Engineering documentation control handbook configuration management and product lifecycle management

Engineering Documentation Control Handbook Engineering DOCUMENTATION CONTROL HANDBOOK CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT AND PRODUCT LIFECYCLE MANAGEMENT FOURTH EDITION FRANK B WATTS Amsterdam • Boston • Heidel.

Amsterdam • Boston • Heidelberg • London

New York • Oxford • Paris • San Diego

San Francisco • Singapore • Sydney • Tokyo

William Andrew is an imprint of Elsevier

William Andrew is an imprint of Elsevier

The Boulevard, Langford Lane, Kidlington, Oxford, OX5 1GB, UK

225 Wyman Street, Waltham, MA 02451, USA

First edition 1993

Second edition 2000

Third edition 2008

Fourth edition 2012

Copyright Ó 2012 Elsevier Inc All rights reserved.

No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the Publisher Details on how to seek permission, further information about the Publisher’s permissions policies and our arrangement with organizations such as the Copyright Clearance Center and the Copyright Licensing Agency, can be found at our website: www.elsevier.com/permissions

This book and the individual contributions contained in it are protected under copyright by the Publisher (other than as may be noted herein).

Notices

Knowledge and best practice in this field are constantly changing As new research and experience broaden our understanding, changes in research methods, professional practices,

or medical treatment may become necessary.

Practitioners and researchers must always rely on their own experience and knowledge in evaluating and using any information, methods, compounds, or experiments described herein In using such information or methods they should be mindful of their own safety and the safety of others, including parties for whom they have a professional responsibility.

To the fullest extent of the law, neither the Publisher nor the authors, contributors, or editors, assume any liability for any injury and/or damage to persons or property as a matter

of products liability, negligence or otherwise, or from any use or operation of any methods, products, instructions, or ideas contained in the material herein.

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

Library of Congress Control Number: 2011936727

ISBN: 978-1-4557-7860-7

For information on all William Andrew publications visit

our website at www.elsevierdirect.com

Printed and bound in the United States

12 13 14 15 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

The wide acceptance of this book has been very gratifying This work seems

to have taken on a life of its own The third edition publisher wrote: “Yourbook over the last year has resulted in the most ‘Buy This Book’ links of ourentire catalog It is very well received by the Googleites.” Sales haveexceeded 11,000 at the time of writing of this fourth edition Why? Whilemanagement fads come and go, buzzword programs abound, softwareacronyms and software applications ebb and flow, the critical importanceand the basics of engineering documentation control remain the same Theauthor thinks of himself as “the Vince Lombardi of document control.”Basic blocking and tackling! In that sense, the fourth edition has notchanged the principles but has been significantly rewritten and edited Anew chapter on product manufacturing systems has been added All with theintent of improved explanations, emphasizing product lifecycle manage-ment, and Configuration Management (CM) as engineering’s qualitycontrol function

Whether you think of this subject as Engineering DocumentationControl (EDC) or CM, or Product Lifecycle Management (PLM) it needs

to be recognized as a key business strategy The wall or gap betweenengineering and the rest of the world has existed too long in manycompanies The “throw it over the wall” syndrome can be overcome It isprevalent in new product releases, bills of material, change requests, andchange processes as well as in related software packages Simple, make-sense,fast, accurate, efficient, measured, and well-understood Engineering DocumentationControl/Configuration and Product Lifecycle Management can tear down thatwall – bridge that gap

The title of this book indicates that Engineering DocumentationControl – Configuration Management and Product Lifecycle Managementare equivalent terms But are they really? Many people feel that EDC is

a subset of CM Some think of EDC as what they are currently doing and

CM as what they ought to be doing PLM is a term used primarily bysoftware applications for engineering – but it certainly implies a cycle thattranscends engineering into manufacturing and to the customer Much ofthe truth in this discussion is in “the eyes of the beholder.”

Historically, the CM term was largely invented by the Defense Industryand the Department of Defense (DOD) The term had been used and

xiiij

abused so extensively by our product manufacturing world that it had taken

on a parochial and a very complex meaning Commercial businesses began

“taking back” the CM term in a simplified form Many defense productmanufacturers are moving toward commercial practices – simplifiedConfiguration Management – a healthy trend

In the meantime, the software configuration management folks havelargely usurped the CM term for application to the development andproduction of software tools If you “Google” the CM term, you willlargely find software tools for controlling software tools

The author is thus all the more pleased to have consistently used theEngineering Documentation Control term This work will use all of theseterms selectively

Can CM in a Defense Industry context be made simple? A studypublished in National Defense magazine, September 1992, by George Kri-korian, PE, summarizes the conditions at that time “The results revealedthat the cost of a product when selling to DOD increases from five percent

to one hundred percent as compared to the same or similar product cost to

a commercial (non-DOD) enterprise.” One of the significant reasons givenwas MIL-SPECS and Standards Configuration Management standardsmake up a significant portion of the total DOD Specs and Standards Therehas been some significant reform in the DOD, however, so the hope formilitary contractors and taxpayers is improving

Meanwhile, some in the commercial segment are erroneously movingtoward more complex CM The Automotive and Aeronautical segmentshave written their own versions of ISO standards adding a layer ofbureaucracy that is making our autos and air transport expensive, addinglittle value or safety to the products The FDA continues to make theirrequirements excessive by controlling products in the same manner theycontrol drugs The ISO standards have evolved but not necessarily for thebetter While claiming to be more general and less specific, the page counthas, nevertheless, increased significantly

The primary goal of this book is to keep CM simple The basics of in-class Configuration Management will be presented from the ground up,for application in either a “commercial” or “military” kind of business.The typical CM approach is to acquire and read all the applicablecommercial and Military Specs, Standards, and Directives, and then designthe system around them Rather, every product manufacturing businessshould develop a simple, make-sense, fast, accurate, efficient, measured, and

xiv Preface

Control/Configuration Management/Product Lifecycle Management andthen examine the DOD, MIL, DOE, FDA, ISO/QS/AS, and all otherapplicable agency standards After careful examination of those standards,add to or modify that approach to satisfy the customer/agency specifica-tions, as and if necessary.

Since the first edition of this book, many companies have become ISO/AS/QS-certified Write down what you do and do what you have written,

it is said Companies have also come to realize that certification only getstheir CM practices minimally documented and followed A significantmajority of ISO requirements and problems involve the CM discipline, butthere is no built-in assurance in the ISO certification that the processes areefficient, measured, productive, or that they outperform the competition.Thus, writing down what you do and doing what is written may be a form

of insanity – which is defined as doing the same thing over and over again,and expecting different results Subsequent revisions of ISO requirementshave emphasized process improvement The emphasis of this book is not onISO requirements The emphasis is on helping people help their companiestoward exceptional CM practices and processes

The quick release of new product documentation, minimal structuring

of a single bill of material database, the ability to request changes, and tochange the documentation and product quickly, accurately, and at least costare critical to a company’s profitability Thus, the development andimplementation of a simple, make-sense, fast, accurate, efficient, measured,and well-understood CM system is an important business strategy Simplyput, it sets the stage for innovation in engineering and operations

The basic principles of world-class EDC/CM are applicable, regardless ofthe kind of manufacturing or the kind of customer Toward achieving thismake-sense approach, the following will be the guiding principles of thisbook:

agency-regulated companies Many of the existing texts on this subject addressDOD Specifications and Standards This work takes a generic approach

• Take the acronyms out wherever possible! The goal here will be to onlyuse those acronyms which are universal in the manufacturing businessand to explain each where it is first used

• Use the English language, defining terms as we go, as opposed to using,for example, over 20 pages of glossary found in one text

complexity out of Configuration Management

Preface xv

• Systematically approach the discipline by using an example product – anelectronic ignition, application software programmed, front-end loaderwith a variety of features and options Develop the design documenta-tion for this product, structure the bills of material with operationspeople, release it from engineering to manufacturing, request changes,change it, and close the loop by knowing when each change was madeand what is in each product as needed.

