Talk:Digital Fabrication Diagram Standards

From Open Source Ecology
Jump to: navigation, search

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 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.
  • 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)?

ChuckH 00:53, 13 December 2012 (CET)

Retrieved from "https://wiki.opensourceecology.org/index.php?title=Talk:Digital_Fabrication_Diagram_Standards&oldid=83650"