Talk:Digital Fabrication Diagram Standards - Revision history

ChuckH at 23:54, 12 December 2012

2012-12-12T23:54:26Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:54, 12 December 2012
Line 1:		Line 1:
	I wonder whether the similarity between library (drawing) number and part number (e.g. D4, L-D4) will breed confusion, especially considering the industry convention that part number & drawing number share the same significant number. Possibly		I wonder whether the similarity between library (drawing) number and part number (e.g. D4, L-D4) will breed confusion, especially considering the industry convention that part number & drawing number share the same significant number. Possibly
	* How about adding some non-signficant digits (e.g. library/drawing D904)?		* How about adding some non-signficant digits (e.g. library/drawing D904)?
	* re-cast the part number as a BOM item number in a hierarchical BOM. E.g. if the drawer subassembly has a ~~library~~ designator in the CEB top assembly, say CEB.3, then the compression gussets might be CEB.3.6, CEB.3.7, and CEB.3.8, all being library L-D4		* re-cast the part number as a BOM item number in a hierarchical BOM. E.g. if the drawer subassembly has a part designator in the CEB top assembly, say CEB.3, then the compression gussets might be CEB.3.6, CEB.3.7, and CEB.3.8, all being library L-D4
	* the library number is now a short number coupled with the assembly ID abbreviation. This is helpful in simpler cases, but if a part design gets reused on different products (as we hope happens often with modular design thinking!) it becomes less useful.		* the library number is now a short number coupled with the assembly ID abbreviation. This is helpful in simpler cases, but if a part design gets reused on different products (as we hope happens often with modular design thinking!) it becomes less useful.
	* is there anything we can learn from part/subassembly/drawing number systems that are used in current industrial practice (any industry, any place in the world, might give ideas)?		* is there anything we can learn from part/subassembly/drawing number systems that are used in current industrial practice (any industry, any place in the world, might give ideas)?

	[[User:ChuckH\|ChuckH]] 00:53, 13 December 2012 (CET)		[[User:ChuckH\|ChuckH]] 00:53, 13 December 2012 (CET)

ChuckH at 23:53, 12 December 2012

2012-12-12T23:53:51Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:53, 12 December 2012
Line 1:		Line 1:
	I wonder whether the similarity between library (drawing) number and part number (e.g. D4, L-D4) will breed confusion, especially considering the industry convention that part number & drawing number share the same significant number. Possibly		I wonder whether the similarity between library (drawing) number and part number (e.g. D4, L-D4) will breed confusion, especially considering the industry convention that part number & drawing number share the same significant number. Possibly
	* How about adding some non-signficant digits (e.g. library/drawing D904)?		* How about adding some non-signficant digits (e.g. library/drawing D904)?
	* re-cast the part number it as a BOM item number in a hierarchical BOM. E.g. if the drawer subassembly has a library designator in the CEB top assembly, say CEB.3, then the compression gussets might be CEB.3.6, CEB.3.7, and CEB.3.8, all being library L-D4		* re-cast the part number as a BOM item number in a hierarchical BOM. E.g. if the drawer subassembly has a library designator in the CEB top assembly, say CEB.3, then the compression gussets might be CEB.3.6, CEB.3.7, and CEB.3.8, all being library L-D4
	* the library number is now a short number coupled with the assembly ID abbreviation. This is helpful in simpler cases, but if a part design gets reused on different products (as we hope happens often with modular design thinking!) it becomes less useful.		* the library number is now a short number coupled with the assembly ID abbreviation. This is helpful in simpler cases, but if a part design gets reused on different products (as we hope happens often with modular design thinking!) it becomes less useful.
	* is there anything we can learn from part/subassembly/drawing number systems that are used in current industrial practice (any industry, any place in the world, might give ideas)?		* is there anything we can learn from part/subassembly/drawing number systems that are used in current industrial practice (any industry, any place in the world, might give ideas)?

	[[User:ChuckH\|ChuckH]] 00:53, 13 December 2012 (CET)		[[User:ChuckH\|ChuckH]] 00:53, 13 December 2012 (CET)

ChuckH at 23:53, 12 December 2012

2012-12-12T23:53:04Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:53, 12 December 2012
Line 4:		Line 4:
	* the library number is now a short number coupled with the assembly ID abbreviation. This is helpful in simpler cases, but if a part design gets reused on different products (as we hope happens often with modular design thinking!) it becomes less useful.		* the library number is now a short number coupled with the assembly ID abbreviation. This is helpful in simpler cases, but if a part design gets reused on different products (as we hope happens often with modular design thinking!) it becomes less useful.
	* is there anything we can learn from part/subassembly/drawing number systems that are used in current industrial practice (any industry, any place in the world, might give ideas)?		* is there anything we can learn from part/subassembly/drawing number systems that are used in current industrial practice (any industry, any place in the world, might give ideas)?

			[[User:ChuckH\|ChuckH]] 00:53, 13 December 2012 (CET)

ChuckH: Created page with "I wonder whether the similarity between library (drawing) number and part number (e.g. D4, L-D4) will breed confusion, especially considering the industry convention that part nu..."

2012-12-12T23:52:47Z

Created page with "I wonder whether the similarity between library (drawing) number and part number (e.g. D4, L-D4) will breed confusion, especially considering the industry convention that part nu..."

New page

I wonder whether the similarity between library (drawing) number and part number (e.g. D4, L-D4) will breed confusion, especially considering the industry convention that part number & drawing number share the same significant number. Possibly
* How about adding some non-signficant digits (e.g. library/drawing D904)?
* re-cast the part number it as a BOM item number in a hierarchical BOM. E.g. if the drawer subassembly has a library designator in the CEB top assembly, say CEB.3, then the compression gussets might be CEB.3.6, CEB.3.7, and CEB.3.8, all being library L-D4
* the library number is now a short number coupled with the assembly ID abbreviation. This is helpful in simpler cases, but if a part design gets reused on different products (as we hope happens often with modular design thinking!) it becomes less useful.
* is there anything we can learn from part/subassembly/drawing number systems that are used in current industrial practice (any industry, any place in the world, might give ideas)?