Drawing numbering system 14

[Adrian2]

Dear Folks;

Back in the old days, a number for each drawing sheet was quite sufficient. Now with seperate drawing, part and assembly files I was wondering if anyone can share a good numbering/recording system for keeping track of drawings.

At the moment I record my drawing, part and assembly numbers in a spreadsheet which allows me to search or sort my work for particular information. But of course this is not an optimum solution for large numbers of drawing files.

Best Regards

Adrian D

 

[TZellers]

Note: I'm stuck in the significant p/n he!! because our MRP doesn't sort by drawing number.

Also, I create a self-validating part number system in Excel, but went overboard. The method of generating the parity numbers (in my case the last 2 digits of an 8 digit part number) is probably too complex for a MRP system to generate on its own, so don't get too fancy if you do go that route. Beware of your system's limitations before you blaze a path for p/n changes.....

 

[EdDanzer]

Keeping track of a semi significant part number system becomes more difficult as the number of parts increases. We have 8.8 GB of engineering data in 22,000 files, the Excel tracking takes up 184 MB in 224 files. Even though we tried to make navigation and finding files simple, it is now difficult, and getting worse by the part number.

 

[J-C]

Ed, exactly why all parts classification should be done in a database as attributes and part numbers should be non-intelligent.

Attributes can be easily changed & corrected. You are usually stuck with a part number once used.

Jason Capriotti
ThyssenKrupp Elevator

 

[EdDanzer]

Gildashard,
You are correct in that this information should be in a database, Excel is a flat file database and difficult to search, PDM software use relational databases, but relational databases do not work well for product knowledge. What I find the most difficult is remembering what something is called, what someone else calls what you are looking for, and what you should call what you are designing. The index in McMaster is a perfect example, some items are listed several times by different names.

 

[kcarpenter]

Ed,
What you really need is a set of standard descriptions to help define you parts/asms. In doing this everyone will use the same methodology in naming their designs AND it will make finding those files in your database much easier.

Here's how we standardized our descriptions:

ASM, AAA BBB ...
AAA What type of assembly?
BBB What type of (AAA) assembly?
(Add as much description as needed to describe assembly.)
Example: ASM, WALKER HD

WLDMT, AAA BBB ...
AAA What type of weldment?
BBB What type of (AAA) weldment?
(Add as much description as needed to describe weldment.)
Example: WLDMT, FRAME FRONT
WLDMT, UPRIGHT FRONT W/HEADTUBE RT
CLR WLDMT, UPRIGHT FRONT W/HINGE PLATES RT

We also have abbreviation standards (as you could already see), and here are a few of those:

Mandatory:
ASSEMBLY - ASM
ADJUSTABLE - ADJ
COLD DRAWN STEEL - CDS
COLD ROLLED STEEL - CRS
CROSSBRACE - X-BRACE
CROSSMEMBER - X-MEMBER or X-MBR
DRAWN OVER MANDREL - DOM
ELECTRIC WELD - EW
EXTRUSION - EXTR
FEET - FT
HARDWARE - HDW

Optional:
BEARING - BRG
BLACK - BLK
BOLT CIRCLE - BC
BONDED COMPOSITE FABRIC - BCF
BOTTOM - BTM
BRACKET - BRKT
HANDLE - HDL
HARNESS - HARN
HEADREST - HDRST
HEAT TREAT - HT
HEATSHRINK - H/SHRK


Kevin Carpenter
CAD Systems Specialist
Invacare Corp.

 

[EdDanzer]

Kcarpenter,
We have a lot of information in our 7 alpha-numeric scheme. Not to the level your are proposing, but adequate for most needs. The description information is in Excel, but locating and using this information becomes more difficult as more similar items are added. New or casual users say the system is difficult to use to locate items with multiple definitions. Items that fit more than one category are the most painful, when we designed the delineation scheme, it seemed good. Now 7 years later some items seem out of place, or need additional information included. Longer part numbers with more information only make the task worse. We tried that with 2D CAD.
I have been looking at using an object oriented database to store and display the information as a 3D tree map. The current work load does not allow for work in this area.

 

[Bouke]

Here is my company's part-numbering system, but I have to add we normally build 1 machine of a kind and rarely have the option of copying units from an older machine. So usually we don't use parts twice:

04AA01-00 Assembly
04AA01-Skel Skeleton
04AA01-01 Part01
^ ^ ^ ^ ^
| | | | Description
| | | Pos-Nr of the part
| | Unit-Nr
| Machine-Nr
Year of Design

or:
04AA01-AA Purchase Part

But I don't think we have the problems you guys are describing above. BTW, If we can use a unit an another machine. We copy all the parts and give them their new unique number.

