints.

--
JHG

RE: Recording changes on a 2D Print

SDETERS we don't have limits to view scale. The scale is chosen for convenience of viewing and reading to minimize secondary need to zoom or pan. So for most machine components for the equipment we make, the general overall view scale may range 1:2, 1:1, 2:1, etc., sometimes 1:10 for a larger system. But the fabrication views and details are scaled as needed to show the required information. We use .10 inch text for all dims, notes, etc. This size is easy to read on most monitors without zooming and likewise prints very readable. Views are added as required and if a projection does not fit on the sheet it is generated from, it is moved to a following sheet with appropriate naming. Most parts for us are one to two sheet drawings but some have 9 to 12. This has caused no issues because the view/details are clear and traceable. The text is readable and the view scale for the views is chosen for clarity when printed on 11 x 17 inch paper. Even when printed to fit on 8 1/2 x 11 inch paper the drawings are very readable. Many shops just print on 8 1/2 x 11.

RE: Recording changes on a 2D Print

Review your process and decide if all traditional drafting and drawing control process hold up with review for efficiency, security, cost of operation. With electronic file control and electronic signature approval, a lot of sections on traditional drawings, such as approval blocks and revision history do very little and take up time and space. I have long-term experience that shows those elements can be eliminated with no detriment.

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