Solved

Eng Revision vs Revision NO

  • 3 February 2023
  • 2 replies
  • 151 views
M
Rank
Userlevel 1
Badge +5

I’m a bit confused with the functional differences between 2 fields in the different Engineering Part Revision Forms. One is “Eng Rev” (or Eng Revision) and the other one is just “Rev No” (or Revision No)

 

In IFS Explorer the first field is described as “The engineering part revision for the selected part. This field cannot be modified. This field is for information only and affects nothing else in the system. “

The second one (Rev No) is described as “The internal counter used to keep track of all revisions for a part. For each new revision, the counter is incremented by one. This is used to correctly order part revisions in forms and reports. This field cannot be updated manually.”

 

… yet conceptually I can’t wrap my head around of the difference or how are they supposed to be used in different ways. Anybody can explain this for me?

 

Thanks!

icon

Best answer by ShawnBerk 4 February 2023, 00:25

View original

2 replies

S
Rank
Userlevel 7
Badge +28

Think of Rev No as the IFS version of your revisions, you can’t alter it, it just counts to keep things unique.  You have no control of it, it starts at 1 and counts one for every new one.

 

Eng Rev is your place to set the revision to what you want it to be, it could be A, B, C or 1, 2, 3 or A, A.1, A.2, B, C  - you can set it to whatever you want, but once moved from preliminary, you can’t change it.  

 

Eng Rev is meant to follow your drawing revision schema whatever that is, but you have to make sure it is right before release because you can’t change it.  In reality though, you could do things in a very non-sensical order.  A, Z, 1, N, 2, B is an allowed sequence, IFS doesn’t care, just people would care.

Rev No is an incremental number you can’t set or dictate, so in the non-sensical version if you did this:

A = 1

Z = 2

1 = 3

N = 4

2 = 5

B = 6

 

IFS would know that B is 6th in the sequence and the system would keep track of that which humans can mess up.  However, because you can’t change or alter the sequence, it is too rigid for most revisioning schemas because they don’t always follow a purely fixed step between them.

M
Rank
Userlevel 1
Badge +5

Thanks Shawn, your post is so clear that I think it should be made part of the IFS documentation! 😀

I have no further questions and I tagged your answer as “Best Answer” as it completely clarifies the confusion around it and addresses my concern completely

Reply


Terms & ConditionsCookie settings