Looking to writing a DRM - What do you use?

[frankreid]

I'm a published author with ten books on Amazon. Three of them are Windows training guides. I have been looking into the idea of writing a DRM, Drafting Room Manual, a book in a three-ring binder that describes all the American standardized way of making drawings.

I looked on Amazon to see if they are still being sold and found three but don't know if they sell. For my own drafting work I often use YouTube for some training and also I Google my questions. And, of course, I come here to get some instruction. I believe most large companies have their own drawing standards manual but it is on their server and is written for their specific way of working. There are also some who buy a DVD with this on it and use it at their desk for reference. This is normally used by a checker to keep all the drawings standardized within the company.

I have pulled out all my old manuals: ANSI Y14, Global Manual, and other paper based documents to get an idea of what I should include. But here is my questions to you.

Do most large companies use an online manual?
Do most small companies use a paper-based book?
Are you still using a paper notebook DRM or design manual for standardizing the drawings?
Do you ignore the manual and just do it your own way?
Basically, is there a market for such a manual?

Those are my questions.
Thanks for reading.
Frank Reid

Frank Reid
Reid Engineering Services of Utah

 

[3DDave]

Over the last 30 years it seems to me that most companies have decided that drafting standards are not important. The companies I worked with fired or didn't have drafting checkers and looking at drawings from outside sources, it is clear they did not do such a good job either. Even little things like having all the required dimensions is becoming secondary as companies take their chances with STEP files. Same effect on the incoming inspection/QA/QC side. They don't check the parts to the drawing and just wait for the production floor to identify fit problems.

After my first company (30 years) literally** burned the manuals and fired the checkers, the program managers started whining the drawings were inconsistent and that the engineers should work together to fix that problem. Right - because the new grads who think they know everything were looking for criticism from the old guys, old guys who couldn't affect their salary, but could delay getting drawings out on time. A perfect recipe for not listening to anyone.

**It was part of the ISO 9000 certification effort. If there are no manuals you can't be found to not follow them.

 

[CheckerHater]

Don't bother with yet another DRM - there is enough already.
Drafting standards are now replaced with default "out of the box" settings of CAD programs.
Hey, our company "standardized" Calibri because they didn't know how to change default font in Office.

"For every expert there is an equal and opposite expert"
Arthur C. Clarke Profiles of the future

 

[MadMango]

I think the DRM is dead (just like drafters), at least for mechanical piece-parts. Now it is all ASME Y14.41-2012. Send the 3D model data to the tool maker, then received parts are CMM/scanned and checked for out of tolerances.

"Art without engineering is dreaming; Engineering without art is calculating."

Have you read faq731-376 to make the best use of these Forums?

 

[MintJulep]

describes all the American standardized way of making drawings.

The best thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from...

 

[ewh]

I agree that DRMs are not really needed anymore. ASME standards cover most areas, and DRMs are now more for the purpose noting exceptions to the ASME standards than defining what constitutes a proper drawing.

"Know the rules well, so you can break them effectively."
-Dalai Lama XIV

 

[DiegoLGraves]

We use ASME, with a supplemental 2 page listing of exceptions, which are mostly formatting notes and dimensions suitable for fabrication.

 

[KENAT]

As a couple of others say, DRM are of limited use.

Probably better to focus on ASME (or I suppose ISO if appropriate) standards as your basis then have a limited document that sticks to things like exceptions, consistent interpretation of some of the ambiguous areas filling in gaps and quite possibly how to do it in your CAD system.

Posting guidelines faq731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

(probably not aimed specifically at you)
What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484​

 

[Dave K]

Agreed, ASME, or whatever spec will cover most of it, and anything that deviates will be a company specific DRM.

-Dave

NX 9, Teamcenter 10

 

[KENAT]

Sorry, had to run earlier. I have copies of Genium (draftingzone.com) and Global DRMs but don't consult them too often & when I do it's often for the extracts of AWS 2.4 on welding or similar references rather than the drawing stuff.

We have a DRM which clarifies some requirements and points out how to meet some of them with our CAD etc. but it hasn't been updated for several years and I'm not sure it gets looked at often.

Posting guidelines faq731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

(probably not aimed specifically at you)
What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484​

 

[MadMango]

I'll add that I have been at two companies that had online DRMs, with two entirely different outcomes. One was just the manual scanned and saved on the network as a PDF. Nothing was hyperlinked, and it was a pain to use. The other was pretty handy. It was quick to search for things, and easy to update by those with proper privileges. It was built upon a wiki-like base, an easily configured content management system.

"Art without engineering is dreaming; Engineering without art is calculating."

Have you read faq731-376 to make the best use of these Forums?

 

[JNieman]

Brings up something I had an old "CAD Manager" tell me when I was asking for input in setting up a previous company standard, elsewhere. "You have to make it easier to conform than not to, or they won't." Sometimes, like MadMango mentions, it's about making it easy to find the answers for those /willing/ to go out of their way to conform. Sometimes it's a matter of making tools that more obtuse users will see as making their job easier, with a side benefit of conformance. That's more of an 'implementation' thing, rather than DRM content though.

My opinion is that there's enough thorough content in standards such as ASME Y14.xxxx that you could save a lot of time and money by referencing that, and only writing material to cover company-specific exceptions/directions.

 

[swertel]

Considering that I'm in a similar situation as the OP, I'll mention what I'm currently working on.

Rather than a DRM, it's more of a Product Design Manual and Tooling Design Manual.
In the manuals are references to the applicable ASME or MIL standards, and their exceptions.
Specific to the PDM and TDM are how MY COMPANY meets the requirements listed in the standards.
I also define part numbering, expand on naming conventions, standard parts & materials, etc.
This information is loosely connected to Purchasing and Inventory Management as well, because it defines things like shop supplies and raw materials that are commonly used and therefore should have a min stock on hand.
The PDM and TDM actually contain very little drawing and modeling details. You won't see much about lineweights, styles, orthographic projections, etc. It is largely a collection of best practices. It is also where the customizations made to the CAD templates is defined, so when we upgrade to the next software version we can ensure consistency.

It's still a work in progress, so I can't tell you how successful it is. But, one thing it does is combine all the disconnected standard operating procedures into a single reference so information is easier to find and impact of change is easier to determine. The PDM/TDM itself is NOT a requirements document. It is a guide. The actual requirements are still defined in the subsequent industry standards and internal standard operating procedures.

--Scott
www.wertel.pro