Working in the Aerospace Industry has allowed me to see how various organizations utilize and implement their software tools and business process in a product development group. Mergers and acquisitions have also given me a great deal of insight and has been a fantastic source of education. Every company has unique processes, people and methods to accomplish a given organization’s goals, but shouldn’t we follow a standard? I would say yes, but there really is no standard for this and most companies allow software tools to evolve freely.

When implementing software, someone should be chosen to lead and evaluate how the software will be used to benefit the organization. Ultimately, the lead has some project management experience, understands the business process the software will be used to benefit, how the software fits within current IT solutions and how it will impact end users and other functional groups within the organization. In the IT world business analysts are used to ensure that software solutions meet all stakeholders’ needs and are implemented wholly. Business analysts with engineering experience are a rare breed and will fit more in the Senior Business Analyst level, but if someone of this caliber is not available, a project manager, a high caliber end user and functional area manager could fulfill the role.

The key to successful software tool implementation are people and planning. Involve the right people and manage the implementation of a new software tool just as you would an end product for your customers. For project planning, I would recommend following the Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC) framework, especially for large scale business system implementation such as Material Requirements Planning (MRP), Enterprise Resource Planning ( ERP), Product Data Management (PDM), Product Life Cycle Management (PLM) and or course Computer-Aided Design (CAD). For the people, select folks who own the process and are proficient in the use of computer-based software application.

Allowing software to evolve freely within an organization will cause problems down the road. If all systems and the capabilities of the software application are not used as intended, implementation of departmental standards, data redundancy and the ability to leverage design output can be greatly impeded and cause problems downstream.

US engineering drawing standards have been in place for many years for the purpose of creating a common language that can be interpreted worldwide. The first documented US engineering drawing standard was MIL-STD-1 (issued in 1948), which covered general practices. Today, the governing US standard, known as ASME (American Society of Mechanical Engineers) Y14.100, is the basic frame work for engineering drawing standards. The ASME Y14.100 document will direct individuals to the various specifications required to ensure consistent interpretation of US made engineering drawings and documentation.

Engineering drawing (drafting) practices are taught in our high schools and colleges, but the materials often omit the fact that there is a US standard or it is just not emphasized as being important. By the time I realized there was a US standard, I was two years into my career as a draftsman. Once I knew a standard was available, I took it upon myself to read, understand and implement the document in my daily duties.

Benefits of implementing ASME Y14.100 Drawing Practices

1. Common language/method of interpretation across Industry
2. Eliminates or minimizes the need to write departmental or organization drafting standards
3. Includes Industry standards for configuration and revision management
4. Provides path to all ASME and other agency standards used in the creation of engineering documentation

Historical reference of ASME Y14.100 in descending order

1. ASME Y14.100 (2004 current issue)
2. MIL-STD-100 (1997 revision G last issue)
3. DOD-STD-100 (1988 revision C, issue 6 last issue)
4. MIL-STD-100 (1975 revision B last issue)
5. MIL-STD-1 (1965 revision B last issue)

Don’t forget to place a note on your drawing referring to this standard. Note 1 should read something like this “Interpret per ASME Y14.100.” Also, copies of ASME Y14.100 can be obtained from www.asme.org.

Articles will follow discussing the use and interpretation of various ASME Y14 series documents. The next article will focus on the ASME Y14.5M Dimensioning and Tolerancing standard.

LineTip.com is a web-log dedicated to design engineering professionals that utilize Computer-Aided Design (CAD) to accomplish daily tasks. At this site I will share my experiences, tools (custom and purchased), tips, techniques and professional opinions as they relate to product development and continuance engineering support. My ultimate goal is to provide other professionals like myself with information that can positively impact their organizations.