To Tell or Not to Tell, That is the Question!!?? 2

[11echo]

I’m a Piping Designer with over 30 yr.s under my belt. I work for a new company that promotes steam generation projects in the mid-east. The problem I’m having is I’m seeing a lot of design and drafting mistakes on pretty much ALL the dwg.s that are generated out of this office. When this company first started up they were trying to develop a dwg format with a “company title block” …what they came up with was somebody’s idea of a good mechanical dwg. format, in reality it was an architectural title block …information block positioned on the side with rounded corners on the borders. I went it and talk with the lead engineer about this, I told him that if we were just dealing with local area this architectural title block with probably be fine, but now we are getting into projects world wide, and we need to be more “professional” and have a real “mechanical” title block. He agreed, and after battling with the other owners …who like the first title block, they finally accepted it, after 2 months of “discussion”.
Well now I’m working on a pilot project and I’m seeing really poor dwg.s going out, poor design (not wrong but poor) and the drafting is pathetic! AND this doesn’t seem to be an issue with the project engineer! I have pointed out a number of things and he just says “it’s good enough”. SO… we come to my question, do I go back to the lead engineer and point out all this “stuff” …deadlines are looming. Or do I wait till the project is over and go in at that point. Or do I just keep my mouth shut? …They are the owners, if it’s ok with them as is and the clients accept it, why would they care? As I said, I’m “old school” and this type of stuff drives me up a wall!
THX. for letting me vent!! …Mark

 

[RossABQ]

I am very sympathetic to "civilperson"s comments, re: CAD standards being the product, not the communication. On a recent project we spent 20% of the TOTAL engineering budget bringing the CAD files we got from the client up to standards that changed THREE times during the project. Sure, we got some extra money, but I had to commit my best designer to the tedious CAD standards work, when he could have been designing. The people who run our client's CAD system don't have any experience in engineering or to construction, they have never taken an entry-level "engineering graphics" course. All they care about is line-weights and object attributes and other things that don't make the design any better.

 

[KENAT]

11echo, welcome to my world!

OK, not quite my world as I’m currently in what you’d probably call machine design, but near enough.

I would say that the majority of managers and many Engineers (certainly almost all of them at my current employer) massively undervalue design communication.

The problem with ‘good enough’ is defining it. The lowest level would be ‘all required information to allow the item to be manufactured without ambiguity’ or something like that.

The ‘without ambiguity’ part causes the problems. If you’re happy to make assumptions about making the part as pictorially shown, invoking ‘industry practices’ without listing them on the drawing etc. then you can get away with a lot.

Trouble is in the event of a dispute between the party creating the drawing and that creating the hardware (or equivalent), the drawing is a legal document. In court all these ‘implicit’ requirements will be meaningless. Just because industry tolerance is say +-1/4” if this isn’t somehow listed or reference on the drawing, and the actual part is +1/2” & doesn’t work, you’ve got no recourse to reject it.

Sure most of us have probably had things made to a sketch on the back of a napkin or equivalent but how would that have held up in court had there been a problem?

Most of your arguments about CAD etc probably have an element of truth, although they aren’t the full answer. I joined industry long after CAD was standard, in fact 3D was already common in my field at the time (aerospace/defense) and I’ve never really used 2D CAD or hand drawing (bar a few minor revisions etc). However, I do try to create good drawings, follow relevant industry standards etc, apparently so much so I was asked to be a checker.

As regards, To Tell or Not to Tell. I’d summarize my concerns in a memo or similar, being careful not to assign any blame etc. Try to give financial implications etc if at all possible, at least emphasize the legal document part. I’d also make some suggestions, for instance if your industry has formal standard drafting practices then suggesting your company invokes them. Once you have some kind of standard then you can look at checking as ewh suggests in order to ensure compliance with the standard. Without some kind of standard defined and invoked any attempt to ensure high quality drawings is doomed because you haven’t defined high quality.

Beyond that how hard to push it is cause for hard thought. You will probably not be popular. It will be perceived that you are suggesting doing extra work, causing delays/requiring more resource etc. and/or saying they aren’t doing it properly. Unless you manage to get some senior people on board then you’re in a no win situation, and probably should either forget about it and/or look for alternative employment. Otherwise trying to push this kind of thing yourself will probably get you fired one way or another, or else made so miserable you leave anyway.

Sorry, I tried to keep it short but it’s a subject near to my heart.


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

 

[KENAT]

By the way, unless safety is involved I don't see any real ethical issue, unless you're thinking along the lines of a good work ethic requires producing the best quality drawings possible or similar.

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

 

[Ashereng]

11echo,

Here is another way of looking at it.

You say the product is not wrong - so I guess that means that it is correct. The product does not look professional, has inconsistencies (but still correct), and lacks polish.

If this is the case, and the project manager is fine with it, then I would just let it go. Maybe the project manager puts up with the imperfections (but still correct) of the product because he is on a tight schule, tight budget, doesn't have the more experience manpower to do it "more professionally" or what not. The point is, it is correct. The other stuff is more "prefereces". That, I have no qualms letting go since it is more of a stylistic issue to me.

Don't know if this viewpoint helps.

"Do not worry about your problems with mathematics, I assure you mine are far greater."
Albert Einstein
Have you read FAQ731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?

 

[jmw]

Within Aherengs definition of acceptable I'd say there are two categories to consider:
[ul][li]drawings going to suppliers [/li]
[li]drawings going to the client [/li][/ul]
I'd suggest that drawings present an image and tell a story about the company that produced them.
I'd also suspect that his is an argument that would gain you more support than any other....

JMW

http://www.ViscoAnalyser.com

 

[csd72]

If it is a matter of inadequacy or safety then that is an engineering concern.

If it is a matter of presentation and quality then that is a management concern.

For the former, I would jump up and down about it, for the latter I would point it out but leave the final decision up to them.

I would always strive for quality in my own designs, however.

csd