Numbering scheme for large crane

[rfletcher]

I have been tasked with coming up with a numbering scheme for a large crane my company is planning to design & build. Does anyone have any advice in this area? I've seen a lot of posting about numbering schemes, but nothing that would really work for this application. Thanks in advance.

 

[fcsuper]

As awhiles, I will state that their should be NO numbering scheme other than just pulling sequential dumb numbers. Part identification comes from the part itself, and your EPR/PLM.

Matt Lorono
CAD Engineer/ECN Analyst
Silicon Valley, CA
Lorono's SolidWorks Resources
Co-moderator of Solidworks Yahoo! Group
and Mechnical.Engineering Yahoo! Group

 

[4zengineering]

I agree. I am bogged down with an "intelligent"/"significant" part numbering system implemented by someone else for a product much much simpler than a large crane. At the very least, it is a pain in the butt.

If you can go as fcsuper said, then that's my recommendation. This is one of the few cases where the dumber, the better.

 

[CorBlimeyLimey]

What is the difference between a large crane and any other equipment or machinery (big or small) which needs it's components identified? A part is a part, an assy is an assy.

If you need some sort of significance, prefix the numbers with LC.

 

[HGMorgan]

In the Tooling Dept of a large aerospace company I used to work for, they used the following (Prior to V5):

-703 Assy consists of detail parts -704, -705 & -706
-707 Assy consists of detail parts -708, -709, -710 & -711
Though this kind of makes sense, it could get confusing sometimes, and, doesn't lend itself to revisions very well.
If the -703 Assy was revised, you had to come up with a new number that is out of sequence.

Then we got V5 and tried to come up with new numbering.
They kind of settled on the following:

-1 Assy consists of detail parts -100 and on, up to 199
-2 Assy consists of detial parts -200 and on, up to 299

A little better, but still has some problems.
Some of us proposed the following:

-100 Assy consists of detail parts -101 and on, up to -199
-200 Assy consists of detail parts -201 and on, up to -299

If assy needed more than 198 unique detail parts:

-1000 Assy consists of detail Parts -1001 and on, up to 1999

 

[KENAT]

Are you talking part numbering or drawing numbering? There's somtimes a distinction.

There are lots of posts either in this forum or in forum781. General consensus seems to be dumb numbering is the way to go, somewhere there is a link to a fancy report about this.

What is it about your crane that makes you think such systems are impractical?

KENAT,

Have you reminded yourself of faq731-376 recently, or taken a look at posting policies:

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484

 

[rfletcher]

The part number will probably end up being the drawing number as well. I was trying to use some type of smart number system because there will probably over 50,000 parts and finding one little part would be a nightmare if you didn't know the number.

What was thinking was maybe something along the lines a 2 letter prefix like BM for the backmast, but then within the backmast are a bunch of other assemblies that will be made up of pipes and plates and then all pinned together.

 

[KENAT]

Dumb numbering system is still probably favourit. Some kind of ERP/PLM/PDM with 'where used' information, bom structure etc.

If you dont have such a system you might be able to achive something with excell, a big spread sheet with the where used etc. At least you'll be able to search by title & find the PN and also use the where used.

KENAT,

Have you reminded yourself of faq731-376 recently, or taken a look at posting policies:

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484