Multiple Assembly Parts List, MIL-STD-100 then and now

[gjacc]

My company historically uses Multiple Assembly Parts Lists on our drawings. For example, an assembly has two variants that are the same except for the Battery Pack (lithium or alkaline) and Circuit Board (Lithium or alkaline). In the drawing Parts List we will have a "-1" and "-2" "QTY REQD" columns for two variants of the assembly. The Parts List shows all variant assembly items, but leaves the QTY REQD cell blank if not used in that variant.

MIL-STD-100 (my book dated 1969) clearly states (section 9.6.3.1.2) that this is an acceptable method of listing multiple assemblies on a single drawing.

I have read ASME Y14.34M (and ASMW Y14.100 and MIL-STD-100G) and they do not mention multiple assembly parts lists!

If I have a two variant assembly with 30 parts and 2 that are different - it seems very wasteful (and silly) to have two separate assembly parts lists. What is the right/standard way to display parts lists on drawings today?

For background: My drawing software (Solid Edge v20) does not cooperate with this "mutiple assembly parts list" notion either. I always try to have linked draft parts lists with my assemblies. SE does this easily and even has "families of assemblies" for assembly variations. BUT you can't have a single linked parts list as I described above. Which means I have to generate the "QTY REQD" column and add a parts list manually (very time consuming).

Thanks for the feedback.

 

[KENAT]

Double check 14.34M-1996 Figure 4, number 2 first paragraph it would appear to me that it's still legitimate.

2 QUANTITY REQUIRED (Mandatory) The number of these columns need not be limited to one. ...

Wow, another SE user in this forum. We couldn't get SE to do it either back at V17, we had 4 cassettes that were the same except for a color coded 'jewel'. We wanted to do a multiple assy drawing using 'dash' numbers however neither the CAD or ERP system could handle it so instead we have 4 almost identical drawings. Fortunately we don't have a lot of assemblies like this.

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

 

[ewh]

Can't get NX to do it either. While I hate to do it, I am forced to cheat the system. Fortunately, this situation seldom happens here, and then only for tooling files.

Believe it if you need it or leave it if you dare. - [small]Robert Hunter[/small]

 

[gjacc]

Thanks Kenat. I skimmed that paragraph too fast. I'm sending an incident report/ feature request to Solid Edge...again.

Greg

 

[KENAT]

Let me know the ER number maybe I'll sign up to it too.

If you could do it based on family of assemblies somehow that might be really good, though I haven't thought it through.

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

 

[swertel]

Please take the SE portion of this conversation to the SE forums, so I can partake. I think KENAT adequately answered the OP.

--Scott

http://wertel.eng.pro

 

[gjacc]

I've created a new thread for this.
thread562-221790

An IR to Solid Edge is pending...

Greg