• Develop principles that are sound for any size company, while nizing the nuances that may be present in small, large, multinational,make-to-print, make-to-stock, make-to-order, or design-to-order fordiscrete product manufacturing

recognizing differences in products that vary from needles to nuclearships, and production rates that vary from quantities per second to yearsper quantity one

• Emphasize early costing of the product and changes, a generally ignoredaspect of CM practice

• Show how redundant bills of material can be eliminated, how to simplifythe bill of material structuring, and how to evolve bills in lead time toproduce the product

standards to use as a guide in the development of your own processes.Assure that the horse (documentation) comes before the cart (theproduct)

• Establish methods for achieving fast processing of releases, requests, andchanges The emphasis will be on speed – a long-overlooked criterionand very costly oversight

a new system Outline methods that can be used, whether reinventingthe system and/or using continuous improvement techniques

• Explore methods for standardizing the processes and auditing them

chain can be broken and address the issues facing the Original ment Manufacturer (OEM) and the supplier

Equip-• Share benchmarking surveys and analysis with the readers

• Identify the most serious, most often made, mistakes in the discipline

Configu-ration Management, and Product Lifecycle Management

xvi Preface

• Develop a few key metrics for all the processes – speed, quality, andvolume Many more measures of merit are in the author’s CM Metricsbook.

that almost all rules have exceptions Realize that all the rules need not

be followed in your company, but violation of very many will lead tochaos

function for engineering

Such goals can be accomplished without sacrificing product quality In fact,the quality of documentation releases and changes as well as the quality ofthe product must increase as new or improved Engineering DocumentationControl is implemented

Good CM alone will not achieve best-in-class Total QualityManufacturing (TQM); however, best-in-class TQM cannot be achievedwithout best-in-class Configuration Management This will be accom-plished while improving quality, not hurrying up to do it wrong!

Engineering Documentation Control is a significant business strategyand an absolute foundation block for: TQM, JIT (Just In Time), cross-functional teams (concurrent engineering), engineering/manufacturing/supply chain software systems, lean manufacturing, meeting domestic orinternational standards, and efficient manufacturing In fact, it must be

a significant company strategy if best-in-class or world-class manufacturing

is to be achieved

One reviewer of this book titled his review, “Setting the Stage forInnovation.” Time for innovation in design and manufacturing can berealized, with the current work force, by first making the EDC/CMprocesses simple, make-sense, fast, accurate, efficient, measured, and wellunderstood

My thanks to the universities who have sponsored my seminar Also tothe over 3500 folks who have attended – I learn something in each seminar

My many customers also deserve hearty thanks since I learn something fromeach of them Last, but not least, thanks to the third edition reviewers, theircompliments and ideas for improvement

Frank B Watts, BSME, CCDM

ec3corp@rkymtnhi.com www.ecm5tools.com Winter Park, Colorado Preface xvii

CHAPTER 1

Introduction

Contents

Why do we need engineering documentation at all? Why control thatdocumentation? The mere use of the word “control” puts most engineersinto a very defensive mode Are we trying to stifle the engineer’s creativity?What is there to “manage” about the configuration of a product?

Let us first identify the basic “raw materials” of product manufacturing –the very essence of product manufacturing There are four primaryelements:

• Money – for the start-up/profits

• Tools (machine, mold, software, etc.)

• People (and the processes and measurements they choose)

So why is it a surprise for some to hear that the management of those designdocuments is a critical discipline? Think about it Without design docu-ments, you do not have a producible product Without control of designdocuments with make-sense processes and measurements, you have chaos.Why do architects make drawings and specifications for a home or plant?

Do they do this for their own pleasure or for a trade magazine or show? Isn’tthe documentation done so the customers get what they want? Aren’t theEngineering Documentation Control Handbook Ó 2012 Elsevier Inc 1j

documents for the builder who has to build the house and for the eventualowner who will have to maintain it? Try building or maintaining a productwithout adequate drawings and specs, it becomes especially difficult anderror-prone when changes are being made Try controlling the cost withoutcontrolling the changes Still, most businesses operate to some extentwithout proper, timely, or adequate control of their documentation Thesymptoms are usually everywhere Let us take a look at the symptoms.Manufacturing says:

• I don’t understand what I’m supposed to build

• What criteria do we test to?

Reduce costs

Avoid making scrap

Avoid making parts that will have to be reworked?

• Will this change increase the “bone pile” of down-level material?

Sales says:

• Why didn’t we deliver a product with the options the customer asked for?Customer says:

• I didn’t get what I ordered

• Where is that new feature or option?

Dealer/Field Service says:

problem?

• Our customer is angry – can’t we move faster?

Repair says:

• I could fix it easier if I knew what is in this product

• What changes should be and shouldn’t be incorporated upon repair?Quality says:

• Is this cost included in our Cost of Quality?

• Should we treat ourselves, our suppliers, or our customers this way?

• We can’t meet international and US standards

Employee says:

• I asked them to do something about this a long time ago

2 Engineering Documentation Control Handbook

Do any of these symptoms sound familiar? The cure is: simple, make-sense,fast, accurate, measured, efficient and well-understood EngineeringDocumentation Control/Configuration Management (EDC/CM) stan-dards and processes Good design documentation and its control is thesolution for the root cause of these symptoms Thus, ConfigurationManagement is the medicine that cures the root causes.

CM, kept simple, results in many benefits to the company What are thebenefits of a fast, accurate, and well-understood CM system? Let us take

a look at the potential benefits of a carefully planned CM strategy

• Gets real cost reductions implemented quicker

• Reduces the manufacturing rework and scrap costs significantly

• Improves bill of material (BOM) accuracy and saves the correspondingmaterial waste and correction time, resulting in correspondingimprovement in product quality and inventory accuracy

bills, not to mention eliminating the risks associated with multiplebills

• Reduces field maintenance, retrofit, and repair cost

engineering and the rest of the world

• Clarifies the responsibilities and thus eliminates finger pointing

• Saves wear and tear on CM managers, master schedulers, and all types ofengineers

• Complies with applicable customer or agency standards

• Sorts out changes that are not needed or aren’t cost-effective

• Saves many dollars a year in paper and copying costs alone

• Significant reduction in the cost of quality

• Allows the company to qualify as a best-in-class producer

• Sets the stage for innovation in engineering and manufacturing

Introduction 3

The ways and means of achieving these benefits are not secret, high-tech, orcost-prohibitive These benefits are attainable This book will outline thewho, what, how, why, when, where, and how much in order to achieve anexceptional EDC system The author has never seen a world-class CMsystem; he has, however, brought the best of the best to this book Whoknows, maybe the best of the best constitutes a world-class system!

