【转帖】standards revisions

yang686526

standards' revisions
i'm looking for a standard drafting note to apply to our drawings that removes the need to write an eco when the gov agency rev's the standard.  i have looked through the drawings rq'mnt manual however more input would be appreciated.
example:  mil-std xxx  instead of mil-std-xxxa
some note such as "all standards on drawing are revision verified prior to use" etc.
thanks,
sds
find a job or post a job opening
"mil-std xxx latest revsion"
it has also been my understanding that if the mil spec is called out without a revision it's understood that it's the latest revision.  please do not call out a revision.....i've seen first hand where material specs were called out with revisions on a navy project....it has been a battle to buy material.  i'd like to flog that designer and checker that let that go into production
i'm with heckler.  when referenceing standards in any document, not listing the revision implies "use latest standard".  about the only standard i know where you are required to note the version is asme y14.5m
i think there is a world market for maybe five computers.
thomas watson, chairman of ibm, 1943.
if you do not control a standard that you are referencing (or at least participate on the committee that publishes it) you should always specify the revision.
it is entirely possible that a revision will alter some aspect of the standard that was important to you, making "latest revision" unsuitable for your purposes.
when you reference a standard it is your responsibility to:
a:  find out what the latest revision is at the time.
b:  actually read and understand it before referencing it.
c:  ensure that you are notified of revisions, and read and understand what has changed in the latest revision.  then determine if the "latest revision" is still suitable for you.
on projects lasting many years it is common for references without revision to be "the latest revision in effect at the date of notice to proceed."  this prevents a moving target over time.
as i re  
all of our aerospace/military customers require i.e mil-x-xxxxa, they require rev after name.
chris
sr. mechanical designer, cad
solidworks 05 sp3.1 / pdmworks 05
when the standard does not have specific types and classes designations then using without revision is ok.
however, if you specify an anodic coating to aluminum alloy per mil-a-8625 you usually have to specify the type and class of the coating to differentiate between chromic to sulphuric or hard anodize. added to this you have to specify the class which differentiate between the sealing and dying options. then you must specify the revision.
newer version may change the type and class designation (as already happened before) but always give a conversion table from the old types and classes to the newer one.