Drawing (Print) Sign-off questions

[93ramvert]

O.k. we have 5 designers who are signing-off the DWN BY in the Title block on drawings. We also have a Revision Block as with most drawings that has (Rev, Descrip., ECR#, By, and Date blocks). For initial release of drawings all designers will place an A in the Rev. block (this is our release letter), place Initial Release in the Description block, a dash will go in the ECR block, and then all but one of our designers will place their initials and date in the By and Date blocks. The last one says that that shouldn't be done as it's not an Engineering change and it's being covered by the Title block sign-off. My procedure for this Revision Block is as follows:

Date Block: Indicates the date the approved block was signed. Dates are to be filled in as electronic printed text.

By Block: Indicates the designer, detailer, draftsperson, etc. who produced the graphic representation of the parts for that revision. Initials are to be filled in as electronic printed text.

The way I have it written, to me these blocks are to be signed and dated no matter what the case.

Is this a normal practice? I've seen some of our customer drawings that follow this same practice. Any comments?

[Coury Ferguson]

In Reply to Parent Post by 93ramvert

O.k. we have 5 designers who are signing-off the DWN BY in the Title block on drawings. We also have a Revision Block as with most drawings that has (Rev, Descrip., ECR#, By, and Date blocks). For initial release of drawings all designers will place an A in the Rev. block (this is our release letter), place Initial Release in the Description block, a dash will go in the ECR block, and then all but one of our designers will place their initials and date in the By and Date blocks. The last one says that that shouldn't be done as it's not an Engineering change and it's being covered by the Title block sign-off. My procedure for this Revision Block is as follows:

Date Block: Indicates the date the approved block was signed. Dates are to be filled in as electronic printed text.

By Block: Indicates the designer, detailer, draftsperson, etc. who produced the graphic representation of the parts for that revision. Initials are to be filled in as electronic printed text.

The way I have it written, to me these blocks are to be signed and dated no matter what the case.

Is this a normal practice? I've seen some of our customer drawings that follow this same practice. Any comments?

I have seen this type of process, in various companies and it seems to work well.

If it works, and that is how your company does it, than keep it the way it is.

[Jim Wynne]

In Reply to Parent Post by 93ramvert

O.k. we have 5 designers who are signing-off the DWN BY in the Title block on drawings. We also have a Revision Block as with most drawings that has (Rev, Descrip., ECR#, By, and Date blocks). For initial release of drawings all designers will place an A in the Rev. block (this is our release letter), place Initial Release in the Description block, a dash will go in the ECR block, and then all but one of our designers will place their initials and date in the By and Date blocks. The last one says that that shouldn't be done as it's not an Engineering change and it's being covered by the Title block sign-off. My procedure for this Revision Block is as follows:

Date Block: Indicates the date the approved block was signed. Dates are to be filled in as electronic printed text.

By Block: Indicates the designer, detailer, draftsperson, etc. who produced the graphic representation of the parts for that revision. Initials are to be filled in as electronic printed text.

The way I have it written, to me these blocks are to be signed and dated no matter what the case.

Is this a normal practice? I've seen some of our customer drawings that follow this same practice. Any comments?

You have to design the process first. What does your drawing approval process documentation say about how (and by whom) drawings are approved? Who has authority to "release" a drawing for production? In general, you should want to show (on the drawing) who the designer is, who did the drawing, and who reviewed and approved it, along with the date of approval and release, if those are different. When drawings are changed, you should show an ECN number and the effective date (as well as the new revision number/letter). The approvals for ECN should be kept to the ECN document itself, so as to avoid unnecessary clutter in the revision block).

[Dale D. Barnes]

Our drawings are done in the same fashion. We have the following

Drawn by block Initialed and dated
Approved by block Initialed and dated
Checked by block Initialed and dated

We also have a revision block at the top of the print example

Rev. Date Revision Record DR. Chk. Appv
NR XXXX Initial Release AB CD EF

Our Document Control person is and auditor also so that is how we do it.


Thanks
Dale

[93ramvert]

In Reply to Parent Post by Jim Wynne

You have to design the process first. What does your drawing approval process documentation say about how (and by whom) drawings are approved? Who has authority to "release" a drawing for production? In general, you should want to show (on the drawing) who the designer is, who did the drawing, and who reviewed and approved it, along with the date of approval and release, if those are different. When drawings are changed, you should show an ECN number and the effective date (as well as the new revision number/letter). The approvals for ECN should be kept to the ECN document itself, so as to avoid unnecessary clutter in the revision block).

The drawing system itself is working. I am the one who is "Releasing" the drawing into production. What we capture is Drawn by, Checked By, Engineering, Manufacturing, and Approval (Me). The question was more for the Rev. block on the initial release. The designer who has completed the drawing normally will like I said place the Rev. letter, description, ECR, By, and date. But I have one who doesn't and says that this is not normally done.
My question was more of do others do it this way or am I requiring something off key?