Drawings and previous revisions, control

J

juliov

Please let me know your input to the following question:
Our assembly department keeps prints of previous machines that were assembled and sold to our customers; new machines naturally have new components and thus new prints’ revisions to account for the new machines that will be sold to our customers.
Keep in mind that the new machines have updated revisions due to modifications,
and these prints are used during assembly as they should be to control quality.

Our customers sometimes send the older machines for repair and logically we dig out the older prints (previous revisions) to repair because the older prints refer to the returned machine. Here is the question, how do we control these prints?? Should we use a “for reference” stamp on them, or store them away and use them when needed to repair older versions of machines, how can we ensure that we don’t get a nonconformance during an audit. What classification should the older prints be under? The new prints are clearly controlled and in file and available at points of use. Our tech leader has a folder with many prints of previous versions of the machines with a “for reference” stamp on the folder cover, is this conforming? Let me know. I would really look forward to find a correct method to include in our QMS that would address this issue correctly and simply.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Stijloor

Leader
Super Moderator
Please let me know your input to the following question:
Our assembly department keeps prints of previous machines that were assembled and sold to our customers; new machines naturally have new components and thus new prints’ revisions to account for the new machines that will be sold to our customers.
Keep in mind that the new machines have updated revisions due to modifications,
and these prints are used during assembly as they should be to control quality.

Our customers sometimes send the older machines for repair and logically we dig out the older prints (previous revisions) to repair because the older prints refer to the returned machine. Here is the question, how do we control these prints?? Should we use a “for reference” stamp on them, or store them away and use them when needed to repair older versions of machines, how can we ensure that we don’t get a nonconformance during an audit. What classification should the older prints be under? The new prints are clearly controlled and in file and available at points of use. Our tech leader has a folder with many prints of previous versions of the machines with a “for reference” stamp on the folder cover, is this conforming? Let me know. I would really look forward to find a correct method to include in our QMS that would address this issue correctly and simply.

Hello juliov,

Allow me to blow off some steam first :mad::mad:
"For Reference Only" is a sorry excuse for NOT taking responsibility and control of the item whatever it is....
Some of my Fellow Covers know this as a "weasel word" (or weasel term).

Older drawings can be controlled per their number and revision status.
Very simple. Machine # XXXX comes in for repair, you look up the drawings and schematics associated with it per number and relevant revision. It's that simple. I have seen this done with no problems. The company I used to work for had drawings going back to 1928. We still made spare parts for equipment from that era using the "old" drawings. They were appropriately controlled just as the new ones.

Simple rule: If you use it and decide to keep it? Control it!

Stijloor.
 

Jim Wynne

Leader
Admin
Hello juliov,

Allow me to blow off some steam first :mad::mad:
"For Reference Only" is a sorry excuse for NOT taking responsibility and control of the item whatever it is....
Some of my Fellow Covers know this as a "weasel word" (or weasel term).

Older drawings can be controlled per their number and revision status.
Very simple. Machine # XXXX comes in for repair, you look up the drawings and schematics associated with it per number and relevant revision. It's that simple. I have seen this done with no problems. The company I used to work for had drawings going back to 1928. We still made spare parts for equipment from that era using the "old" drawings. They were appropriately controlled just as the new ones.

Simple rule: If you use it and decide to keep it? Control it!

Stijloor.

I agree with the "for reference only" thing. All prints are for reference only, unless you're also going to use them to paper the walls.

As for the question of control, it becomes a problem if new machines carry the same part numbers or other identifiers as the old ones, and then it's only a problem if you don't have good revision control. I've seen this sort of thing dealt with by stamping the old prints with something like "For history purposes only; check for appropriate revision before using." It should be made clear that the way to determine the appropriate revision is to look at a sales order to determine the revision level of the machine the customer was sold.
 
J

juliov

Thanks! Stijloor for your advice, let me dig into your reply to see if I am clear on its message; we are to control the older prints' versions of our machines per their number and revision level and pull the prints out when needed to repair a previous machine that is associated with that print revision, correct? now should these prints still be in the master list of documents? in order to verify current revision? in either hard/or electronic copies stored in a proper storage place, correct? then we are to lose the folder and kick the "for reference label" out of the assembly dept. in other words we are to treat the older prints as if they were current controlled documents or as we treat new versions. No doc should be or have the "for reference" stamp on it. Comment please.
 

Stijloor

Leader
Super Moderator
Thanks! Stijloor for your advice, let me dig into your reply to see if I am clear on its message; we are to control the older prints' versions of our machines per their number and revision level and pull the prints out when needed to repair a previous machine that is associated with that print revision, correct? now should these prints still be in the master list of documents? in order to verify current revision? in either hard/or electronic copies stored in a proper storage place, correct? then we are to lose the folder and kick the "for reference label" out of the assembly dept. in other words we are to treat the older prints as if they were current controlled documents or as we treat new versions. No doc should be or have the "for reference" stamp on it. Comment please.

Hello juliov,

Yes, that would be my suggestion. Discuss this with your colleagues though.

If you use a master list (inventory) of drawings, they should be included in that system. Even though you use "older" drawings, they are still active when machines come in for repair or refurbishment.

In my experience, drawings maintained in locations you've mentioned in your previous post, would worry me.

Stijloor.
 

AndyN

Moved On
Thanks, guys for the 'for reference' comments.....:applause:

Yes, you will have to control the versions of prints for equipment returned by the customer for repair etc. That means keeping an index or similar log, knowing what print was used on what equipment etc. This is a dilemma faced by all organizations who perform repairs of older equipment, unfortunately. I've seen similar situations where the term was 'As built' drawings.

The version of the print used at the time to build the equipment, is the 'latest' version. If you keep serial numbers of the machines built, you could annotate the drawing with a stamp or similar "Used on" and list those serial numbers on the print or in the log/index, instead of that pesky 'for ref'
:2cents:
 
C

CliffK

Yes, you do have to control the drawings.

How do people locate the proper drawings now? How well does it work?

If it works well, build your control procedure around what people actually do. If not, sit down with the people who use the process and help them figure out a better way. Then document that.
 
Q

QualityNo1

Hi Juliov,
I agree with the advice others have posted. The drawings are just like the machines - OLD - but they are still very current and relevant just like the machines you are repairing, therefore must be controlled in the same way you control all other drawings.

Regards
Steve
 
Top Bottom