What should i do? 5

[evilchickenking]

ok, so i work for a pump manufacturer that designs and builds large pump. currently im their draftsman. up until now all has been good there but lately they've been hounding me to find a way to catch more mistakes.

they've really, flat out, just not implemented anything that would remotely resemble a system in which my work is checked. what should i do?

today i was told that some job got botched because of something that should have been caught by someone and it's landed squarely on my shoulders.

what system do you guys use check your work and how does it function?

 

[ctopher]

JStephen,
I see what you are saying, but I disagree. I think all parts, no matter quantity or price, should have the drawings checked. A system should be set up to have all documentation checked and have configuration control.
You never know if marketing is going to turn that $50 part into a $1000 part, change the qty from 2 to 5000, or change it from a commercial standard part into a military part.
Set up a document system that works to insure consistent quality of the parts.

Chris
Systems Analyst, I.S.
SolidWorks 06 4.1/PDMWorks 06
AutoCAD 06
ctopher's home (updated 06-21-06)

 

[JStephen]

On the contrary, Chris, a lot of us DO know that the quantity isn't going to change from 2 to 5000, and that it isn't going to go from commerical standard part (or actually, commercial custom part) to a military part- you're assuming we all work in the same industry, and that isn't the case.

 

[ctopher]

If you are lucky to know, that's great. Then it will work for you.
The last 3 companies I worked for, engineering does not know. The purchasing and marketing depts take over from there. We just design and document the parts, then release into the system. It's in productions hands after that, unless there is a design problem.
But, every doc is checked through a strict configuration system and all parts are treated the same, this way all drawings are consistent.

Chris
Systems Analyst, I.S.
SolidWorks 06 4.1/PDMWorks 06
AutoCAD 06
ctopher's home (updated 06-21-06)

 

[KENAT]

If drawing check must be rationed then Jstephan way is one approach.

Another, perhaps slightly better way, is to have different levels of check.

e.g. High cost impact parts get a very thorough check, Low cost impact parts get a lower level of check.

However, my preference is still for 100% full checking but it's not always possible to convince management of this.

Maybe the problem is that checking usually doesn't directly make money. However, checking can save vast sums of money by identifying problems up front before parts are made or attempted to be made. However, because these amounts are very difficult to quantify it’s difficult to put a number on it to convince management.

Ajack is right about ISO 9001, all it does is make sure you have a documented process. Doesn’t guarantee that process is good or even adequate.

Also while getting QA and production input is always good I wouldn’t get hung up on making sure they are a required signature on all drawings.

Something that might help if you must do self check is prepare yourself a ‘checker check list’ for you to go through.

BTW, my company still hasn’t formally implemented checking. Those in my group do it and we try and persuade others to take advantage of our checker but it’s still pretty much hit & miss. Last I heard our ‘checking procedure’ document was held up because people couldn’t decide on the document format!

 

[ewh]

One way to quantify it would be to research existing change orders and the cost of implementation and correction of existing parts per those change orders.

 

[macmet]

Well, it's friday afternoon and it has been a long week.

I have been following this thread since it was posted. Unfortunately, I have no input that can be considered useful in any sense, but I love the handle "evilchickenking".

Cheers

 

[Allen]

I have a situation like yours in my company, since I am working in a small company I am preparing my own drawings and check them myself. My suggest is that make a checklist for yourself . the most terrible thing that I myself afraid of when prepare a drawing is “dimensioning in CAD” and “Bill of materials” CAD packages can easily fool one when dimensioning fast. Before dimensioning a part ask yourself if it makes scenes and “how this will be measured? “. Here is a good checklist which you can print and use :

http://www.quartic.co.nz/4_drawing_guidelines.html

 

[ewh]

That checklist may be a good start, but leaves a little to be desired (at least if you are trying to conform to Y14.5 or similar standards).
I do have a problem with their take on view presentation - "We have to see the component in every view (top, bottom, sides and ends)."
A good, concise drawing only shows the views necessary to define the part and extraneous views just take up space. Iso views may be an exception, as they do add to the understanding of the part.
But I wander from the op...

 

[evilchickenking]

I've been trying to figure out exactly what iso 9001 or y14.5 are but haven't been able to track much down on whats in either spec. is there any place that provides such details without purchasing a book on the matter? i have an idea of what they are but not exactly certain.

can someone explain a good way to go about setting up iso 9001? having a hard time getting the management to buy into the fact that we need it.

also if they don't opt to go for some for of standardization, should i be nervous about staying in the company?

 

[ewh]

I don't think you will find them for free, but I also don't think Y14.5 covers your industry. There are some national cad standards which do that have been mentioned on this site. Try a search in the drafting standards thread. Good luck!

 

[MikeHalloran]

If you can't get management to even rent a checker, any attempt at implementing ISO9001 is a >>guaranteed<< disaster. You can't homebrew it, and you certainly can't homebrew it alone, and if you can't even scare up the money to buy a book about it, you just flat shouldn't be talking about it on company premises. You don't want your name associated with it; it can easily eat up more money than you will make in your lifetime, and/or put the company out of business, and it won't solve your problem anyway.

Similarly, 14.5 is not a magic bullet, and even if it were, it's not the particular magic bullet you need.

