callouts/balloons in notes

[Kirsten]

We've been discussing how to call out items in notes, whether to include the title, part number and/or item number, or any combination of those.
Also, is a balloon (circle) over the 3 in the examples below necessary? We're trying to make the notes as automatic as possible by tying them to part attributes.

Here are some examples:

1) Apply tape, Item 3, to carton...

2) Apply Item 3 to carton...

3) Apply tape, 861453-00, to carton

4) Apply 3 to carton...

5) Apply tape to carton...

Any thoughts?
Thanks.

 

[MadMango]

As long as the item is described, #2 above should work. We don't place balloons in the notes. You could also use:

6) Apply Item 3 (861453-00) to carton...

The only problem there is if you change part numbers on the tape, you have to change every drawing that references it.

[green]"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers."[/green]
Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943.
Have you read faq731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?

 

[ewh]

I agree with MadMango. #2 would be my first choice, but his suggestion of including the p/n is good, as long as it doesn't change. In either case, baloons are not normally used in notes; use "item" instead.

 

[MechCT]

If you're drawing is going to be used to aid assembly than I've found in the past that a brief description of the part (as in option #1) is best. But there is nothing wrong with option #2 and I would probably pick that one if I was doing a drawing that manufacturing, assy, and inspection people were all going to use.

 

[wes616]

Following along with MechCT's suggestion, If you give a desc, even if it is in the notes, you should consider (REF)ing it.

ex. ...APPLY ITEM NO. 2 (TAPE) TO CARTON...

Wes C.
------------------------------
There are no engineers in the hottest parts of hell, because the existence of a 'hottest part' implies a temperature difference, and any marginally competent engineer would immediately use this to run a heat engine and make some other part of hell comfortably cool. This is obviously impossible.

 

[ctopher]

We use items 1 & 2 and work well for us.

Chris
Sr. Mechanical Designer, CAD
SolidWorks 05 SP3.1 / PDMWorks 05
ctopher's home site (updated 06-21-05)
FAQ559-1100
FAQ559-716

 

[Heckler]

I would agree with Chris about item 1 or 2 working. But something you might want to consider is if this a manufacturing process write an assembly procedure and then call out that procedure on the print. So of our assembly processes are way to lengthy to list in block notes.

Best Regards,

Heckler
Sr. Mechanical Engineer
SW2005 SP 5.0 & Pro/E 2001
Dell Precision 370
P4 3.6 GHz, 1GB RAM
XP Pro SP2.0
NIVIDA Quadro FX 1400
o
_`\(,_
(_)/ (_)

Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean that they aren't out to get me.

- Woody Allen

 

[drawoh]

Kirsten,

What can your CAD software do, and how observant and thorough are you and your co-workers?

SolidWorks can re-arrange parts lists without me noticing, therefore, I do not include item numbers in drawing notes. I use part descriptions, which I make absolutely consistent on the drawings and on the parts list. Also, I do not use part numbers, since there might be more than one valid one, and since the parts list callup could change. SolidWorks can extract part metadata out to any notes you have attached on the drawing view with an arrow, but this does not work for assemblies, at least on SW2003.

On my drawing, it would be "APPLY ADHESIVE TAPE TO CARTON". No part numbers. No item numbers. The parts list would show the manufacturer, the part number and the description "ADHESIVE TAPE".

JHG

 

[wes616]

Hi Kristen,

Generally speaking in the Aerospace Industry (or at least the parts that i've been involved in) it is better to write a manufacturing process specification, and refer to that as a flagnote callout in the drawing than to include this information on the face of the drawing. (Especially since "applying adhesive to a carton" can be then used on many drawings.)

If that is the case, you would call out the part numbers explicitly within the specification. But, hey, writing process specs is an extra step...

Wes C.
------------------------------
There are no engineers in the hottest parts of hell, because the existence of a 'hottest part' implies a temperature difference, and any marginally competent engineer would immediately use this to run a heat engine and make some other part of hell comfortably cool. This is obviously impossible.

 

[looslib]

This may make this thread longer but, someplace in ASME standards doesn't it say that manufacturing process steps are NOT to be placed on the face of a drawing?

Assembly operation steps are not really any different from drill and tap hole statements.


"Wildfires are dangerous, hard to control, and economically catastrophic."
"Fixed in the next release" should replace "Product First" as the PTC slogan.

Ben Loosli
CAD/CAM System Analyst
Ingersoll-Rand

 

[wes616]

Ben,

A process spec should be it's own doccument.

As assembly processes get more sophisticated, then they should be placed off the drawing. If the process is to be called out on multiple drawings, it makes sense to do this, then refer to the refrencing doccument on the face of the drawing through a flagnote...


Wes C.
------------------------------
There are no engineers in the hottest parts of hell, because the existence of a 'hottest part' implies a temperature difference, and any marginally competent engineer would immediately use this to run a heat engine and make some other part of hell comfortably cool. This is obviously impossible.

 

[Kirsten]

Thanks for the responses! For the record, we use Unigraphics (NX2), which lets us link the callout, part number and/or title to the parts list. The problem with linking the title is that it often doesn't read well in a note. (Secure item 2, Clamp, loop type, MS122914...) I think that using the title helps whoever is reading the notes (and we should do as much as we can to encourage that practice) grasp the meaning better. They don't have to jump back and forth from note to parts list.

Also, we do have Op. sheets, but they are controlled by manufacturing and are generated after the drawing, so I don't know what they're going to include. (Sounds like management could address that issue.)

No one here can explain to me why there should be a balloon over the callout, but they've "always done it that way." They're a bother when you have to move the note around, though. You can go to the trouble of associating the x-y origins and hope the note doesn't change later, but it's easier to do a transform (UG lingo), but not as easy as dragging it.