Grtz, Bouke

 

[EdDanzer]

Bouke,
The service, and inventory people must hate your part numbering scheme. If you have to inventory spare parts, a change in numbering methodology may reduce the money tied up in inventory substantially. Do you do this to fasteners, bearings, and plumbing items?

 

[Bouke]

Like I said, We only build machines onces or twice. So I can't say our company has inventory or service people. What we do have is an electrical,software and mechanical design departments and an realisation-department. The mostly used fasteners we keep their appropiate closet and the other purchase parts used in the machines are ordered in the right quantity's.

So like I said, I don't think we have the problems you guys are describing.

 

[RBasniak]

I worked on a company that used the following naming system... I'm sure it's not that perfect naming system but it was the best i worked with, we had just a few problems with it.

9999-99-99

The four first digits are just a sequential and unique numbering system, the tow middle ones are thre to indicate the if the part is welded in anoter one, it's 00 for the welded assy and 01, 02, 03 and so on for the parts in this assy, or just 01 if it's a independent part. The last two are the revision number. Every fabricated part or assy is saved with an unique number with those rules. The drawings are saved with the same name of its referenced part or assy. Every project has a folder on the server and its parts are saved into a PARTS folder in this folder. When the revision is increase we just have a macro that do the bored work of saving the drawings and all the references as needed. The revised parts are archived in a dead file folder. The mounting assys are saved separetely of the fabricated parts and assys, with no special naming system, ie PACKING UNIT, HOT MELT APPLICATION, FORMING UNIT...
For comercial parts we save them with the manufacturer code like DNC-32-XX-PPV, SKF3201... all in a library folder. Then we have lots of configurations into all of them and each config has an User Specific Name to appear in the BOM, this number is the naming system of the parts, like C9999, EF9999, P9999, and the first one or two alpha characters means the tipe of the library item, like component, fixing elements... We chose this method for comercial parts just because they should have configs and we can't use more than one name to the same file... a windows limitation yet LOL Then we have a database with all codes of the manufactured and comercial parts with all information about this part, even the info that is in the custom info, so if a client needs a spare part just give us the code and we track it by the database... I was having some ideas to some little improvements but I changed the company... The biggest problem with this naming system is the limitation of just 9999 diferent parts... We almost reached this number in less than 2 years... But it's easy to solve, there's a lot of easy ways, like changing for something like that: X999-99-99. This way we double the possible variations.

 

[tluxon]

The numbering system that I feel is very easy to work with as an engineer is one that has a significant 2 or 3 digit prefix used as a family indicator, a 4 digit non-significant "body", and a 2 or 3 digit suffix (aka "dash number"). For clarity, hyphens are used to separate the prefix, the body, and the suffix (e.g. 979-0123-005).

Two or three digit prefix: The first digit of the prefix can identify an item as an end item, sub-assembly, or piece part (general delineation), while the remaining 1 or 2 digits can indicate a product family or generic part (more specific delineation).

Four (or 3 or 5) digit body: This non-significant number is sequentially assigned as needed in order to delineate part numbers, ensuring that each has a unique identification number.

Two or three digit suffix (often termed the "dash number"): This number is used to tabulate part numbers described on the same drawing. If three digits are used you will have more tabulation flexibility. For example, the first digit could be used to indicate the condition of a part at a non-inventoried intermediate step (like if it's sent out for electropolishing).

It's important to note that the drawing number in this system is NOT the same as the part number, but is a subset of it. This provides for multiple configurations (lengths, sizes, combinations, etc.) on a drawing without having to use wildcard digits in the drawing number (i.e. 979-0123-XXX). It has been my experience that in a wildcard system, invariably someone will create a part number with a pre-existing "mask" that requires its own drawing. The company I work for now has that problem running rampant, and simply knowing the part number is often not enough to lead to the drawing it's defined on - that wastes time.

Tim

 

[abeschneider]

I am using PDMWorks 2004 with solidworks 2004 SP3, and would like to develop a convenient way to generate a 6-digit non-significant part number for all the files I create.

I'm curious to know if you've got a solution to the following problem: In PDM works, upon checking in a new model, the user is asked to assign a part number. He's given complete freedom to define what this is. In fact - you can assign the same part number to totally different parts. (I made 2 parts and checked them both in as part "000001" - in the same project directory in PDMWors!) This is inconvenient because it could lead to confusion down the road. If you always adhered to a part # creation method which kept track of used, unique #'s, this problem could be avoided. Ideally, this would tie in at the # creation stage during new part check-in.

kcarpenter - I wouldn't mind trying out your Access file - I tried writing you but your email seemed invalid.

 

[kcarpenter]

abeschneider,
I'm sure you know this but remember to remove "_removespam_" from the email address I listed. I've sent out several copies of the DB to others without an issues. Please give it another try, or post your email addy and I'll send it to you.

Kevin Carpenter
CAD Systems Specialist
Invacare Corp.