If you can't find some way to get more sets of eyeballs on the design documents before chips are made, you are doomed.



Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA

 

[evilchickenking]

if after a while of trying the company is resistant to having a checking system, should i consider leaving the company for one that does use specs and is willing do have checkers?

 

[MikeHalloran]

Either that, or be prepared to suffer continued abuse for stuff that "should have been caught".



Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA

 

[jmw]

You shouldn't have to figure out ISO, or any other standard, you've got better things to do with your time and skills.

You don't have to find the justification, just look up a few companies that specialise and get them to send you some info.

These guys should do there own selling and will do a better job than you. Let them.

So I suggest all you need to do is get a couple of different companies to send in information and send it through to the boss and ask which company he wants you to get to come in to give their pitch. All this will cost is some time.

If this wasn't what he wanted you to do this is a good time for him to tell you how he wants you to solve the problem.... but if he knew that, he'd have told you in the first place; instead they have been "hounding you" to find a solution.
So you sending him a couple of companies for him to choose from "assumes" that this is what he wanted and his choice isn't "how" or "if" but "who".

It won't cost anything for the sales pitch and may help clarify the whole problem to you and your management.

Which ever company gets to make a pitch, be sure to brief them on the problems you are having so they can set up the presentation to hit some "nerve points".

Whatever happens now, you did your bit.

JMW

http://www.ViscoAnalyser.com

 

[aardvarkdw]

Evilchickenking,

Where are you located? If you are in the U.S. and you did your schooling here, you should have some idea of what is part of the ASME Y14.5M-1994 standard. That SHOULD have been what you were taught from, more or less. ISO 9001 is more of an organization issue, it requires accountablility for things like drawing revisions but it isn't a drawing standard. There is an ISO drawing standard but it isn't as well used in the U.S. and if you are working for a company that does military and gov't drawings there are DOD standards.

Like Mike said, having or knowing the drafting standards is not a magic bullet. You would need to get others at your company to use it as well for it to help and even then it wont help your problem with checking drawings.

Do what you can to ensure that you have caught everything you can before you submit a drawing, even if that means redrawing it from your print. Next, ask someone to review your work before you submit it (get them to sign it if you can). Next, bring your concerns to your supervisor and try to get them involved in implementing a checking system (whether it is peer-checking, or a dedicated checker). If you can't make any headway on any of these things and you don't like getting blamed for mistakes, you should look for another job. If you do, ask in the interview about the company drafting standards and about the checking and drawing review process.

 

[KENAT]

evil,

I suspect a decision like 'we should implement iso 9001' is well above your pay scale. As others note 9001 doesn't really directly apply to drawings or drawing checking so will be little or no help with your current dilema. By all means suggest it to management but I wouldn't die in the ditch over it. Also unless your customers are asking for it as a condition of doing business you probably don't 'need' 9001. It can also be very expensive.

Introducing a checking/document approval process on the other hand will help and while probably not your ultimate decision to make is in your 'sphere of influence'. Also it need not be that expensive.

Of course as part of this you need to give some definition of what to check to. The relevant government/industry spec (Possibly ASME Y14.5 for the US, maybe another if diffent location or industry) should probably be the foundation of this. You may then want to emphasize/clarify certain industry or company specific points.

The checking procedure can be entirely internal to your company.

 

[evilchickenking]

Im located in northern california, and i do have an idea of what the y14.5 spec is, but as far as checking goes, they didn't really teach us how to get plans checked in an organization. so im sure that my plans are standard if not very close to standard. just hoping there might be a spec i can adapt to the whole checking process.

currently my some of my plans do get an approved stamp that is signed, but that doesn't appear to be enough. so im a little angry that they would bring things back to me after it had been approved. i guess i should push them to have an engineer stamp the plans instead of the manager.

 

[KENAT]

I believe some Mil Stds may give some info, or at least state the requirement, but I'm not sure they'd cover everything you're talking about.

As above you could add a checked by and approved by box to your drawings. You could then create a company standard/procedure that says all drawings must be checked (by someone who knows how to draw) and approved (usually by the cognizant engineer or equivalent) before release. You'd have to get management to sign off on that procedure and enforce it's implementation.

As regards what to check to hopefully the various specs stated above give you a start. Start doing some google searches on them, you probably wont get a full copy but will maybe get a better flavour.

When you say "they didn't really teach us how to get plans checked in an organization" what type of education are you referring too?

 

[evilchickenking]

i was referring to all of the college drafting courses that i've taken. most of this stuff either wasn't covered very well, or wasn't mentioned. as far as a good system of checking goes, or how one would operate. maybe there's a specific one that includes it. i guess i'll have to look into that.

 

[KENAT]

Thats what I thought.

I sure wasn't taught anything like it at Uni but then my drawing course consisted of maybe 1/2 dozen labs using autosketch!

I learnt everything I know about drawing systems, configuration control etc in the work place. I suspect this is the same for most people although I could be wrong. If you'd taken any configuration control classes it might have touched on it but no guarantees since drawing check isn't really a config control function.

I really feel that to solve your immediate problem you just need to try and introduce a real simple check procedure/policy as a few above explain. It needn't be too complex or exhaustive to begin with but can evolve over time as need be. This may not be as easy as I've made it sound since management buy in is required but it is probably the simplest option.