Clerical spelling error. 1

[James7443]

I have an instance where a spelling error was introduce during the last revision change. The word is in the drawing title and was spelled correctly in revision "A" of the drawing. During the update to revision "B" one word in the title was accidentally changed. The change request markup does not authorize a change in the title and the error was not discovered during the checking phase. This spelling error was made seven days ago.

Is there anything in ASME specification that allow this spelling to be correct today without changing the revision of the drawing?

Thanks, James

 

[dgallup]

I don't know what ASME has to say about it but was the drawing distributed to suppliers, customers, etc? If it's gone out and you want to change it, should have a new revision in my book. We do have an expedited process for simple error corrections like that, does not need nearly as many approvals.

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

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.

 

[MintJulep]

No.

 

[jassco]

Hi, James:

You can make the correction. But you have to go through a revision process. You are not supposed to touch anything on a released print without advancing its revision.

Nice try. But no.

Best regards,

Alex

 

[drawoh]

James7443,

Make a revision. State that you corrected the spelling error. Your fabricators will see that you did not change the part definition in any way. If they don't trust you, they must charge more.

--
JHG

 

[James7443]

There are some exceptions in which you don't have to create a revision. One is when you completely redraw and replace a drawing. It is noted in the revision column but the revision letter does not change. However, I can't find anything to correct spelling errors.

One thing that I tried to find without any luck was the fact that the revision A drawing had the word spelled correctly and the change notice did not authorize to change the word. But in this case the drawing change procedure was followed, the drawing was checked to the change notice, but this misspelled word was not noticed.

Normally this would not be an issue and the correction would be made on the next revision if ever. But in this case a list will be submitted to an outside entity that will review p/n's, titles, revision, etc.. Everything needs to be black and white, no gray areas allowed.

Thanks, James

 

[drawoh]

James7443,

There are no exceptions to recording revisions. You are moving out onto a slippery slope. If you can tweak that spelling error, I can tweak a tolerance.

You should not change form, fit and function on your parts. If you need to change form, fit and function, you create a new part, a new part number, and a new revision table.

Look at this from the point of manufacturing and their warehouse. Part number 123[‑]456 works on every assembly that calls up that part. If you are willing to make functional revisions, then the parts must be stored by revision (123[‑]456[‑]C?). Since they have no reliable way of tracking which revisions are functional, the parts fabricated from the drawing with DISCOMBOOBERATE spelled incorrectly on page three, must be separated from the parts fabricated from the correctly spelled drawings. If you slip changes in without telling anybody, manufacturing must store parts by manufacturing batch.

Look at it from the point of view of your fabricator. If you send out drawing 123[‑]456[ ]Rev[ ]C, they need to know if their tooling (dies and fixtures? CNC[ ]code?) still works. If they cannot trust you, they just re[‑]do that tooling, and then charge you for it.

This all is the KISS rule in action!

--
JHG

 

[CheckerHater]

I can't find anything to correct spelling errors.

Paragraph 5.1(e):
When minor changes not affecting form, fit, or function, such as correction of misspelled words or addition of reference dimensions, are required on the drawing, the changes should be incorporated at the same time as other revision authorization documents.

"For every expert there is an equal and opposite expert"
Arthur C. Clarke Profiles of the future

 

[3DDave]

If part of the reason for asking about this is "Does it have to be this painful?" the answer is "Yes." Because being painful for even little problems discourages people from being sloppy on larger ones as well. If it's one drawing and that's the only issue it should have been through writing up the change and getting it approved with all the embarrassment that entails for a typo.