We use rolling revisions with the last three revisions shown. Older revisions roll off the top of the revision table. To see/access the file history ,you right click the drawing and select History. You can view/print any previous versions/revisions using that dialog.
We went for about 15 years (under our last CAD software) of seeing only the latest rev on the drawing, but we had good access to previous revs in our in-house rev control program. Now that we are in SW and EPDM, we are doing the rolling rev thing, where we say "minimum of 2, maximum of 5" depending on the space available on each drawing.
We also keep a rolling list of up to three revisions in the rev block. That gives you quick access to the last three changes but full history is always available in EPDM.
Side comment - the rev block shown has a redundant comment in it; "Changes per ECO 1155" duplicates what's in the "ECO #" column and doesn't seem to add any value. I work with the engineers to get a short but informative note in the rev description. That helps give value to the three revisions that show, making it easier to track down when a certain change was made. The ECO will always have more detail, but the rev block gives a high level overview.
But I may be barking up the wrong tree and this may be a one off. What works for one company may not be needed at another. It just caught my eye, that's all.
Yeah, I agree. We may be looking at some training (which hasn't really happened) on how to do an ECO/N once we figure out what we really need to keep for CAD data.
For me, I am used to an entry that has a Rev, Description, ECO # and date completed. Then the drawing will actually have, hold your breath, change callout showing you where changes occurred. Now this doesn't mean that every note and dimension gets a change callout but enough to document the change on the drawing. We can also do a model compare to see actual "physical" changes.
Our vault was never really setup to work the way we to do as an organization. Our vault is the OOTB vault workflow and to be honest our users are only using Check in/out as "revision". It's a really sad condition. I'm working on getting an new vault setup with workflows that maintain the documents we really want to control. We use SolidWorks and DriveWorks so if we make changes we should only, in theory, only need to make changes to our DW rules and template files. Once the drawings are created (pdf being our document of record) we could technically nuke our CAD data. If the product is reordered or we want to update our flat patterns we will rerun the models so we get updated flats and be done. We do have a different environment and one that is pretty alien to me.
I appreciate everyone's input.
I have my system set up to fill in the date and approval signature through a variable.
I use a single line for the revision.
The user needs to change the revision letter and add the description manually. The sheet version in the title block will fill in automatically, using the revision variable.
As for getting old copies, go to history, select the version you want and select get.
This will make the current item that version.
You can then get latest to bring back the latest item to view
I'll have to echo the comments of others: EPDM's structure in theory makes the contents of the revision table somewhat redundant. Particularly since your change comments can be longer than what would normally fit in a "description" column AND since you can refer to ECO/DCR (or whatever your acronym) data either through your data cards or through reference pasting to actual documents.
How well that works in practice probably depends on how many people in your organization actually have a utility for those tables (or if there are people outside your company, like vendors, who want that information without access to your vault).
DriveWorks integration... that's always a fun topic for me, depending on how you incorporate revision level of the master model into your model rules. But that's a completely different topic altogether.
I'm of the camp that would like to see 2 or possibly 3 of the last revisions. Though if I'm a new vendor at the current rev, it doesn't matter. I've worked at a few places over the last 40 years where you had to beg for the ECO/ECN listings. We switched to a practice of 'check and verify everything, don't go by the listing at all'. Yes, in some cases that was 'start all over'. Most of these parts were mildly complex precision sheet metal or easier.