×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Drawing numbers and part numbers

Drawing numbers and part numbers

Drawing numbers and part numbers

(OP)
I hope I've submitted this in the right place - seems the most relevant...

I have a simple sounding question - is there a preferred system for numbering drawings and/or parts?

I have in the past used a system where the part number gave information about what the part itself was, another system where the part number gave information about which product it was used on, and another system that gave no information whatsoever and was just a sequential numbering system.

I work for a company that is fairly new, and trying to come up a consistent system that is, if possible, approved or recommended by ISO or other bodies.

Any comments would be welcome!

RE: Drawing numbers and part numbers

I'm sure that you will get good suggestions here, but this might be a more suitable forum in which to ask:  forum781: -Engineering Configuration Management

In a nutshell, dumb numbers are usually best, semi-significant are also good, but avoid complex, boxcar numbers where every digit has it's own meaning.
I don't think ISO cares what numbering system you use, just that you follow one that is documented.

Anyway, check that forum out.  There are threads there addressing this very issue.

"Good to know you got shoes to wear when you find the floor." - Robert Hunter
 

RE: Drawing numbers and part numbers

This has come up several times both in this forum, as MM linked and also in the forum ewh gives.

In summary, current thinking seems to be that dumb numbering is best.  Other information like used on etc. can generally be contained in their own fields as meta data in CAD files, ERP systems etc.

KENAT,

Have you reminded yourself of FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies recently, or taken a look at posting policies: http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

RE: Drawing numbers and part numbers

There's a white paper that studied the use of sequential (dumb) numbers versus smart numbers. I think it is actually linked in one of the threads here on eng-tip.  Anyway, yeah, dumb numbers are smart, and smart numbers are dumb.   

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

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources