Pedigree in a Part Number? 1

[monkey_brain_ideas]

I have never heard of this.

To date our part number system for mechanical parts is as follows <drawing number>-<dash number> and the drawing is revision controlled in Solidworks PDM and gets a rev letter inserted in the drawing at the time of release. This yields part numbers of the form "123456-001". And if there is a second part described on that same drawing, then it gets a -001. Great for situations like left and right hand versions of a part, or perhaps a different material choice for the same geometry. Works great. Been using it for years across multiple companies. I would use this system forever until today.

Our manufacturing department wants to add a "Pedigree" character into the part number described above. (no, not dog food. I asked) The purpose of the pedigree character is a counter for changes to a part in an assembly on the manufacturing line. Say we have the first part used in the assembly and there is a design change to alter the form, fit, or function. Normally I would issue a new part number and insert it into that assembly and make all necessary changes to documentation and work instructions to be able to use that new part number in that assembly. That new number is part of the issue, it is not easily relatable back to the first part used in that assembly. The pedigree number seeks to retain the prior info of the part number, so that it is easy to know where this new design goes in the assembly line, and in the final assembly of the product. To use the part number from above, the 123456-001 remains the same, a pedigree number is added yielding 123456-001-01, and when this change rolls through we get this new number on the assembly line: 123456-001-02. Mind blown. They want to call this our new part numbering system and move forward with it.

All of my manufacturing department worked together at a prior company, a big name company, and this is how they did business.

My question to the fine folks here: who has ever seen something like this?

 

[ctopher]

Company I work now does something similar. But, we have one drawing that indicates what the dah numbers are. The drawing is 123456-XXX-XX. It will have a table indicating what each dash number is. In our case, 123456-001-02, -001 may = a length, -02 may = material or painted, etc.
Having separate drawings for the same part is confusing. They will have different revisions, but stocking can be a nightmare.

 

[Wuzhee]

We use Siemens TeamCenter and we utilize a dual revision system for part numbers.
At the initial release the part number (for this example lets say PLABCDEFGH) gets its first version and revision.
The PN will be PLABCDEFGH-01-00

01 is the VERSION
00 is the REVISION

When something is changed and it's a minor change that won't change the basic functions the REVISION goes up. Teamcenter can manage this easily.
New PN suffix will be -01-01

When a MAJOR change occurs, such as a new part installed or something removed or completely redone, the VERSION goes up.
It will be -02-00 (in this case the revision for the new VERSION is reset to -00.

And so on and so on.

 

[jassco]

Your parts (part 1 and 2) have no relationship. Why do you want to force a relationship? What you are after is revision record of their parent assembly.

Putting in more intelligent characters into part no. causes redundances. You may want to read this technical research report ("Non-Significant, Self-Validated Part identification numbers") by G. Harhalakis, M.E. Bohse, B.J. Davies in Feb. 1986.

 

[monkey_brain_ideas]

01 is the VERSION
00 is the REVISION

Interesting. It makes sense. But what happens if the change is so big that you want to create a whole new file? Can you make an new file and set the version counter to start where the last file left off? Or are you stuck with reusing the same file for all versions you might possible come up with? And if "yes", is being "stuck" with that file a problem?

 

[Wuzhee]

We keep everything under the parent Mechanical Part. We don't "rename" them when major changes occur. It's essential in PLM.

I once started a new prototype development, made the parts etc, did some upgrading and had 3 revisions. Then my colleage joined the project and he put his ideas to use, he took my base model and made his design with a new PN. Along the way we made several revisions then one time we decided to go with his version. From that point my older ones are just collecting dust but they are available if I ever have to go back.

This was a case of a "change SO big". It is mostly prevalent in proto design. With serial products, we don't do this at all.

 

[lucky-guesser]

So let's say you adopt the 123456-001-01 format. You then take that to make 123456-001-02. Is that 02 just a revision now that they will all be moved to for future production, or is it a derived version based off of 01 and they can be used side by side, or either/or, where both remain active part numbers?

If it's just a revision marker, I think its rather unnecessary. As long as you follow good ISO 9000 practices, you should be able to differentiate between the two as you make the change over to the new version.

If they both remain active, then I can see it being viable. If 123456-001-02 is made FROM 123456-001-01, then your processing should be set up in a way that shows it as being made from that part #. But if you have operation 1 WIP, operation 2 WIP, then in operation 3 it finally becomes one part # or the other, then yes I like your idea.

 

[Wuzhee]

Running products aren't updated automatically, different versions are used parallelly.
The dwg carries the revision notes, and it's stated in the title block that a 'number up' is a revision or a version up. Like the picture.