Zero vs the letter "O" Font
Zero vs the letter "O" Font
(OP)
What does everyone do to distinguish between zeroes and the letter "O" on their drawings. I have only located one font type that looks halfway decent and distinguishes between them by placing a slash through the zero. The font type is SB Font. This issue crops up when we reference alpha numeric part numbers (from the vendor) on our purchase part drawings. This is really a SolidWorks question and a global engineering drawing question. If I were to decide right now, we would use SB Font on the portion of the note that contains alpha numeric part numbers. I am just looking to see how others may have addressed this issue, as I'm sure people beside ourselves here at my company have already stumbled across this one. If it were up to me, the letter "O" would never be allowed in company part numbers, just like certain letters should not be used to denote revision level. Is there a standard that defines any of this? TIA.
Pete
Pete






RE: Zero vs the letter "O" Font
You should have a system setup at your company that would specifiy when, where and what was used.
Example - Maybe the zero should be used only as the the third character and the "O" is only used as the 5th. If your company was to setup standards like these, then there would be no confusion.
The last 2 companies I have worked for had this as common practice to have a standard way setting up their part numbers. Maybe you already have a way... then maybe it's time for a change.
But most of all if you can avoid using them it should be considered... or at least don't use the letter "O" and just stay with the number "0".
Regards,
Scott Baugh, CSWP
www.scottjbaugh.com
FAQ731-376
RE: Zero vs the letter "O" Font
Pete
RE: Zero vs the letter "O" Font
Chris
Sr. Mechanical Designer, CAD
SolidWorks 05 SP3.1 / PDMWorks 05
ctopher's home site (updated 06-21-05)
FAQ559-1100
FAQ559-716
RE: Zero vs the letter "O" Font
"Perfection - a result of many mistakes."
BJH
RE: Zero vs the letter "O" Font
Are you not reading my post, or was I not clear? I was asking what your company does as far as display of the letter O versus zero on a drawing. My copmany does not put the letter "O" in our internal part numbers, but other companies we purchase from do. We reference other copmany's part numbers on our pruchase part drawings to clearly define approved sources for the part. There is no getting around that. It has nothing to do with my company's part numbering scheme, but rather a way to distinguish between O and zero on a drawing. Maybe I should not have brought part numbers into the discussion, b/c I seemed to have confused everyone. I have found SB font to place a slash through the zero and this is acceptable for us on our drawings. SB Font was one of the only ones. That is our solution, what is yours? Sorry for confusion.
Pete
RE: Zero vs the letter "O" Font
RE: Zero vs the letter "O" Font
Flores
SW2006 SP1.0
RE: Zero vs the letter "O" Font
Pdybeck, to answer your question, ASME Y14.100-2000, section D9.5 Drawing Number Structure says drawing numbers shall not exceed 32 characters, can include numbers, letters and dashes with the foloowing limitations:
Letters I, O, Q, S, X and Z shall not be used in the development of new drawing numbering systems.
Did that help?
"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers."
Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943.
Have you read FAQ731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?
RE: Zero vs the letter "O" Font
Would this apply to part numbers as well as drawing numbers? I guess they aren't really the same, even though I prefer to name a drawing by the part number that it defines. Thanks for the reference.
RE: Zero vs the letter "O" Font
"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers."
Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943.
Have you read FAQ731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?
RE: Zero vs the letter "O" Font
Thanks very much for the info... So it appears that certain letters should not be part numbers/drawing numbers just like they should not be used in revision identification - according to ASME Y14.100-2000. I checked out Arial font. We normally use Century Gothic font on our drawings and I think Century Gothic actually distinguishes the zero and letter O a little better than Arial. Still not as distinguishable as SB Font for this situation. We will be using SB Font just for the referenced part number portion that is displayed on our purchase part drawings if a zero or letter O is used on a referenced part number.
RE: Zero vs the letter "O" Font
I am clear what you are saying. Your company needs to learn to tell the differnece between O and 0 when reading the English language. The other's suggestions are clear also. It doesn't make a difference how the rest of us do it, your company obviously does not like how O's and 0's look alike. Pick a font that is acceptable for you.
If a P/N has a 0, use a 0.
Sorry, not trashing anyone, just stating what it is.
Chris
Sr. Mechanical Designer, CAD
SolidWorks 05 SP3.1 / PDMWorks 05
ctopher's home site (updated 06-21-05)
FAQ559-1100
FAQ559-716
RE: Zero vs the letter "O" Font
I got what people were saying. Part of it was helping, the other part was a little off base. Sorry for sounding a little gruff. I certainly didn't mean that - I was just looking for info that would help me and was trying to keep the post on track for that and not going off into the weeds about part numbering changes that we should make. MadMango's post was helpful to clear up that if companies were following ASME, then this predicament would not have arisen. But, its a big world and companies don't follow suggestions and we need to be able to distinguish one thing from the next. There doesn't appear to be a standard that defines how a zero and letter O should be distinguished in appearance on a drawing and that is the gray area we are in. Certainly a number of font types are valid and I recognoze that, was just looking for what everyone else does. Thanks for the input of all.
RE: Zero vs the letter "O" Font
I agree with this and I ahve seen this many years ago. But if I remember right that was meant for just Revisions and not part numbers, etc...
Thanks,
Scott Baugh, CSWP
www.scottjbaugh.com
FAQ731-376
RE: Zero vs the letter "O" Font
Chris
Sr. Mechanical Designer, CAD
SolidWorks 05 SP3.1 / PDMWorks 05
ctopher's home site (updated 06-21-05)
FAQ559-1100
FAQ559-716
RE: Zero vs the letter "O" Font
ditto.
RE: Zero vs the letter "O" Font
Use either:
M or N... not both
F or E... not both
V or W... not both
Windows 2000 Professional / Microsoft Intellimouse Explorer
SolidWorks 2006 SP01.0 / SpaceBall 4000 FLX
Diet Coke with Lime / Dark Chocolate
Lava Lamp
RE: Zero vs the letter "O" Font
In fact, there may be some shareware proggies that would allow you to do this on your own. Just put in a line over your 0, save the font and viola.
But yeah, strangely enough it has not been identified as a common problem. Maybe because the people (purchasing et al) that get confused by this actually do not have any pushing power in the companies?
RE: Zero vs the letter "O" Font
I am expecting this concerns digital documents that you can edit, if not, this method is hard to apply
How about a simple copy and paste operation into exel or other software that distinguish between numbers and letters?
If you copy the O (or 0) in question into a exel cell, you will be able to see if its a number or a letter, as these kinds of programs disregard the font, and only looks to the actual meaning of the symbol.
Best of luck, Bernt Ødegård, Oslo, Norway.
RE: Zero vs the letter "O" Font
I'm a strong proponent of not having "smart" or "significant digits" part numbers. This is one reason. Another is that almost without exception, significant numbering systems soon run into cases which can't be handled within the definition of the system, so exceptions get made, or some catch-all category is invoked. In either case, the system soon becomes littered with non-significant numbers, which need to be looked up anyway.
I'll be the first to admit that non-significant systems need better ways to find parts than significant ones, but my personal belief is that they are a better long-term solution.
Apologies to pdybeck for this tangent, but it is near and dear to my heart.
</soapbox>