WHAT IS CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT

Configuration Management is the communications bridge between designengineering and the rest of the world (seeFig 1.1) This is the single mostimportant function performed by the CM organization

The critical nature of the CM discipline cannot be overemphasized.American manufacturing has developed a near tradition of allowing designengineering and the rest of the company to be in an adversarial relationship

It results substantially from the “throw it over the wall” syndrome – the newdesign release or engineering change that is done without consultation withthe key people at the right time

Many manufacturing and engineering systems are often unwittinglydesigned to foster that traditional kind of thinking The enlightened CMmanager can tear down the wall, or at least build a bridge over it

Let us face it, generally, the designers are thinkers and creators, while theoperations people are movers and doers They will naturally have difficultycommunicating The CM group can enhance communications and ensurethat these folks cross the bridge at the right time for necessary communi-cations and with the necessary documents

The CM function must ensure that what crosses the bridge is properlydocumented, minimally controlled, available as and when needed, and thatfeedback is obtained as to when changes occur in production or service Allthis must be done at a minimum cost, while appearing “transparent” to thecreative design people and the rest of the world

DESIGN ENGINEER

REST OF THE WORLD

A BRIDGE FOR COMMUNICATIONS

Figure 1.1 Configuration management defined.

4 Engineering Documentation Control Handbook

While not getting in the way of the design engineer or software neer, it must be kept in mind that the engineer’s product is not just

engi-a working evengi-aluengi-ation or prototype unit, but thengi-at it is engi-accurengi-ate specificengi-ationand drawings for all the parts in that product ready for production Theengineering/CM product is thus quality design documentation

The primary customer for this documentation is not design neering, but is manufacturing, suppliers, field service, and the company’s

these “users” (a term that is much less acceptable to this writer than

“customer”) The vast majority of the design documents are preparedfor manufacturing/operations, suppliers and service use In this sensemanufacturing, suppliers and field service people are the most importantcustomers

There are some symptoms crying for improved CM in every company.The benefits of having a best-in-class CM organization and system explainwhy it is a significant business strategy

“Between Engineering and Manufacturing” is an article the authorwrote for Mid-Range Enterprise Resource Planning (edited), which mayshed further light on the need for improving this discipline This articlefollows

BETWEEN ENGINEERING AND MANUFACTURING

Most product manufacturing companies suffer from the “wall syndrome.”The “manufacturing side” bought MRP/ERP; the “engineering side”went out and bought CAD/PDM/PLM Those software systems do notgenerally “talk” to each other The engineering folks are, by and large,analytical and cautious (Ready Aim Fire); the manufacturing folksare, by and large, shakers, movers, and doers (Fire-Aim, Fire-Aim, Fire-Aim) The people do not communicate very well The manufacturingfolks say that engineering “throws it over the wall.” The engineering folkssay that you cannot find anyone when you need them who knows how theproduct will be processed Many of the modern MRP/ERP/SCM andCAD/PDM/PLM systems also do not aid the communications very well.This situation often results in a huge gap between engineering andmanufacturing

There is a discipline which can, if properly done, bridge this gap It isEDC/CM However, EDC/CM is often very poorly understood andoften clouded with claims from the software application folks on both

Introduction 5

sides Those who came from a military/DOD-regulated world haveapplied configuration management requirements that are too complicated,and usually resulted in too much control Most often, the documentcontrol function is manned by one or a few low-paid people who are ill-trained, buried in the organization structure, frustrated, and ready tochange jobs A configuration management function that is properlymanaged, organized, trained, and manned can tear down the wall andbridge the gap between engineering and manufacturing “Properlymanned,” however, does not always mean hiring new people Often thepeople are there, but they are just scattered in many parts of theorganization.

The software applications people all seem to have a claim for doingconfiguration management Some do address some parts of the processesinvolved, but few are comprehensive Most companies end up with a CAD,

a manufacturing system, an engineering system and other systems, but stilllack a comprehensive CM These software systems (a term used frequently

in this text to refer to the variety of three-letter software applications) thatallow workflow diagrams to be developed to control the processes comeclosest but are also often found wanting

The military definition of the discipline is based on the terms: fication, control, status accounting, and planning; some real “put-you-to-sleep” terms A much better way to define the discipline is by the processesthat it encompasses – the new item release, BOM, requesting changes, andmaking changes Thus, we are talking about processes that most readers canrelate to Are there any software application systems out there that willaddress all our needs for these processes? Maybe, if one pays enough, if onebuys enough consulting time to accompany the software, if one knows whatone needs, and if the consultants understand the discipline – that is a lot

identi-of ifs!

There is a very scary tendency in industry today After the cation of a problem(s), the tendency is to seek a software applicationsolution Software programs may help after you understand the job thatneeds to be done and what process flow is best for you The processes,however, must be simple; they must make sense, be fast, accurate, andefficient, measured and well understood Get educated first, design yourprocesses with legacy software, and then finally buy more software ifneeded

identifi-Something more substantial than software is needed between neering and the rest of the organization, and it is called CM

engi-6 Engineering Documentation Control Handbook

CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT LADDER

Many people believe that when they have been ISO (International dards Organization) certified, they have adequately covered the docu-mentation control and configuration management requirements This istrue as far as ISO is concerned, but ISO does not care how fast or efficient,

Stan-or effective Stan-or simple the processes are As is often said: “ISO merely wantsyou to document what you do and do what you document.” This is a goodstep out of chaos, but is a long way from being the best in class or world-class Examine the CM ladder inFig 1.2

well-Benchmarked by others.

Processes / results exceed customer expectations.

Outperform direct competitors

Process meets all internal management requirements / metrics

as well as ISO / QS requirements.

Meets all customer and ISO / QS requirements Written standards are followed.

Ineffective, inefficient, slow, variable

by whim, few or no standards.

Figure 1.2 Configuration management ladder (Adapted from “How to Stay Flexible and Elude Fads” by Irving DeToro and Thomas McCabe, Quality Progress, March 1987.)

Introduction 7

CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT DISCIPLINE

Let’s start with a definition of Configuration Management:

measured, and well-understood process approach to planning, identifying,controlling, and tracking a product’s configuration from its inceptionthroughout its life with minimum cost

We engineers hate the word “control.” Too much control detracts fromspeed Speed is an element missing in most systems Also note the time frame –birth to death of the product Notice that the term “tracking” is used instead ofthe classical DOD term “status accounting.” The challenge for the CMmanager is to mix just the right amount of each of these elements into the CMprocesses – product and document release, BOM, request and change.Also notice the emphasis on training – “a well-understood system.” To

be “systematic and well-understood,” the processes must be documented.The discipline must be depicted in a set of standards, and the involvedpeople trained in those standards

Definition:Configuration; The technical description and arrangement

or combination of parts and materials which are capable of fulfilling therequirements defined by the product specification, other specifications, anddrawings

The discipline can be applied to companies that produce a productwhich is either parts or process driven – discrete product manufacturing orprocess manufacturing The product can be a component or an atomicpower plant The principles apply, with some care, to any “product.” Thisbook will, however, concentrate on discrete product manufacturing At theother end of the spectrum, where does the product program code (productapplications software) fit into this definition? It is also included in the sensethat the code is “assembled” onto a disc or chip that then becomes one ofthe “components.”

