ECO form: "IS" "WAS" order

[mackra]

In the context of an ECO form that is showing the difference between the pre-change state vs post-change state, is there a Y14.X order standard for depicting the change? Or is it more of a preference? For example is it more common to show the pre-change / post-change order as:

IS: Post-Change text or image
WAS: Pre-Change text or image

OR...

WAS: Pre-Change text or image
IS: Post-Change text or image

Thanks,

 

[MintJulep]

Do you mean like:

Is this WAS your biggest problem your life IS pretty good.

 

[ctopher]

It's a preference. Most companies I have worked at I see
IS:
WAS:

 

[3DDave]

I've used "WAS" "NOW" at the previous company for 30+ years.

I prefer to simply incorporate all the changes and let software generate the differences between them with a link to a report as to why the changes are being made rather than WAS/IS/NOW which tells no one much about the reason the changes exist.

An integrated CAD/CAE/CAM system will carry the change all the way through noting any features that no longer exist have their tool paths eliminated and noting those surfaces that newly exist have no matching manufacturing operations. Any minor dimensional or tolerance changes will be automatically adapted in the tool path software or noted as changes to the tool holder (for drilled operations.)

How have ECOs hung on so long when they another step to incorporation errors? They were great in the 1940s, OK in the 1980s.

What a drag they still exist.

 

[drawoh]

In the context of an ECO form that is showing the difference between the pre-change state vs post-change state, is there a Y14.X order standard for depicting the change? Or is it more of a preference? For example is it more common to show the pre-change / post-change order as:

mackra,

I am not aware of a standard for ECRs, ECOs, ECNs, change requests, orders and notices. Each and every person who sets them up do it whatever way they damn well please. The terminology means what they choose it to mean, neither or nor less. Everybody else interprets the concepts the same way.

How about context. If I am writing an engineering change REQUEST, I am complaining about something. The flange screws ARE not big enough. "Discombooberate" IS spelled wrong on page 11 of the assembly drawing. As the ECR writer, I will not necessarily make the corrections. The engineering change review committee may determine that the flange screws ARE big enough. They can correct the spelling of "discombooberate", they can re-write the sentence, or they can say "No, we like the spelling."

If I am writing an engineering change ORDER, I am instructing somebody to change the flange screws from M8 to M12. Since we cannot agree on the spelling of "discombooberate", I will provide the replacement word, or new sentence. IS and ARE are not meaningful distinctions.

I am applying way more logic than I ever have seen used on an ECR or ECO form.