Part numbering

[neilc78]

Hi all, I have been giving the task of fully implementing Solidworks in a design office. One of the main discussion I am having at the moment is how we name and save parts. I am interested here in the numbering systems people here have used.

Our parts are mostly sheet metal with numerous fastners and bought in components attached. Our end products are one-off machines but within those machines are sub assemblys which may be used in different models (for example the frame in a number of machines may be the same).

I imagine there a range of people here who have started and finished what I am about to look at. I am wondering if they might have some advise for me - should I use descriptive part numbers for example. Thanks.

 

[Areva]

Neil,
We operate a 2 Alpha 7 numeric system e.g. AB0001 001

For example the first 2 digits designate the product group i.e.

RS = Rotary Switches.
MC = Moving Coil instrument.
TB = Test Box.
ZE = For use across any range of products.
ZB = Manufactured item bought in as a purchased item.

The next four digits are typically dedicated as follows:-
0xxx is for assemblies.
2xxx is for plates, machined parts, stampings. (ferrous items)
3xxx is for spacers, pillars, inserts. (ferrous & non ferrous items)
4xxx is for screws, nuts, washers.
5xxx is for springs
6xxx is for moulded parts.
8xxx is for insulation materials.
9xxx is for labels, nameplates & miscellaneous items.

The last 3 digits are designated for sequential part numbering 001, 002 thro to 999

Hence if someone enquires about a drawing/part numbered TB6021 004 I know from the above information it is a moulded part for a test box, like wise RS0078 001 would be a rotary switch assembly.

Prefixing the alpha to the numeric allows us to associate the number identity to a product range, increases flexibility when searching our data base and improves user friendliness.

Eddy

 

[CorBlimeyLimey]

Just do a search using numbering for loads of previous threads on this topic.


Helpful SW websites every user should be aware of faq559-520
How to get answers to your SW questions faq559-1091

 

[Heckler]

The most important thing about putting together a part numbering system is allow yourself some flexibility to change things a year down the road. A few years back we were tasked with a creating a part numbering system. We had an electrical engineer on staff that was a guru programmer in another life. So he wrote a part number / BOM data base in VB with a SQL back end. It has its limitations but it creates good solid BOMs and allows multi-users.

003-0000 - Sub-Assemblies
004-0000 - PCB Assemblies
648-0000 - Machined parts
650-0000 - Molded Plastic Parts
646-0000 - Labels
990-0000 - Test Fixture
615-0000 - Washers

Here are some threads of interest

thread559-107029
thread559-45542




Best Regards,

Heckler
Sr. Mechanical Engineer
SW2005 SP 5.0 & Pro/E 2001
Dell Precision 370
P4 3.6 GHz, 1GB RAM
XP Pro SP2.0
NIVIDA Quadro FX 1400
o
_`\(,_
(_)/ (_)

Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean that they aren't out to get me.

- Woody Allen

 

[rgrayclamps]

Hi,Neilc78:

Unique sequential numbering is no doubt the best way to go. Unfortunagtely, so many people fall in love with descriptive part numbering due to historical reasons. You can only discribe so little about a part in its part number. A part is better described by its attributes. Searching a part by its attributes is more efficient than by its part number.

Also, if you use a unique seqential numbering system, it will be a lot more efficient to search parts.

Alex

 

[ctopher]

We use 5 digits in numerical order for parts and assys, 4 digits for the model numbers they are used on.
I strongly suggest using PDMWorks (or similar) for your SW files.

Chris
Sr. Mechanical Designer, CAD
SolidWorks 05 SP3.1 / PDMWorks 05
ctopher's home site (updated 06-21-05)
FAQ559-1100
FAQ559-716

 

[smcadman]

We simply use sequential numbers with a "-0#A" for assemblies, and a "-#P" for parts.
For example, project # 80000:
80000
80000-01A
80000-01P
80000-02P
80000-03P
80000-02A
80000-04P
80000-05P
80000-01P (ued again)
80000-03A
etc., etc.

If there is a configuration, then the properties will designate the config number by using:
$PRP:"SW-File Name"-$PRP:"SW-Configuration Name"
as the "user specified name. This puts the config number in the BOM. The title block has $PRPSHEET:"SW-File Name"-$PRPSHEET:"SW-Configuration Name" for the part number, so the config number is populated on the sheet as well.

Our part and assembly templates have the default config as # 1, and we simply add each config by a consecutive number, such as 2, then 3, etc.

Flores
SW 2005 SP 4.

 

[MadMango]

Another thread: thread559-27901

[green]"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers."[/green]
Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943.
Have you read faq731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?

 

[wes616]

Check out the Configuration Management Forum.