Notice the emphasis on the product specification It is surprising howmany companies try to get along without a controlled product specification,

or they have one but do not release it, or they produce or release it muchlater than is desirable This issue will be discussed in detail later

CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

The total CM system is made up of four major processes These aregenerally collectively referred to as product release and change control orlifecycle management More specifically, the processes are:

8 Engineering Documentation Control Handbook

• Document release process.

The change request process and the design change process are oftencombined under one term, change management This will not be done inthis book for reasons that will be apparent later The product or part ordocument “obsolescence process” is combined with the design changeprocess and treated as a special kind of design change These four processesmust cover any product from inception to obsolescence – from birth todeath

There is a temptation to claim that these processes occur in series Forexample, first, we document the product and release the documentation,then create a BOM, and so on Although some companies try to do business

“in series,” it is not desirable The processes overlap almost totally Forexample, the product specification should be created and released very early

in the product lifecycle The product specification should be put under

a simplistic form of change control, then, long-lead parts should be released

in lead time This may well be done long before a BOM is “structured.”Some documents may be obsolete before they are released, thus theprocesses should not be considered “serial,” but very “parallel.” In fact,trying to do these processes in series creates a problem If, for example, wetry to create and release all the documentation for a product beforeproceeding, then the need to release long-lead items (in lead time to make/buy) creates a quandary Shall we hold up the project until all the items aredocumented before releasing the long-lead items? Shall we wait for theirassemblies to be released? Grouping any of the documents for release creates

an artificial batching of the work It is much better to design the processes toencourage an item-by-item release in lead time to produce, since that is theway they are needed and used

HISTORY OF CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT

The real beginning of CM occurred when Eli Whitney designed and builthis cotton gin with interchangeable parts That concept of interchange-ability has come to be expected in all product manufacturing Items that arereplaceable (service items and the end product) are expected to interchange,

or reasonable notice be given

Introduction 9

Many companies use CM standards and practices that date back to theearly years of their conception Industry standardization of certain CMpractices began with the government during the space program in the late1950s This was a necessary and natural occurrence, since the assurance ofinterchangeability between the many contributors in a space program wasvery important In the late 1960s, the Department of Defense (DOD)recognized that each agency and branch was developing its own set ofstandards They brought all the CM standards under the purview of theDOD By the 1990s, they had begun to adopt some industry/commercialpractices.

In the 1990s and in the twenty-first century, software solutions havebeen sought to solve every problem In the first edition of this book, almostall the existing standards and books in the field had been military/DOD-driven Since then, the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers(IEEE), Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE), Electronics IndustryAssociation (EIA), American Production & Inventory Control Society(APICS), American National Standards Institute (ANSI), and InternationalStandards Organization (ISO), have all made some contribution in the field.The following quote from the first edition of this book is no longer true:

“Industry by and large, however, has been satisfied to let the DOD take theinitiative The result is an IRS like, bureaucratic maze of forms and regu-lations It is time for the commercial CM world to stand up and becounted.”

Several organizations have helped the discipline The Association forConfiguration and Data Management (ACDM) has blossomed into

a wondrous resource However, a lack of understanding of the basics still exists.This book will answer the challenge and keep it simple – that is the goal!

ORGANIZATION OF CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT

Let us examine the CM organization starting with the names it is called –the organizational names that is The terminology varies depending uponthe company Some common names are:

Documentation Control may be a proper term, if that is all the functiondoes There may be several documentation control functions in thecompany or division – engineering, manufacturing, service, etc One ofthese functions (normally engineering) should be designated as the CMfunction – it will control the total processes by which all do business as well

as other functions

The CM title is preferred when the responsibilities are generally asoutlined in this book When the responsibilities are broader (includefunctions such as publications, reproduction, data backup, software systeminput/control, etc.), then the generally preferred name is EngineeringServices Presuming that your company or division organization is “slim”(few total levels of management), the CM function should answer to the VP

of engineering In larger organizations there may be an engineeringservices function between CM and the VP of engineering If the functionreports to any “lower” in the organization, it will not have the necessaryclout; communication of needs will suffer, and the result will be more of thesymptoms described earlier

Some companies have the CM function answer to quality assurance(QA), manufacturing, operations, or even (rarely) to the president If theresults are very good, do not change the reporting relationship It can anddoes work well or poorly in any organization Most companies have thefunction answer to engineering The question is often asked, “Isn’t that likehaving the fox watch the chicken coop?” The answer is, “Of course, butthey’re engineering’s chickens!” We are talking primarily about designdocumentation!

If engineering has the function and the described symptoms exist,reorganization may or may not solve the problems The design engineeringmanagement, however, runs the risk of losing the function if they eat toomany chickens Location of the function in QA tends to produce rigid

“over control.” No matter which organization has CM, there is always a riskthat they will “grind their own axe.”

Large multi-plant companies should have a CM organization in eachbusiness unit or division They should also have a slim corporate function toensure that minimum standards are met This minimum level of standard-ization should be based upon three criteria:

1 Moving a product from one business unit to another

2 Customers contact/contract with more than one division or business unit

3 Field service by a single person for products made in more than onedivision

Introduction 11

The greatest difficulties arise when engineering is in one location andmanufacturing is in another or several different locations A different building,across town, across the country, across an ocean the bridge gets longer.When one of the manufacturing locations is offshore, this adds anotherlevel of complication The ideal results are more likely obtained whenthe engineering (or at least the “continuing or sustaining engineering”function), CM, and the manufacturing functions are in the same location(small business unit) This is desirable, regardless of the company size.Within a business unit, placing CM responsibilities within multiple

“project offices” is inviting chaos Too many groups will develop their ownrules for CM practices and create chaos In business units that are too large,however, it may be the only way to attain fast action If this is done, a slim

“corporate type” CM function will be necessary to maintain minimumstandardization – probably one person would be adequate

DOCUMENT CONTROL FUNCTION RESPONSIBILITIES

The typical document control function should do the following:

• Assign all part numbers, change numbers, and document revision levels

initial release (master file and backup file, either hard copy or electronic)

• Input and accuracy of the BOM database (design information) regardless

of the software applications involved

• Change control and facilitation

backup practices are satisfactory

These are necessary and important functions although, as seen later, theCCB often takes on a counterproductive character

CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT FUNCTION

RESPONSIBILITIES

Preferably the CM function should have the following responsibilities:

• Audit the system to ensure that it is followed or changed

system

12 Engineering Documentation Control Handbook

• Develop metrics, continually measure, and report on the CM system.

