Generic Part Numbers?

Hi,

This looks like the right place for this question;

The company I work for is finally starting to realize that we need to do something different with our part numbers. Using vendor or manufacturer part numbers on our parts lists causes the inevitable problems due to multiple sources, equivalent parts, tricky formats, etc. In the past we've defined our own numbers for some of the more common components (resistors and capacitors mostly), but because there was no rhyme or reason to the numbers, and also it was nearly impossible to find the corresponding in-house number for a part, given the required parameters, or even if one existed. Some parts ended up having multiple in-house numbers, and others which logically should have been included with previously-defined numbers weren't because the particular value wasn't required when the numbers were defined.

It was mass confusion, and still is, to a degree, because a lot of the numbers are still being used. So the idea of using "generic" part numbers has been suggested. Supposedly this is what most electronic manufacturing companies do.

I think it's a great idea and could simplify things greatly, at least for future jobs. But it seems to me that to come up with a system which will accommodate all possibilities is going to take a lot of time, work, trial & error, and subsequent tweaking to find out exactly which parameters need to be encoded into the part numbers. It seems like a colossal waste of effort, if most companies out there are already using just such a system.

So my question is, "Does every company that uses generic part numbers have to 're-invent the wheel' from scratch, or is there some kind of standard system out there which can be adopted?" And where could I find information about it?

Thanks,

. . ... Scott . . =B6|;-D

Reply to
Whyrmie
Loading thread data ...

Reply to
Whyrmie

Every place I have ever worked developed their own system which worked for a couple years. For instance, the last place used a letter followed by seven digits for a part number. My suggestion is to create consecutive part numbers for any component that has standardized values, like resistors, capacitors and such. Even if you don't use every value, you already know what the part number will be when you need to add that part. A different prefix for each set will keep the 0805 from the 0603 and the 5% from the 1% and the .1%

--
?

Michael A. Terrell
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Michael A. Terrell

There was a discussion about this a few months ago in sci.electronics.design :

formatting link

Matt Roberds

Reply to
mroberds

Yeah, they've done something similar here too, but it hasn't worked well. Without being able to instantly get your hands on the drawing for the new part number, it could be anything. And there's no way to get to the new p/n, given the manufacturer number.I'm trying to avoid trying to design a system from scratch whicvh will accomodate all parts, without having to have a meeting and sign off a new drawing every time we decide to use a part we haven't used before. It just boggles my mind that in this day and age of multi-national mega-corporations, there's no standardized system, which means that every location has to make up their own and continually modify it to include new parts. No wonder our productivity as a nation is nowhere near where it used to be.

Anyway, thanks.

. . ... Scott . . =B6|;-D

Reply to
Whyrmie

Oh, good. Thanks Matt.

Off I go... . . ... Scott . . =B6|;-D

sci.electronics.design :

formatting link

Matt Roberds

Reply to
Whyrmie

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.