Wes C.
------------------------------
There are no engineers in the hottest parts of hell, because the existence of a 'hottest part' implies a temperature difference, and any marginally competent engineer would immediately use this to run a heat engine and make some other part of hell comfortably cool. This is obviously impossible.

 

[Standing]

I would suggest keeping it simple. No significant part number system by large. Use categories, such as 100000 series for top level assemblies, 200000 series for sub-assemblies, 300000 for manufactured parts, 400000 for modifications and 500000 for purchased parts.
I do like the idea of having base numbers for screws. Say a Cap Screw 10-32 x ½ has a number 300123-08, the same screw size with different length of one inch would be 300123-16 and etc. 1/16 of an inch is -01, 2/16 or 1/8 of an inch is -02.

We used a significant part numbering system here, about 2 years ago. I found electrical filters in with the pneumatic filters categories. We had 27 different categories with the miscellaneous section was running out of numbers.

My biggest complaint about assigning numbers is that management seems to give the job of assigning numbers to a clerk, money reason I am sure. They cannot tell the difference between a terminal block, barrier strip, connector block or terminal strip. So how does one sort by description?


Bradley

 

[yanceman]

Neilc78,

First ask yourself if you want an Intelligent part number system (where the prefix numbers reference a fixed family of similar components, i.e. 100-xxxx Circuit Boards, 125-xxxx Schematics, 200-xxxx Hardware Fasteners, etc...) or a Non-intelligent part number system (where the numbers are meaningless).

Intelligent part numbers are great, as long as you allow for plenty of expansion. Areva and Heckler use this system.
This system is user-friendly, makes part number searches quicker, and is easier for new employees to learn.

Non-intelligent part numbers allow for more flexibility, but are harder to remember.

Jeff

 

[overkill4]

The thing to remember also is that nobody is going to have the "be all end all" of numbering systems. Each company is too unique to have a system that will cut and past to another company. The key is to have a system that is easy to browse and will reduce the amount of times guys design parts that have already been used, such as standard motor mounts or brackets.

Dave

 

[rgrayclamps]

Hi, Dave:

Generally, "one size for all" will be very good. But if there is such a thing, why not use it?

Alex

 

[neilc78]

Thanks to everyone for there help above. It is interesting to see the varying systems. At the moment I think I am leaning towards a non significant 6 digit number. The reason is that our company is growing very fast and moving into different areas each year - the future is very blurry in terms of what we might be doing so I think keeping it simple in terms of part number and having a good system of part description is the way to go.

I do have one other related question. I am currently beginning to assign our part numbers to some of the nuts, bolts and washers in Toolbox. I am wondering whether it would be good practice to copy the toolbox folder and make a second folder which would include all my numbered parts. I am afraid that a future SP might wipe some of this info. The flip side is that my new folder might not receive SP updates that it needs. Any opinions?

 

[yanceman]

Neilc78,

We have several (about 10-15) common hardware components that we have saved out of toolbox and given a part number, added mate references, and BOM descriptions, then checked into the PDM vault (after ECN release). How many individual part numbers are you looking at?

Jeff

 

[neilc78]

Jeff - I'm talking about a couple of hundred parts. I'd like to use toolbox (or a copy of tool box) to save me having to reassign all those smartmates.

 

[BSMECAD]

Hi Neil,

I recommend setting up a nonsignificant sequential numbering system for both parts and assembly.
Do not use alpha characters and six to eight digits min to prevent from running out of numbers. Use the part number when name naming part, assembly, and drawing.
Here are some examples of file naming convention:

853751.sldprt
853751.slddrw
853752.sldasm
853752.slddrw

 

[mrMikee]

The debate between nonsignificant and coded numbers continues to go on. While the current theory is nonsignificant numbers, my opinion is that the answer is somewhere in between. In other words, more than just a string of numbers, but less than what was done in the old days. Remember that your system will be used by people.

But the real reason I am posting here is to recommend a book by Frank B. Watts called "Engineering Documentation Control Handbook, Configuration Management in Industry." I've taken two seminars from Frank and he is one of the good guys. Also very good is the guy Frank sometimes lectures with, Graemme Bartuli.

More good books:

"Manufacturing Data Structures" by Clement, Coldrick, and Sari

"Bills of Materials" by Dave Garwood

Part numbers, bills of materials, and configuration management are all closely tied together. This may be more than is required by your assignment or may be more than you are interested in at this point, but there is more involved to this than most of us engineers realize.

Regards,
-Mike

 

[MadMango]

mrMikee, you bring up some good points. I know here our numbering system was determined by the capabilities of our MRP system.

[green]"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers."[/green]
Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943.
Have you read faq731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?