• Do revision (incorporation) drafting for design document changes

• Control data and document transmittals to customers/agencies

• Ensure that non-value-added requests for change are filtered out

• Ensure that the changes are traced to the actual date or units affected

• Ensure easy access to a traceability database and produce reports asrequired

• Ensure the quality of all design documents and changes thereto

CM processes

If any of these functions are not included in the CM manager’s bilities, the results will likewise be limited Some companies vest the CMgroup with other responsibilities, such as:

responsibilities

• Microfilming/digitizing

• Software system control

• Engineering library

• Product support/service documentation preparation (publications)

• Manufacturing, quality, sales tech document control

• Control of the approved manufacturers list

The last three of these functions should generally not be placed with CM

It is far too easy to overload the CM manager’s plate with control ofmanufacturing and support documents or lists It is better to keep theresponsibility with the organization that authors the documents But onemight think: “That will make several document control functions.” Yes, itwill, but it also places the responsibility for control with the organizationthat authored the documents Of course, it must all be tied together withflow diagrams, standards, audited, and controlled That responsibility wouldrest with the design document control function that would thus becomethe CM function

Helping the design engineer with their responsibilities is a verydesirable CM function It must be thus chartered and staffed to be effective.This is one excellent way to have the CM organization viewed as part ofthe solution It must be clear, however, that the responsibility for certainfunctions belongs to the engineer and not to CM or any other organi-zation that is “helping” the engineer For this reason, many organizationschoose CAD/drafting/designers/technicians to help the engineer ratherthan CM

Introduction 13

Reference will often be made in this book to “Design engineer isresponsible for .” This is not to say that they do not have help in theperformance of a task, but that they must be finally responsible for that task.

DISTRIBUTED CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT

As mentioned earlier, document control functions can and should normally

be distributed Can the CM functions be successfully distributed? Somecompanies have the CM functions scattered throughout the organization.Sometimes those functions occupy just a fraction of a person’s total job.These functions need to be brought together into one group This recog-nition and emphasis is the first step toward attaining best-in-class CM.Some discussions on “distributed CM” are now taking place A fewcompanies try to make each engineer responsible for their “own” CM.However, since this author has not seen such an arrangement work in anacceptable way, it remains a questionable practice It also remains an unmetchallenge Better data processing systems may eventually help make thedistributive process viable

Companies with several small business units should distribute the CMresponsibilities to each division or small business unit with minimumcontrol from the corporate function, as outlined earlier

MANAGER’S JOB

A seminar attendee asked the author if he had a job description for a CMManager The result was to write one The outcome is an interesting anddifferent perspective on CM It presumes that the design documentationcontrol and the CM function are one

MANAGER OF CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT

Responsibilities:

• Owner of the CM process and standards for this (company or division).These processes include the release of new items, the design portion ofthe BOM (all BOMs) and item master files, design change requests, anddesign change control

• Owner of the EDC process and standards for this (company or division)

• Ensure that the processes between departments are documented in form,form instruction, policy, flow diagrams, and standard practices, asnecessary

14 Engineering Documentation Control Handbook

• Ensure that these standards are well understood by conducting thenecessary training for those involved in and affected by the system.

• Control the master design documents after the appropriate point of release or release This includes all CAD master, word master, and anyhardcopy master files

pre-• Accurate incorporation of all changes into the master documents afterthe changes are appropriately signed

• Monitor all design change requests, route to the responsible engineerand review team, route responses to the requesters, and ensure that a list

of open requests is maintained and regularly addressed

know the actual effectivity of every change, and produce such status/traceability reports as may be required

throughput time; assure that process time and quality are continuouslyimproving, report to the senior management monthly, report to otherinvolved managers and key people weekly

• Assign and control all (part numbers and/or document numbers) changenumbers, request numbers, and document revision levels

compo-nent files and screens; responsible for BOM accuracy with regard todesign data elements in any/all software systems

• Ensure that non-value-added requests and changes are not done

unit(s) were changed in the field/where to find that informationreadily

manuals, outside organization specifications, etc

Not responsible for:

assembly instructions, fabrication instructions, etc

service manuals, and lists

Introduction 15

• Filing or control of quality technical documents.

• Filing or control of sales technical documents (packaging, product specs)

Notice that this description goes into what the CM manager should not beresponsible for as well as what the manager should be responsible for Thisissue and the AML will be discussed in detail later

ORGANIZATION WITHIN CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT

When the function grows beyond one person, how does the CM managerorganize his/her people? After all, one operation may have three and thenext thirty-three people! There are two basic approaches one can use, or

a combination of the two

The first is the “production line” approach That is, each personperforms some steps and passes the release or change to another person, and

so on, until complete The other method is the “job-enriched” method Inthis method each person performs all steps in the process The job-enrichedmethod is preferred, that is, each person will be responsible for all the CMfunctions for a product, set of products, or a customer(s)

The manager’s goal should be for every person in the group to be fullytrained in all aspects of the work – whether or not attainable because ofturnover or growth This makes the people as interchangeable as is practical.The author calls these people CM technicians Three levels of CM tech-nicians are ideal – entry, learned, and teacher In this fashion, one canassign the people to a product, project, customer, or whatever, dependingupon the complexity When someone is sick or goes on a vacation, theinterchangeability of people avoids delay This does require a significantamount of training Training is expensive However, if you believe thattraining is expensive, try ignorance! Training within the CM group and inrelated functions is the best way for the system (and all its processes) tobecome accepted, used, and improved

CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENTdWHAT IS IT?

An article the author wrote for Mid-Range Enterprise Resource Planninggives another interesting perspective:

Defining Configuration Management (CM) is very much like the oldstory about the Company President hiring a Controller At the end of theinterview, each applicant was asked: “What is two and two?” The person

16 Engineering Documentation Control Handbook

that was hired answered: “What do you want it to be?” In some companies

CM is a clerical function that keeps document files The next companymight keep files and process/facilitate the design changes Folks doingDOD, NASA, or FDA business may have extensive organizations thatcontrol every aspect of the product/document configuration as required(sometimes more than is required) by specifications and contracts A fewcommercial product manufacturing operations have tight controls on all theinterfaces between engineering and manufacturing

There are some who say that if the proper data processing applications are

in place, then no CM/EDC is needed Since the writer has not witnessedsuch a utopian environment, the conclusion must be that it is like “paperlesssystems,” a good long-term goal, but we would currently be satisfied with

“less paper.” Some folks use boards or teams in the processes, some do not.The natural conclusion is that CM/EDC is whatever you want it to be.What should you want it to be? The answer varies with the size of theoperation, the culture, the organization structure, the legacy softwareapplications, regulating agency requirements, and the experiences of themanagement In general, it should be the function that bridges the gap (ortears down the wall) between engineering and manufacturing

A company that has engineering and manufacturing in the same smallbusiness unit is thus going to have a different answer than a company thatdesigns in the US and manufactures in several domestic and internationalsites A small operation might not need a change request process, whereas

a large operation probably does A company regulated by the FDA hasdifferent traceability requirements than the one working to commercialindustry “standards.” If the management has seen boards in their priorexperience, then a board seems to be a necessity It is easier to attain shallowBOM structures in a JIT (just in time) manufacturing operation than intraditional manufacturing What do you want it to be?

