Drawing Checking 2

[slipstream44]

thread765-185533 This is in response to the myriad comments on the art of drawing checking. As a DOD drawing checker for two decades I can validate that the support of management is paramount in a reasonably smooth process. Without it, you are "fair game" to anyone with an axe to grind, usually has something to do with ego. Never commit to a meeting where the drawings are to be scrutinized by every tom, dick and harriet who's credentials are dubious and which is not strictly overseen by management; he/she absolutely MUST establish the ground rules for any comment(s), otherwise that meeting will become another gunfight at the OK Corral. The drawing checker must be given the benefit of the doubt because the drawing package inevitably becomes his/her responsibility once his/her signature appears on the drawings. That's the key.....SIGNATURES. Every other drawing not yet ready for public review should always be stamped "PRELIMINARY" to make it clear that that drawing has not yet been "blessed" by the drawing checker. Management is your flak jacket.

 

[MacGyverS2000]

You dug up a 5 year old thread to comment on it?

I should give you a star just for giving me a blast from the past...

Dan - Owner

http://www.Hi-TecDesigns.com

 

[TheTick]

Aaagh! Zombie thread!

 

[slipstream44]

Actually, I came across this site as an aside to wondering, since I am retired, if drawing checkers were considered viable components these days,...and yes, I AM a "blast from the past". I dunno, my wine cellar is a bit dusty too. A five-year old thread vice a five-year old wine, you be the judge.

 

[KENAT]

Come on guys, not sure pouncing on the newbie is really called for.

slipstream, you might have been better received over in forum1103 where some of us actually care about the quality of our drawings and think the checking process has merit, not like the unwashed masses here;-).

Plus there has been at least one recent thread touching on checking where your input may be appreciated.

Welcome to Eng-Tips!

Posting guidelines faq731-376

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

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

 

[slipstream44]

Thanks KENAT. Clearly I cruised up the wrong road; didn't mean to run over anyone's dogma with my karma. Probably too, should have mentioned that in my experience entitlement was the biggest sticking point when marking up certain originators' drawings. I think it may have had something to do with the red felt tip pen. Similar response as waving a red cape at a bull.

Thanks again, I'll be moving on now to that forum you suggested.

 

[patprimmer]

If the internet had been around, we would have found Pythagoras theorm published on a forum.

Although being a very old thread, it would still be current.

Regards
Pat
See FAQ731-376 for tips on use of eng-tips by professional engineers &

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

for site rules

 

[MacGyverS2000]

Sheesh, somebody not have their pint this morning, Ken? ;-) I don't think either of us jumped on him, we just noted the ancient thread being resurrected...

Dan - Owner

http://www.Hi-TecDesigns.com

 

[TheTick]

btw...

A.) Just joking
B.) WELCOME!
C.) I heartily agree with what you say about ground rules, OK Corral, etc. I've been to too many review sessioins that turn into wholesale trashings due to lack of scope and discipline.

 

[slipstream44]

It's all swell now; found the appropriate forum. Like the man said in "Absence of Malice", "...everyone in the room's smart..."

 

[SNORGY]

There is a difference between "checking" and "redoing because *my* may is better".

There is value in the former, not much in the latter.


Regards,

SNORGY.

 

[casseopeia]

Well don't spend all of your time over there, slipstream44. Come back to the fora where sharp wits are often accompanied by sharp claws and where getting pounced on is a right of passage.

Personally I'd love to argue the "management is your flak jacket." The last place I worked the 'checking' system was nothing more than another method of power mongering and a way to terrorize Project Managers. In my case, management was a 70 year old fine arts major who spent his career in building maintenance. He was not a form of protection, he was an albatross around my neck that I had to defer to and pretend not to notice his failing memory and other symptoms of Alzheimers.

"Gorgeous hair is the best revenge." Ivana Trump

 

[KENAT]

Funny Snorgy, every designer/engineer I've worked with that really complained about checking across the board turned out it was because their drawings looked like something an MBA would turn out.;-)

Checking in the DoD/Aerospace etc. field generally seems a bit different than elsewhere, in so much as they take it seriously.

Posting guidelines faq731-376

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

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

 

[SNORGY]

Kenat

Regards,

SNORGY.

 

[SNORGY]

Stupid iPad...

Anyway my comment is rooted in an incident in which I had a senior piping designer lay out a pigging skid for me. Then, the Checker came into the picture and laid it out differently because he liked it better his way.

Burned 40 man hours fixing something that there wasn't a darn thing wrong with in the first place.

That is when checking has no value,

Regards,

SNORGY.

 

[slipstream44]

Typically I would make certain an imposing figure of management was chairing the meeting, if for no other reason than to establish the scope/boundaries of that gathering. It tended to weed out the casual shooting-from-the-hip types who were posturing for attention. As far as I was concerned the management rep didn't really have to get in the weeds of the drawing package; just act as a deterrent to inanities. He would simply stay standing, maybe walk around a bit and call balls and strikes. I had a pretty good run at this DOD/Navy R&D site using that method; about 90% effective over a period of 20 plus years. Granted, one must identify and secure the effective manager, one who enjoys that kind of control. Let HIM/HER massage egos in their inimitable style while you, as the checker can go about fielding legitimate issues.

 

[MacGyverS2000]

Snorgy,

That's not a "checker"... that's a "changer". In my view, a checker should essentially redline all issues, and only make changes after they have been approved.

But what do I know, I'm just an EE... I only draw schematics, and electricity flows up or down.

Dan - Owner

http://www.Hi-TecDesigns.com

 

[slipstream44]

It generally boils down to how much trust is warranted a "checker"; and what actually defines him/her. There is little use for a tyrant in any scientific endeavor. The checker must gain an implicit level of confidence from his/her contemporaries, otherwise....well, you said it fine, you will have a "changer" to educate.

 

[KENAT]

MacGyverS2000, from where I've seen it with a half decent checker then the designer/drafter/engineer needs to justify not making the change.

Plus there are at least 2 sides to the checking thing.

There's the design verification aspect that obviously needs to be done by someone familiar with that aspect. Back in aerospace we had a separate 'structural' approval for that, and to some extent the cheif engineer/tech director approval.

Then there's the drawing completeness/correctness/standard compliance/basic manufactureability... side of things.

Do not get me wrong, in many cases one person can adequately address both sets of issues, however sometimes finding someone that's both a relevant technical 'expert' and a drawing requirements 'expert' can be a challenge.

Posting guidelines faq731-376

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

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

 

[slipstream44]

KENAT: Yes, during my career with what is quaintly referred to around here as "The Navy Base", I wore many hats. Designer, Checker, Configuration Manager, Project Manager; eventually became the de facto Checker due largely to the need for such a position. The volume of drawings being prepared was daunting. So, in essence, I agree that a checker must be capable of investigating a drawing package with the intuitive as well as the statutes.