Re: Devil's Advocate
Allen Nelson said:
So Chako -
You seem to be saying that the drawings should reflect the machine that was built, rather than the machine being built to reflect the drawings. Is that it?
Great questions Allen. Let me clarify a few things.
When drawings are released of a custom machine we build they are released to the panel building teaming on the floor. We have a sheet with sheet numbers of every drawing on it.
I initial and date EACH sheet number column on that single piece of paper, then I grab a red stamp that says "Released for Assembly", sign and date each page of the electrical prints before I hand the prints over to the head electrical dude.
Also on that same piece of paper is a an extra column called updated and a spot to initial it again indicating that I looked at the returning prints after the job was complete and I updated the red line changes.
The guys on the floor know that if there is a change to the job electrically, to red line in red penicl ONLY the prints with the stamp "Released for Assembly". This is considered the master electrical prints for the job. No other red lines should be drawn on any other print but the print set that has that stamp on the page.
So yes I know that the red lines need to be added to the final prints.
When the job is over, I look at the "Released for Assembly" prints and check for red lines on each sheet, when I update them in CAD, I get back out that first piece of paper above, and by each sheet number I initial my name next to the sheet number I updated meaning that I looked at the prints, I updated them in CAD and they are considered "AS BUILT" or "FINAL". Once all the columns are check, this means I got back ever piece of paper that I released to the panel building team with red line changes, and I updated every single piece of paper. So now I can destroy the red line copies and print my FINAL "as built" set of prints and ship the prints with the job.
Now my question is the revision tracking. My understand is if we change our ISO flow to CONTROLLED copies on the floor we have to track revisions or each red line change that is on the floor. I am against this change because I don't think we should have revision 14 or revision 5 or how many other red line changes we made to a print while it was being built. CONTROLLED copy prints are generally better fit for a manufacture place that produces widgets, not for an OEM custom machine building shop.
So my question is, am I thinking right and asking any other OEMS that are ISO certified because you deal with Tier 1 suppliers too that require you to be ISO to do business with them, do you release your prints UNCONTROLLED but still have some "process" in place that satisfies your ISO inspector and not have to mark the prints CONTROLLED?
If they are marked CONTROLLED, our ISO inspector will force us to track each and every red line change as a revision and note the red line change on the prints even BEFORE they are shipped final to the customer.
To get around the jargon terms and ISO requirements, I suggested that we stay UNCONTROLLED, and keep our print tracking in place as described above and then when the prints are updated and sent out the door with the final "as built" machine, they are considered CONTROLLED prints. At this point if we make a change in the field or add on something to the electrical panel, then I have no problem calling that a revision 1 to the sheet page I added my addition too in the field or after the final prints were updated.
With all that said, does anyone else do what I am proposing? Or do I need to go lay down and shut up?