Since processes are the essence of business, the answer should lie indefining the CM/EDC processes If we look carefully at the interfacebetween engineering and the rest of the company, there are four majorprocesses at work: (i) the new product/part/assembly/document creationand release (called the “release process”); (ii) the creation, structuring, andcontrol of the BOM (the “BOM process”); (iii) the requesting of engi-neering changes (the “request process”); and (iv) the making of engineeringchanges (the “change process”)

So what you should want “it” to be is four processes, each simple, sense, fast, accurate, measured, and well understood These processes touch

make-Introduction 17

the very souls of the engineering, supply chain, production, purchasing,service, QA, order entry, publications, and other company functions Thecross-functional nature of these four processes makes the CM/EDC disci-pline very hard to define.

On top of this complication, add the fact that several of these functionshave documentation that can easily be defined as “engineering” documents.Often, a product design document will contain manufacturing processinformation/specification Who should control these documents? Shouldthey all be controlled identically?

If all engineering documents are not controlled by the same department,how is it all tied together? Thus, the plot thickens Small/start-up companiesoften give the control of engineering, manufacturing, publications, andquality documents to the same department In small operations themanufacturing process responsibilities often lie with the design engineer.They may neither have a quality engineer, nor a publications person Ascompanies grow, however, a quandary develops “Too many cooks spoil thebroth” goes the old saying, but should not the documents be controlled bythe group that authors the document? What if a design change affects severalfunctions and documents?

In the author’s opinion, technical documentation should be controlled

by the department which authors them This would mean that there areseveral document control functions Engineering would control designdocuments, manufacturing would control process documents, qualitywould control quality documents, and publications would control servicedocuments, etc This requires a standard to list all the technical documentsand the corresponding responsible function

How are they tied together? One function should be designated theConfiguration Management function That function would assure thatminimum control is exercised and that the methods used in the individualdocument control function are not in conflict That function would ensurethat the processes are in place to attain fast, accurate, and well-understoodresults When a design document is released, the process would ensure thatthe affected functions are involved in the item’s development, that theauthor signs the document, that the proper “acceptor” (primary user) signsthe document and that those who need to know are informed of itsrelease

When a design change is made that function would ensure that thesesame events occur and that the change to the design documents are not held

up while the other documents are being assessed/changed In other words,

18 Engineering Documentation Control Handbook

the CM function would develop the standards and work flow diagrams todesignate fast, efficient, and accurate processes.

They would also ensure that the necessary training takes place to makesure the processes are understood well Thus, the CM function develops thepolicy, standards, forms, form instruction, and flow diagrams (a picture isbetter than a procedure) required for all four processes, and trains all thosenecessary about those processes The CM function would also measure theprocess speed, volume, and quality, and report to the management on thesemeasures of merit

But will the various regulating agencies and ISO/QS/AS accept thisarrangement? Some specs do seem to encourage central control, but they donot prohibit distributed control Personal experience, consulting experi-ence, and seminar attendee reports indicate that distributed control isacceptable and preferable, provided the overall minimum control is present.There seems to be a high amount of pressure from some regulators to “do itall in the same group.” It is convenient for them if all control is done in thesame group, but is it the best for the company? Not in most companies!Thus, CM will be whatever you want it to be and you should want it to

be four simple, make-sense, fast, accurate, efficient, measured and understood processes

well-SUMMARY

The approach used in this book is definition, execution, and emphasis of thebasics Keep it simple, but recognize and address complexities in the simplestterms possible Build upon these basics to develop the processes by use of anexample product – electronic ignition, programmable, front-end loader (see

Fig 1.3)

FEL-100

Figure 1.3 Electronic ignition front-end loader; FEL-100.

Introduction 19

We will develop documentation for this product, release that mentation, develop the BOM, request changes, change the product bychanging its documentation, and follow the change to implementation inthe product We will also go into development of the processes work flow,with an emphasis on speed, cost, accuracy, measurements, and training.Forgive a certain amount of calculated redundancy Issues which areimportant to more than one chapter or subheading are covered in more thanone place in order to attempt some “standalone” reference.

docu-20 Engineering Documentation Control Handbook

A profitable company has a product that is in demand That product isembodied in the drawings and specifications It is not the purpose of CM orthis book to specify drawing standards It is important, however, to ensurethat certain elements are present in drawing formats or content It is alsovery important to emphasize that certain data elements should not be onthose formats.

DOCUMENT FORMATS AND STANDARDS

Keep as few formats active as possible A well-thought-out drafting standardwill help in this area Use ANSI Y 14.5, DOD STD 100 or the commerciallyEngineering Documentation Control Handbook Ó 2012 Elsevier Inc 21j

available Drafting Room Manual (DRM) as a guideline for your own standard,taking care to ensure that all the rules and guidelines given therein have beentaken into account as well In other words, do not merely invoke one of thesestandards; read, and modify it according to the parts of this text that you wish to adopt,deleting those parts that are not applicable to your business Also, delete changecontrol sections as they are poor and even counterproductive, as will bediscussed later.

Design documents, regardless of size, including drawings, specs, lists, andother documents, should have a common format They should all have

a Body, Title Block, and Revision Block, as seen inFig 2.1

is not required It is very important to cover the data that should not be inthe title block Notice that the title block does not show the currentrevision of the document Although some companies show the revision

in the title block, the practice is not recommended At one extreme,

Revision Block

Body

Title Block Figure 2.1 Terminology.

22 Engineering Documentation Control Handbook

a company’s one-page “A” size drawing showed the revision in no lessthan four places.

Rule: Show the revision once in the revision block on the first page andonce on each subsequent page of the document and make sure it iscurrent there

Reason: Other appearances of the revision level only add work to keepthem current and add the risk that confusion and errors will result whenthey differ

A few companies are still partially in a hard copy mode They may have

a high need for the revision to show in the corner of a folded hard copy Ifthis is a worthy need, add one more appearance of the revision on the firstpage

The original product used-on (developed for) is shown in the title block,but no attempt is made to keep other used-on up to date on the document

A separate file should be set up for the maintenance of the used-onrelationships

Rule: Do not maintain used-on information on design documents Set

up a separate file for these data

Reason: You may use any item over and over again in other products; it

is wasteful to access the original document in order to revise it each timeyou use the item elsewhere It is important to know the originalproduct/project in the title block in order to tie the document to thedesign files, calculations, etc

DRAWING SIZE DRAWING TYPE CLASS CODE AUTHOR

ITEM DESCRIPTION CAGE #

PAGE OF

PART NUMBER PRODUCT (ORIGINAL USED-ON)

COMPANY LOGO

Figure 2.2 Title block data.

Product Documentation 23

Most software systems have used-on capability Wherever it is maintained,make it the only source for where used/used-on data and only a single dataentry for input and maintenance.

