Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Looking for the correct Standard

  1. #1
    Associate Engineer
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    1

    Looking for the correct Standard

    Hi all,

    New here, but have used this site many many times to gain knowledge.

    I have a mechanical drawing under a rev change and under previous revs, parts were removed from the parts list and the FN's were listed as "Obsolete", but remained on the drawing. The drawing in now being reved again and the engineer is redlining to say remove the obsolete lines, but not renumber the parts list, so now I have a drawing they want released the has FN's go sequentially up to sat 5 and the next FN is 17. I know this is because the engineer does not want to have to renumber his drawing. (Worked with them for years and I know how they get)

    As the QAE reviewing this, I know I'm going to reject this change, but I cannot find the reference to stand on. I have looked through ASME Y14.100 and ASME Y14.34M but can't find where it would actually say this can or cannot be done.

    I really could use some guidance on this one. Hope I posted in the correct area.

    Thank you

  2. #2
    Administrator Kelly Bramble's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Bold Springs, GA
    Posts
    2,152
    Quote Originally Posted by Hitman View Post
    The drawing in now being reved again and the engineer is redlining to say remove the obsolete lines, but not renumber the parts list, so now I have a drawing they want released the has FN's go sequentially up to sat 5 and the next FN is 17. I know this is because the engineer does not want to have to renumber his drawing. (Worked with them for years and I know how they get)
    It is very standard to not remove or reassign note numbers on engineering drawing revisions.. In general, the removed note is simply replaced with "REMOVED" or equivalent. OBSOLETE = REMOVED in my mind. Also, some organizations use the cross-out method thus leaving the original note.

    In aerospace they work to MIL-DTL-31000 standard which outlines the TDP including the engineering drawing practices. Clearly, it is a good idea to NOT re-number as this effort could introduce drawing errors and create extra labor and more spend.

    Be aware that many organizations have internal DRM's and may choose any practice that best fits their organizations requirements.

    I would check out the following standards:

    ASME Y14,35M - Revision of Engineering Drawings and Associated Documents

    If you work in aerospace, see Global Engineering Documents "Drawing Requirements Manual" as you probably live by this document.

    MIL-DTL-31000 D -->mil-dtl-31000.pdf
    Last edited by Kelly Bramble; 04-04-2014 at 07:59 AM.

  3. #3
    Engineer
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Posts
    11
    We often do not renumber our upper level drawings (layouts for trackwork, etc.). This is to ensure our service manuals and field copies of drawings (even on outdate revisions) will have similar numbers. Too often we get calls for replacements of "Part 45" and it has been renumbered.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •