Assembly drawing question - multiple versions

[thepete]

[/URL]]

What I have is two assemblies that share the same assembly drawing. The difference is the tapped hole. Assembly A uses a 1/4-20 bolt and washer, Assembly B uses an M6 bolt and washer.

So I'm looking at y14.34-2008, specifically around figure 4.

On one hand, it says every item shall have an individual find number - hence (9,17) below.

On the other hand, it gives rules to use a substitute number that has the same Find Number - in which case both bolts would use (9). But it isn't really a substitute number, since the M6 bolt can't be directly be substituted for the 1/4-20.

So which methodology of bubble numbering / BOM listing is correct? Two seperate lines with two different Find Numbers? Or two lines, both with the same Find Number?

-Pete

 

[CheckerHater]

First things first: How many BOMs do you have? Do your inch and metric assemblies have different part numbers? Do your inch end metric screws have different part numbers? Do you have parts list/BOM on your drawing and does it show part numbers or only find numbers?
(I am just trying to pinpoint exactly where the confusion starts)

 

[drawoh]

thepete,

If your two assemblies are different, they must have different part numbers. This does not stop you from tabulating them and placing them on the same assembly.

SolidWorks now supports tabulated quantity columns on the BOM. What does your CAD software do? Alternately, you can have two separate parts lists for your assembly.

I do know these standards, however, you have the practical problem of some assembly person looking at your item number, and locating it on the correct parts list.

--
JHG

 

[thepete]

Good questions.

[ul]
[li]2 BOMS[/li]
[li]Each BOM has a different part number xxxx-GL & xxxx-BSP[/li]
[li]The M6 and 1/4-20 screws both have individual part numbers. Same for the washers.[/li]
[li]There is a BOM, and I do want it to have each (US&Metric) part numbers listed.[/li]
[li]The BOM will have two columns identifying the quantity in each assembly, one for each assembly number.[/li]
[li]As for the Find Numbers - that is where I'm unclear - whether the two bolts should share the same number, or have unique numbers.[/li]
[li][/li]
[/ul]

-Pete

 

[CheckerHater]

I believe generally you cannot have same find number for two different parts, so I vote for unique numbers.
As long as person looking at the drawing can clearly see that different find numbers belong to different assemblies you should be fine. (Even if the situation still slightly confusing)

 

[thepete]

Drawoh - I'm a Solidworks user, but still on 2011. Below is a heavily redacted version of a similar BOM. (different parts, same problem).

 

[thepete]

Checkhater,

I agree, though my colleague does not. She thinks they should share the same find number (so I'd have two item 9's and two item 10's on the list above).

Assuming that I used two different find numbers, should i put both #'s in the same bubble (9,16) as I have above, or two different bubbles (9), (16) that point to the same part. I like the first option as it seems less confusing, especially if it was on a busier print than this one.

 

[CheckerHater]

I agree, though my colleague does not.

Unfortunately I don’t have a copy of the standard. If you do, you can try to find something in it like “Item Number refers to the identity of the part recorded on the parts list” or other similar statement that supports uniqueness of find number.
Good luck

 

[dgallup]

We produce dozens of different assemblies from one drawing. We only put one sequence number in the bubble. The BoM's are separate documents, each one has it's own unique part number. You would not be able to see the difference between most the interchangeable parts if we included them on the drawing. It would be shear madness to put dozens of numbers in each bubble.

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

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.

 

[drawoh]

thepete,

If you have a tabulated drawing of any kind, you have a table on it, which provides a part number for each version, and which shows the differences between them. Generally, the part number is the drawing number plus a dash, and your tabulation code.

As I noted, SolidWorks supports tabulated quantity columns. Alternately, your table to point to a series of external parts lists. It can point to notes, or whatever else it is the makes your parts different.

--
JHG

 

[MikeHalloran]

Two numbers in one bubble is confusing.

Using the same view for two different assemblies is confusing.

Using two part numbers that differ only by a suffix is confusing. Better they be completely different.

I'd prefer two entirely separate drawings and two entirely separate BOMs and two entirely separate assembly part numbers.
In the old days, the second one would take way less than an hour's work with sepias.
Computers have not been universally helpful.







Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA

 

[CheckerHater]

We produce dozens of different assemblies from one drawing. We only put one sequence number in the bubble

How do you deal with revisions? Even in times of CAD many places still follow the rule that you strike out the old part and you DO NOT reuse line/item number for new part.

 

[dgallup]

Like I said, the BoMs are separate documents. They have their own revision history (alteration record, which is also a separate document). So we may have an item like a spring with 5 different rates or a metering disk with dozens of hole sizes and patterns. They all get assembled exactly the same way and you can barely tell the difference between the parts by looking at them. Manufacturing just need to know which parts are used to build each assembly, that is controlled by the BoM. The part numbers never go on the drawing.

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

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.

 

[ctopher]

This is a first for me. If I made a dwg or BOM like this at any company I have worked at, this would never work.
I agree, very confusing. But, if it works for your company...

Chris
SolidWorks 13
ctopher's home
SolidWorks Legion

 

[ewh]

I don't see any huge problems, until one configuration has a part eliminated or added.

“Know the rules well, so you can break them effectively.”
-Dalai Lama XIV

 

[dgallup]

Then it gets it's own drawing.

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

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.

 

[udayh22]

thepete,

one way to resolve your problem is to use single drawing for multiple assemblies having separate BOMs. In BOM use same find numbers for bolt and washer respectively as currently you are and common drawing (different part number other than Assembly part numbers) to be added in BOM as supplementary drawing in both BOMs. Now BOM structures for both assemblies will be as attached.


While ballooning in drawing make sure you will callout same find number to same type of component (like screws, nuts etc), positioned in same location in assembly even though part numbers are different in respective BOMs. It will avoid confusion and same drawing can be used for similar type of assemblies regardless the size.


- Uday