The material required to make the part is often shown in the title block,

in a separate material block, or in the body of the drawing The importantissue here is that it is in a consistent location, to make it easy on yourcustomers or suppliers

A simple material “parts list” may be in order If you have, or foresee,problems with the material tracking, inventory control, material shortages,material formula, or material used-on, you may wish to consider makingthe part into an “assembly” That is, making the material specification(s)

a call-out on the item assembly parts list

Example: A sheet-stock user wishes to control the roll-stock materialthat a variety of items are produced from This can be done by preparing

a one-item parts list for each assembly produced or, better yet, adding thisitem to an associated parts list:

SAE 1010 steel; 1=4"nominal Unit of Measure sheet; qty  xExample: An injection molding company needs to control the materialcontent or formula of the part They can do so by preparing an assemblyparts list such as:

Virgin Material qty X

Coloration Material qty ZWhether this material parts list concept is needed or not also dependsupon how vertically integrated a company is It should not be donewithout careful benefit analysis, since it might add a level to the BOMstructure One injection molding company found this technique to be verybeneficial

The drawing type in the title block is typically an alpha code thatindicates whether the drawing is a:

P¼ Part

PL¼ Parts List

Some companies use this code as part of their part number As a separatefield, this information is more readily maintained and expanded, should you

24 Engineering Documentation Control Handbook

not set aside enough digits in your part number Develop a standard (andkeep it up to date) that spells out your acceptable abbreviations Keep itsimple – one standard covering only this subject.

Note:The term standard will be used in this text when one might saypolicy, procedure, or standard operating practice, etc

The definition of an “Assembly” is often debated The simplest nition is: “any physical item with a parts list.” It follows then that a part is anyphysical item without a parts list The term “item” can refer to both Theterm “component” will also be used “Component” is a general term muchlike “item,” in that it may refer to a purchased part or assembly

defi-If a company has a drawing-type code or processes that treat parts andassemblies differently, it is critical to develop clear definitions A definitionsstandard should be developed for every company

The title block author should be the name of the single, primary personresponsible for the item’s creation Avoid having more than one signaturesince at least one standard (ISO) calls for the same signature in the changeprocess that originally approved the document/release (unless specificallystated otherwise in your standard) In order to minimize the signaturegathering and to fix responsibility, have only one name here

Since it is a common practice to have several engineering functionssign a document (not recommended by this analyst) but no “internalcustomer” signs, one “acceptor” of the document should be added to thetitle block This would be the manufacturing engineer (ME) or some otherresponsible person who would speak for the manufacturability, testability,serviceability, etc., of the item – the primary user (internal customer) ofthe document

The margin of the document can be used in an unofficial manner for thechecker, CAD designer, or drafts-person, to sign or initial

If computer access codes are secure, a computer-printed signature isacceptable in most environments This single responsibility practice is thebeginning of an important concept, the responsible or cognizant engineerlist This list will be discussed later It is kept separate from the drawing asopposed to changing the author name on the document This avoidschanges to documents for changing responsibilities

Revision Block

Information typically found in the revision block of a drawing or cation is shown inFig 2.3

specifi-Product Documentation 25

Note that the revision date is the date on which the change wasincorporated into the document (not necessarily the date on which thechange was written or approved).

If the description of the change is short, it may be placed here If thedescription is long, it is perfectly acceptable to enter a few words of revisiondescription Saying “See ECO” (Engineering Change Order) is unacceptable.Rule: Always enter a phrase which encapsulates the reason for/title ofthe change

Reason: When troubleshooting a problem, an engineer can rule outcertain changes from the search by reading a brief description

This will, upon troubleshooting, avoid the step of accessing each ECO toidentify what each change “did.”

The ECO Number should be a separate field as opposed to entering itinto the description field When it is not a separate field, it is typical tooccasionally omit it Without this number associated with the change thetraceability to the ECO that documents the change is lost Thus, the reasonfor change, other dates, change details, etc., are then not readily found

A separate field improves the chances of always having this trail

This signature is that of the person who incorporated the change intothe document If your change system is sound, there should be no need forany other person to sign in the revision block In other words, the ECOmust be a standalone document If it is, then the signature of the person whoincorporates the change into the master document or file should be the onlyone required This should be a lettered/typed signature to assure readability.Rule: The signature column should be signed only by the person whoincorporates the change into the document No other signatures should

be required

Reason: If more than one person signs, who will assure that ration of the change was done correctly?

incorpo-REVISION LETTER/NUMBER REVISION DATE REVISION DESCRIPTION ECO NUMBER SIGNATURE

Figure 2.3 Revision block data.

26 Engineering Documentation Control Handbook

More than one signature also adds significantly to the process time Thecritical issue is defining the responsibility for incorporating the changecorrectly and rapidly We will discuss more about this in the change process.

BODY OF A PART DRAWING

The following information should appear in the body of a part drawing:

• Pictorial

• Notes and specifications

It is important to keep the notes and specs short and crisp If the spec or noteinformation is long or has use on several drawings, then a separate documentshould be created The part number of the separate spec or detached notesshould be referenced on the body of this drawing

An example of a part drawing for the bucket of the front-end loader isshown inFig 2.4

The dimensions are left off the example drawing so as to focus on theissues that are most important to CM On a part drawing, the primary issue

is reference to notes and specs In this case the mold to make the part is

a referenced specification It is done by referencing the mold tool number.Since the note “Remove all burrs” is short and crisp, it is shown on the body

of the drawing If the company develops a lengthy de-burr specification,then that specification would be given a separate item number and refer-enced on the body of this drawing

Imperial (English/American) or Metric

If we had shown the dimensions on our drawing, should they be in inches,metric, or both?

Rule: Pick either the imperial or metric dimensioning system, do notshow both

Reason: Unless your CAD system does it automatically, it is at least twicethe work to dual dimension Most of the parts (where most dimen-sioning exists) are manufactured under one system When mistakes aremade, bad parts result, and a design change is needed

Manufacturing engineering can and should do the converting in theproduction processes if and when necessary Another consideration may be

to make it as difficult as possible for foreign companies to carbon copy yourdesigns Some multinational companies have chosen to dual dimension their

Product Documentation 27

drawings Most have wished, based on informal polls taken in the universityseminars, that they had picked one method.

Document Signatures

Typically, several design engineering signatures appear on each document

A designer, a checker, an engineer, and a manager or two, all sign Doseveral signatures for the same function assure better-quality documents?Where is the signature of the primary customer of the document?

Notice that in the Loader Company, the cognizant engineer of thisdocument has signed his/her name in “authored by” in the title block The

In Development

Ref Mold # A23GC54

Remove all burrs

Drawn By: Proprietary:

ove all burrs

Figure 2.4 Piece part drawing.

