Drawing approvals

[billtati]

In our design dept we use several CAD applications. When sending a drawing for approval via our Electronic Document Control System (EDMS) we either send the actual file or an Adobe Acrobat .pdf version. In most cases the engineer approving the drawing does not have access to the software that created it (Inventor, etc.) and in many cases receives an "uneditable" .pdf. As such, before the drawing leaves the design dept we type the approving party's name in the approval block with only one date... the date the drawing is sent for approval. It is often days before the drawing makes it's way through the necessary approval process and is "released". This creates a problem... the date on the drawing is not exactly the same as the date indicated in EDMS as the approval date. This leads to a question; When indicating a date for approval, or revision, is this the date the draftsperson changed the file, or is it the date the approving person "signs" the drawing. ANSI standard says it is the date of "implementation", which is a bit ambiguous. We have been resolving this issue by stating that the dates on the drawing are "for reference only, see electronic document management system for approvals and dates". Has anyone else encountered this problem and how did you resolve it?

 

[Mandrake22]

I don't have any comment on your date precision concerns but the full version of Acrobat (not just the reader) does allow the addition of text.

 

[ewh]

We consider the date of implemetation to be the date that the final approval signature is given. We do not circulate any drawing with the signature blocks filled in until the approval signatures are given. Thus when we release the drawing, all signatures and dates signed are available to include in the released file. Files awaiting approval are kept in a separate pending file (which cannot be used for manufacture, purchasing, etc); once signed, the signature blocks are updated and they are moved to the released file.
This method has worked well for us.

 

[billtati]

Mandrake- I have the full version of Acrobat, but the engineers do not. Hence the in-quotes "uneditable" phrase. And if we did allow editing of the .pdf file, the next revision of the base document would print to a .pdf without correct signature & dates. Each change to a .pdf would necessitate an update to the base document (.dwg, idw, etc.).

ewh- Once the drawing leaves my control in the EDMS system I have no control over the file or knowledge of when a document is released. The last person in the chain is our configuration manager who does not have the multitudes of different software (AutoCAD, Inventor, PowerPCB, PowerLogic, etc.) or the skills to edit in these different programs. The only way to coordinate the actual dates & signatures is the method you use... but this would mean the configuration manager would need a copy of every program used to create controlled documents... or send the files back to the designer for signature/date reconcilliation, a step no one wants.

I agree that the date of implementation is the date of the last approval in the chain, but my company has not interpreted it this way. They believe that the date the draftsperson/designer changes the file is the date of implementation.

Back to square one. :-(

 

[ewh]

One solution, which is used by one of our customers who use IMAN, is to have a statement in the title block stating "SEE SEPARATE APPROVAL RECORD".

 

[billtati]

Is this statement IN PLACE OF the approval names & date? or IN ADDITION to the approval names & dates?

 

[ewh]

In place of. The only names that appear on their drawings are the one who incorporate any ECN changes.

 

[billtati]

Won't the names associated with ECN's lead to the same problem as the initial release (disagreement between the document and the management system)?

 

[ewh]

Only the name of the changer is on the drawing, not the date of change incorporation. As long as the ECN documents show who incorporated the ECN, there should be no problem.

 

[BML]

My company separates the implementation date into two distinct areas. There is a release date for the drawing, which is the date the revised drawing was completed and checked. Then there is a separate shop floor release date, which controls when the new revision of the part actually makes its way into production.

I've also worked at a different company that essentially made the revision part of the drawing/part number, specifically to control issues with releases to the shop floor. I suppose it depends on the abilities of whatever system is available to you.

 

[DRC1]

If you have no control over the drawing - who reviews and modifies the drawings? Doesn't anyone talk to the original drafter/ designer about comments questions or changes?

 

[billtati]

BML- The problem coordinating the EDMS system date and the date on the drawing would still exist. And making the revision part of the part number is a BIG no-no. Not only does it violate Mil standards, but everytime you revise a drawing it would necessitate a revision to all Parts Lists, Kitting Logs, etc.

DRC1- I only have control over the drawing when it is in my "workflow". Once I finish the drawing and send it for approval, it is no longer under my control. It may then take a day or two (or more) before it is finally released. If the approving party has comments or additional changes they route it back to me and the process starts again.

 

[BML]

billtati - making the revision part of the part number isn't necessarily bad, depending on your circumstances. That particular company didn't have to worry about Mil standards, and they needed to be able to go back and build a previous revision configuration if needed. So for them it made sense.

I should have also clarified my current company's practice. The date on the drawing is when it was last modified, which can be different than when it was actually approved. Even then, approval of the drawing can be separate from approval of tooling based on the drawing, which can be separate from approval to release the parts to production, which in turn can be separate from the date the parts start to be used in the shop.

It's a bit convoluted, but each item is tied to an ECO/ECN, and our procedures farily clearly state the distinction between all the dates. Our own drawing database includes date fields for both last modified as well as approval.