How do I ensure my part revision control with PLM software is compliant with aerospace audit requirements?

To make part revision control in PLM compliant with aerospace audit requirements, you want to prove two things:

1. The process is controlled
2. The records are traceable, immutable, and auditable

Here’s a practical compliance checklist.

1) Define a formal configuration management process

Your PLM workflow should support a documented process for:

• Part creation
• Revision assignment
• Change request / change order approval
• Release to production
• Obsolescence / supersession

In aerospace, auditors expect this to be based on a controlled procedure, not informal user practice.

2) Enforce revision control at the system level

Make sure the PLM system:

• Assigns unique part numbers
• Stores revision history automatically
• Prevents overwriting released revisions
• Separates draft, in review, released, and obsolete states
• Locks approved/released records from unauthorized changes

Best practice: users should not be able to “edit in place” on released parts.

3) Use formal change control

All revision changes should go through a controlled change mechanism:

• Engineering Change Request (ECR)
• Engineering Change Order (ECO)
• Deviation / waiver process when applicable

Each change should capture:

• Reason for change
• Impact analysis
• Approval signatures
• Effective date / serial effectivity / lot effectivity
• Linked documents and affected assemblies

4) Maintain complete traceability

Auditors will want to trace:

• Why the revision changed
• Who approved it
• When it was approved
• What downstream parts/assemblies were affected
• Which manufacturing or inspection records used that revision

Your PLM should link:

• Part numbers
• Drawings
• Specifications
• BOMs
• Process plans
• Supplier documents
• Test/inspection records

5) Control document and BOM synchronization

Make sure revision updates to:

• part master
• drawing
• 3D model
• BOM
• manufacturing instructions

are released together or through a controlled linkage. A common audit finding is mismatch between a part revision and the associated drawing/BOM revision.

6) Capture audit trail and e-signatures

The PLM system should record:

• who created/changed/approved records
• timestamps
• old vs new values
• status transitions
• electronic signatures, if used

Audit trails should be tamper-evident and retained per your retention policy.

7) Restrict access by role

Use role-based access control:

• engineers can propose changes
• approvers can release changes
• manufacturing can view released data
• only admins can manage permissions

This supports segregation of duties, which auditors often check.

8) Validate the PLM system

For regulated aerospace environments, the system itself may need validation/qualification:

• confirm workflows behave as intended
• confirm revision lockout works
• confirm approvals are mandatory
• confirm audit logs cannot be altered
• test backups and recovery

Keep validation evidence available for audit.

9) Manage supplier and outsourced data carefully

If suppliers contribute design changes or manufacturing revisions:

• require controlled submittals
• version supplier data on receipt
• review and approve before release
• keep supplier revision history linked to internal records

10) Retain records per policy and regulation

Ensure records retention meets company and contract requirements. Keep:

• revision history
• approvals
• obsolete records
• audit logs
• training records for users involved in the process

11) Train users and audit the process

Even a good PLM system fails if users bypass it. Train people on:

• how revisions are generated
• what must be changed through ECO
• release rules
• naming/numbering conventions
• document control requirements

Then periodically audit:

• random part records
• revision change samples
• released vs obsolete data
• approval completeness

12) Align to relevant aerospace standards

Depending on your environment, the audit basis may include:

• AS9100 configuration management and document control expectations
• AS9145 advanced product quality planning / product realization
• customer-specific requirements
• FAA/EASA regulatory expectations, where applicable
• internal quality procedures

Common audit findings to avoid

• Uncontrolled revision edits
• Missing approvals
• Drawing and BOM not matching part revision
• No traceability from revision to change request
• Users with excessive access
• Audit logs not retained or not reviewable
• Obsolete revisions still available for production use
• Changes implemented before approval

A simple “audit-ready” minimum

If you want a baseline, your PLM should be able to show:

• Every part has a unique ID and revision history
• Every revision change has an approved ECO
• Released records are locked
• All related documents are revision-controlled
• Audit trails are complete and immutable
• Access is role-based
• Obsolete revisions cannot be used in production
• Validation and training records exist

If you want, I can also give you:

1. a sample aerospace revision control procedure, or
2. an audit checklist for PLM compliance.