28 Engineering Documentation Control Handbook

primary customer for this document signed as an acceptor This clearlyseparates the responsibility for the design from responsibility for manu-facturability, etc In this case, the ME signed because it is a manufacturedpart If it were a test specification, the test engineer would sign; the productspecification would be signed by the sales or marketing representative;

a spare parts list by the service engineer For a purchased item, someonefrom the supply chain, or a ME representing them will sign

The ME should sign in order to assure optimum manufacturability The

ME must be aware of and trained in the needs of suppliers, receivinginspection, the production floor, repair, etc The service representativeneed not sign individual documents that represent service items (subject towear, failure, or damage), but in the Loader Company there will be a spareitem parts list which the FE will agree upon and sign with the cognizantengineer, so there will be no need for them to sign individual documents.Many technical people should be part of a team to review the designdocuments but no more signatures are required than the author and theacceptor of the document If you have more than these two people signingyour drawings and specs, it will unnecessarily delay the process Moresignatures tend to make responsibilities unclear and slow the processes Thus,the more the signatures, the more the problems that can go undetected.Some companies have the ME and other engineers sign the release form.This is an undesirable practice since it usually places the burden forobtaining their signatures on the CM function rather than the creatingengineer It also does not assure that they view the drawing itself – only theform The object must be for the engineers involved in this project toconverse, face to face, “up front,” in the development To talk directly aboutproblems, reservations, ideas, etc., as opposed to having the CM obtain thesignatures upon the release of the document

The team concept is fostered by the design engineer getting the properacceptor to sign the drawing More about teams later

Rule: Design documents should be signed by the ME/acceptor, andthose signatures should be obtained by the authoring design engineerrather than CM

Reason: Engineers should be functioning as part of a team and talkingdirectly to each other Having the CM obtain the signature creates

a wasted and counterproductive step in this process

Whenever there are questions, CM is merely acting as a go between.Communication can be lost or misinterpreted in that process The ME/acceptor should sign the drawing/specification rather than the release or

Product Documentation 29

change form, since the manufacturability, maintainability, repairability, andsimilar issues are on the drawings and the specifications, and not on the forms.

A computer manufacturing company had a problem wherein a criticaladjustment was physically “covered up” in the original design A subsequentchange was required to open an access hole to allow adjustment at the finaltest When the ME was asked how this was allowed to happen, the responsewas, “I didn’t know that was the reason I was signing the release form!” It isalso a good idea to develop a standard that crisply explains the responsibilitythat goes with each signature

Online Signatures

Most companies prepare the pictorial part and assembly drawings with someversion of Computer Aided Design/Drafting (CAD) Should a hard copy beprinted out in order to sign it? In most environments, online signatures aresufficient Security on the system is required for each author and acceptorfor good business practices and for liability purposes The same can be saidfor release, request, or change documents as well

Drawing Notes

If notes are brief they are placed on the body of drawings (such as “De-burrall edges”) If notes are multiple-use (can be or are used on more than onedrawing) or too long to be in the body (such as detailed finish requirements),they are detached on a separate document They are usually given a separateitem number and that number is referenced on the drawing body Placement

of reference documents on the assembly parts list is discussed in Chapter 5.When the design engineer specifies the process to be followed inproducing the item, the same comments would apply to these processspecifications

BODY OF THE ASSEMBLY DRAWING

The face or body of an assembly drawing should contain:

• The assembly pictorial

• Assembled dimensions and tolerances if any

The most prevalent mistake made on assembly drawings is to put the partslist on the body of the drawing Prior to the general use of computers, theaccepted practice was to place the parts list in the body of assembly drawings

30 Engineering Documentation Control Handbook

When the usage of computers became common, they brought a powerfulcapability to produce detached parts lists for materials ordering and control.

It was too easy to also leave them on the body of the drawing The partslist should normally be on a separate detached list The find or balloonnumber relates the picture to the list With the advent of data processing thedetached list can be obtained from a software system

Rule: Do not put parts lists on the body of an assembly drawing unlessthey are put there by a singular BOM database/data entry If you do

a separate data entry to put them on the body of the pictorial drawing,start a planned program to detach them

Reason: The parts list on the pictorial is redundant to a parts list in

a database This redundancy requires wasted effort to input more thanonce and to reconcile list differences It is not just confusing andwasteful; it is dangerous, as it allows possible diverging designs

An exception to this rule would be where the company has one softwaresystem which feeds the parts list to the drawing as well as to other systems Inthis case, the existence of one data entry is the desired result Unless yoursystems are automatically connected, the solution should normally be todetach the parts list and not to develop a parts lists in CAD If forced, as insome ECAD software, ignore that parts list “by policy.” We talk more on thissubject in Chapter 5

A typical design pictorial drawing for the front-end loader is shown in

Fig 2.5

While in the product development phase, the designer should controliterations of the design using the date field The revision field should be leftblank This leaves numeric and alpha revisions for subsequent phases ofrelease

In the Loader Company example, the final assembly pictorial and partslist were released for limited quantity build (pilot) at Revision 01 Theywere both revised during the pilot production phase, the change to thebucket configuration (Rev 02) They were again revised to change therevision level to an alpha (A) when the team agreed that the item was readyfor production Then, when the small tire “OD change” occurred, therevision level changed to “B.” We discuss this subject of revision levels again

in the release and change chapters

The design assembly drawing is sometimes used as the pictorial for themanufacturing assembly operator The difficulty in using the engineeringassembly pictorial on the production floor begins when the production ratechanges, either doubles, or is cut in half for example What one operator did

Product Documentation 31

earlier is now the job of two or half the job of one Shall we run a designchange to revise the picture and parts list to accommodate the newproduction rate? Instead of preparing and changing these pictures to suitmanufacturing, give manufacturing access to the CAD database to makeproduction process pictorials as they require – without the ability to change

REV DESCR REV

8-28-07 9-26-07 1-14-08 Small tire OD

EDC EDC EDC EDC

02 A B

Figure 2.5 Assembly pictorial drawing.

32 Engineering Documentation Control Handbook

the engineering database Such an arrangement can eliminate the need fordesign assembly pictorials in many companies.

With the advent of 3D/solid model CAD, this pictorial is dimensional – a very powerful aid to production If given access to the 3D,the ME/IE can present a pictorial made to best suit the operator

three-It is often stated that the production people need the parts list on the face ofthe pictorial drawing This is usually required in companies that do not have anindustrial engineer responsible for writing assembly processes – a much bettertool for production than engineering pictorials This is discussed in detail later

Assembly Parts List

The corresponding final assembly parts list for the front-end loader parts listlooks likeFig 2.6

Note:Part numbers are shown with a “-” (dash) for the sake of example.The dash is neither necessary nor desirable in actual application becausekeystrokes do add up

The part number of both assembly pictorial and parts list documents isidentical Notice that the find number allows easy cross-reference betweenthe two documents The revision level of both documents is maintainedidentically Keep them that way to avoid confusion, even though not allchanges affect both documents

Some companies have chosen to make the two documents different itemnumbers and to cross-reference by listing the pictorial number on the parts listand even the parts list number on the pictorial Although less desirable, this is

a workable scheme It allows CM to change only the affected document, and

to allow their revision levels to be different This scheme favors the CMdepartment, however, not the customers of the documentation It is betterfrom the customers’ viewpoint to spend the extra CM effort to make themthe same part number and keep them at the same revision level This avoidsrequiring customers to look up the correct rev level of the matching “set” –all customers, forever Start-up companies or those changing their docu-mentation system should seriously consider this issue Established companieswith a workable two number system should not change to a same numberunless they are changing their part numbering system for some other reason.There are three items on the parts list that are not physical items – theProduct Spec, the Material Spec, and the Service Parts List They have beenentered because they are part of the design requirements for the product Theyhave been entered with quantity “Ref ” and Unit of Measure “Doc” in order

Product Documentation 33