Hello,
My company is implementing PDMWE in a month and I will be the adminfor the system. I am trying to streamline our part numbering,revision, and drawing release process and I am looking for feedbackor suggestions.
It might be easier to understand our system by first knowing thatwe design, develop, and manufacture medical devices, and themajority of our parts are injection moulded plastic or siliconeparts.
REVISIONS
We currently use a numeric/alpha system for revisions.
- numeric (01, 02, 03...) for revisions thatare not approved (PPAP's or design verified)
- alpha (A, B, C...) for revisions thatare approved (PPAP's or design verified)
Overall, I think this system works well, but are there any concernswith PDMWE?
PART NUMBERS
Our current system uses two schemes for part numbers: one numberscheme for pre-production (or development) parts, and a differentscheme for production parts.
- the pre-production scheme is XXXX-YY-ZZZ where XXXX is theproject number, YY is a sequential number, and ZZZ is the materialor colour. Only one drawing is used for each sequential number, sodifferent materials or colours are indicated on the drawing.
- the production scheme is more complicated: XXX-Y-ZZ-AAA (-999)where XXX is the product type, Y identifies it as a component orassembly, ZZ is the product version. If it is a component then AAAis the material or colour and (-999) means that this particularpart is also used at our sister company. The (-999) may or may notbe in every part number. If it is an assembly then there are othernumbers added such as country codes and quantities, but those arecontrolled in out ERP system and do not relate to the drawing orpart.
The distinction between pre-production part numbers and productionpart numbers is made because not every project goes intoproduction. Another reason for the distinction is that indevelopment we usually build a single cavity tool to develop thedesign. Once the design is finalized, a production number (with anumeric revision) is given and a multi-cavity tool is built. Oncethat tool as been PPAP'd then an alpha revision is given.
At this point I don't think changing the part numbering scheme ispossible, so are there any issues with respect to PDMWE?
FILENAMES
- both the drawing and the part or assembly file names are thefirst 6 digits of the part number (0645-01.sldprt or 101328.sldprt)
DRAWING RELEASE
- pre-production drawings are controlled by engineering and arereleased through a MPD ECO.
- production drawings that have a numeric revision are controlledby engineering and are released through a MPD ECO.
- production drawings that have an alpha revision are controlled bydocument control and are released through a DC ECO.
Will PDMWE handle two ECO processes?
The following situation is where I'd like to get some feedback.
If an approved part (alpha revision) needs some development work(ie tooling change, new material, replacement tool etc) then a newdrawing is released to communicate the change during the approvalprocess. The new drawing part number is the same as the approveddrawing, but instead of an alpha revision, it is given the nextnumeric revision. This allows manufacturing to still use the latestalpha revision until the change is complete. Once the change hasbeen approved, the drawing with the numeric revision is update withthe next alpha revision.
To illustrate, the revision block for an approved drawing may looklike this:
A .... (was XXXX-YY Rev05)
B ....
C ....
If a change is needed then the next numeric rev is added:
A .... (was XXXX-YY Rev05)
B ....
C ....
06 ....
Once the change is approved then the next alpha rev is added
A .... (was XXXX-YY Rev05)
B ....
C ....
D .... (difference between rev C and rev D)
What do other companies do when production parts need changes thatare beyond typos etc?
Sorry for the long post, but I thought it best to have all theinformation upfront. If you have any comments about how to improveour system or just want to share how you handle these things pleasedo.
Thanks,
Adam
SolidworksSolidworks Pdm enterprise Pdm
My company is implementing PDMWE in a month and I will be the adminfor the system. I am trying to streamline our part numbering,revision, and drawing release process and I am looking for feedbackor suggestions.
It might be easier to understand our system by first knowing thatwe design, develop, and manufacture medical devices, and themajority of our parts are injection moulded plastic or siliconeparts.
REVISIONS
We currently use a numeric/alpha system for revisions.
- numeric (01, 02, 03...) for revisions thatare not approved (PPAP's or design verified)
- alpha (A, B, C...) for revisions thatare approved (PPAP's or design verified)
Overall, I think this system works well, but are there any concernswith PDMWE?
PART NUMBERS
Our current system uses two schemes for part numbers: one numberscheme for pre-production (or development) parts, and a differentscheme for production parts.
- the pre-production scheme is XXXX-YY-ZZZ where XXXX is theproject number, YY is a sequential number, and ZZZ is the materialor colour. Only one drawing is used for each sequential number, sodifferent materials or colours are indicated on the drawing.
- the production scheme is more complicated: XXX-Y-ZZ-AAA (-999)where XXX is the product type, Y identifies it as a component orassembly, ZZ is the product version. If it is a component then AAAis the material or colour and (-999) means that this particularpart is also used at our sister company. The (-999) may or may notbe in every part number. If it is an assembly then there are othernumbers added such as country codes and quantities, but those arecontrolled in out ERP system and do not relate to the drawing orpart.
The distinction between pre-production part numbers and productionpart numbers is made because not every project goes intoproduction. Another reason for the distinction is that indevelopment we usually build a single cavity tool to develop thedesign. Once the design is finalized, a production number (with anumeric revision) is given and a multi-cavity tool is built. Oncethat tool as been PPAP'd then an alpha revision is given.
At this point I don't think changing the part numbering scheme ispossible, so are there any issues with respect to PDMWE?
FILENAMES
- both the drawing and the part or assembly file names are thefirst 6 digits of the part number (0645-01.sldprt or 101328.sldprt)
DRAWING RELEASE
- pre-production drawings are controlled by engineering and arereleased through a MPD ECO.
- production drawings that have a numeric revision are controlledby engineering and are released through a MPD ECO.
- production drawings that have an alpha revision are controlled bydocument control and are released through a DC ECO.
Will PDMWE handle two ECO processes?
The following situation is where I'd like to get some feedback.
If an approved part (alpha revision) needs some development work(ie tooling change, new material, replacement tool etc) then a newdrawing is released to communicate the change during the approvalprocess. The new drawing part number is the same as the approveddrawing, but instead of an alpha revision, it is given the nextnumeric revision. This allows manufacturing to still use the latestalpha revision until the change is complete. Once the change hasbeen approved, the drawing with the numeric revision is update withthe next alpha revision.
To illustrate, the revision block for an approved drawing may looklike this:
A .... (was XXXX-YY Rev05)
B ....
C ....
If a change is needed then the next numeric rev is added:
A .... (was XXXX-YY Rev05)
B ....
C ....
06 ....
Once the change is approved then the next alpha rev is added
A .... (was XXXX-YY Rev05)
B ....
C ....
D .... (difference between rev C and rev D)
What do other companies do when production parts need changes thatare beyond typos etc?
Sorry for the long post, but I thought it best to have all theinformation upfront. If you have any comments about how to improveour system or just want to share how you handle these things pleasedo.
Thanks,
Adam
SolidworksSolidworks Pdm enterprise Pdm
