ASTM Y14.35M/Y14.100 and Revison change for Release to Fabrication 1

[FuriousG]

My company is initiating a new document control policy and we are split on the issue of revving submittal drawings to 'Fabrication Issue' when they come back approved.

We routinely send out submittal drawings for custom fabrications to consulting engineers for approval. Up until recently, when the drawing was approved and returned, it was up-revved before being issued to fabrication. Furthermore, the revision level after approval was switched from letter to number or vice-versa.

ASTM Y.14 35M & Y.14 100 speaks broadly of changing the revision of a drawing when transfer of design responsibility occurs. However, I believe this applies to documentation used between multiple organizations and is not necessarily applicable to releasing drawings for purchase & fabrication.

The issue is our drafters & drafting manager are convinced it is a waste of time to revise approved drawings if nothing has changed other than its ability to be purchased/fabricated. In their scenario a submittal drawing originally released at revision 'A' and approved by the customer would stay at revision 'A' throughout purchase & fabrication.

 

[ctopher]

I have never been at a company that changed the revs because of approval.
I have added the released rev, then stamped (in red) something like "waiting for approval" or "preliminary" or ??
The documents are signed per the revision that is submitted, not revised because it was approved. This is 'bassackwards'.

Chris
SolidWorks 10 SP4.0
ctopher's home
SolidWorks Legion

 

[KENAT]

Prior to formal release for production we use numeric revs and frankly sloppy doc control - it's up to the individual engineer to keep track.

When we formally release for production we go to rev A.

So for us there is sum justification of the switch because it indicates that the drawing is under formal doc control.

However, if for you if even before being sent for approval the drawings are under formal control then it's debatable if revving it adds much.

In fact, my first thought was similar to Chris that if they are approving rev 'X', then it seems perverse to then change it to rev '1' to indicate that it's been approved.

However, if you have issues like us of moving from effectively uncontrolled to controlled then I can maybe see why you're doing it.

Posting guidelines faq731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

(probably not aimed specifically at you)
What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484​

 

[ptruitt]

If your company expects to be in a situation where your customers or regulatory entities may come audit you, or where you may be about to invest in expensive MRP/ERP/PDM software, now is the time to read thick books cover-to-cover and get your ducks in a row and your formal, written, policies in place. A poor decision now can be devastating down the road. You should probably take your time with this decision.

(This topic should probably be in the Configuration Management forum.)

Peter Truitt

 

[fcsuper]

It sounds like your system is trying to mix release status with raw approvals. Although there is value in having pre-production revisions and production revisions (and rev'ving from pre-production to production; such as numeric to alphabet), an approval itself should happen for each revision, not just at the transition. Approval should not revise a drawing, in my view. This is because the approval is for the rev being approved. To revise after it is approved (and not seeking a new approval for the new revision) doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me either.

Matt Lorono, CSWP
Lorono's SolidWorks Resources & SolidWorks Legion
Follow me on Twitter

 

[ptruitt]

In an unregulated business that will never become regulated or sell to regulated OEMs that also has excellent effectivity record-keeping and proven policies that routinely pass audits, I don't see a reason to have Master Drawing Lists or do the 'Fabrication Issue' thing. But your documents must always be 'released' (if you call it that') before assembly drawings are 'released'. Folks must be asking for the 'Fabrication Issue' step because you don't control effectivity as well as it needs to be controlled. Compare what authors Frank Watts and Dave Garwood say about this and pick one of their distinctly different two approaches. Doing your homework before making a decision is very important.

Peter Truitt

 

[MintJulep]

You: Please approve this drawing, rev. 3.

Customer: This drawing rev. 3 is approved.

You: Revise the drawing to 4 to somehow note approval.

Customer's inspector: We approved rev. 3. Why are you building to rev. 4? What changed? Where is our approval of rev. 4? Did you ever send rev. 4 in to us for approval? I'm not authorizing shipment of anything made to rev. 4.

You: your payment is delayed and you spend a bunch of time and money explaining your system to your customer, not that it matters, because you'll get a different inspector next time who will say the exact same thing.