Prototype Drawing Release Process 1

[umatrix]

Hello E-tips,

Our current drawing software only allows one a revision to be released, i.e, active. This is helpful for production parts but does not allow for the flexibility and iterative nature of the prototype phase.

I have been asked to release three prototypes each with minor variations.

What methods do you use for this situation and are there any standards for drawing release/revision process that covers the release of multiple version of prototypes?

 

[dgallup]

I give them three different drawing numbers.

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

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.

 

[djhurayt]

to expand upon DG's answer:
the same basic number with an A, B, C, etc. prefix meant to say suffix

 

[berkshire]

As dgallop says 3 different drawing numbers, and stamp them " Not for manufacture." unless you actually want somebody to make that part instead of just reviewing it.
B.E.

You are judged not by what you know, but by what you can do.

 

[umatrix]

Thank you, everyone.

Follow-up question,

Are these types of methods controlled by your company or are you free release by method of choice, i.e revision versus different part numbers.

I would assume that an ISO certified company would have this process controlled and well documented.

 

[CWB1]

Our current drawing software only allows one a revision to be released, i.e, active.

That software would not work well for any design or manufacturing company I have worked for as its common IME to have multiple print revisions released to production simultaneously.

Typically releasing parts is a standardized process, sometimes as simple as an engineer and his supervisor each approving a print, sometimes as complex as a dozen or more signoffs.

 

[dgallup]

have multiple print revisions released to production simultaneously

So which one do they use??? This is completely verboten anywhere I've worked.

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

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.

 

[CWB1]

So which one do they use???

The one called out in the specific assembly. Lean established that excess p/ns were a significant waste in manufacturing 20+ years ago due to lost data, lost time locating data, duplication of data, and a number of other reasons. A previous employer had common fastener p/ns with well over 100 revisions and a dozen or more in production.

 

[dgallup]

How can you tell which one is called out in the assembly if they have the same number?

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

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.

 

[CWB1]

They don't really have the same "p/n." The base p/n is the same, the full p/n includes the rev via a -XXX suffix and is clearly labeled. When there is no suffix the part is assumed to be the initial rev 1/A/etc.

 

[Korichnevijgigant]

I would assume that an ISO certified company would have this process controlled and well documented.

you would think so, but I have worked at ISO9001 certified places where configuration control and their change management processes were a joke and only followed when things were slow

I have seen multiple drawings that were very different with drawing number with the same revision

Just curious what software are you using?

I recently dabbled with OnShape, they allow branches off the main released part, so you can do a say a vendor feedback or DFM branch and make changes as needed that will not affect the main branch of the part, then if that gets approved, you can roll those changes into the main branch and like magic the changes are applied to the main branch all the while keeping revision history and change history, it blew my mind

THIS SIGNATURE INTENTIONALLY BLANK