Hello,
I have just joined on a new electronics company as QA Engineerand just found that the part number assignment of components is not following a fixed scheme?. There are atleast two or three digits which doesn't add any info?. Do you think while adopting part numbering, do we have to code the part number with info such as Value, tolerance, size etc, or just a single digit to classify the class of component is enough and the other digits in the follow an ascending order with the addition of further components into the list.?
Please assist..

My experience has been that no matter how carefully you try to construct a coded-significant-identifying-number system, something will come along that your system didn't provide for. Or, someone will second-guess the priorities and assumptions you used.

With fast databases and searchable front ends so easy these days, I think it's easier to assign identifying numbers in some non-significant way, and just provide everyone with easy access to a computer that runs your networked materials management software.

Hello,
I have just joined on a new electronics company as QA Engineerand just found that the part number assignment of components is not following a fixed scheme?. There are atleast two or three digits which doesn't add any info?. Do you think while adopting part numbering, do we have to code the part number with info such as Value, tolerance, size etc, or just a single digit to classify the class of component is enough and the other digits in the follow an ascending order with the addition of further components into the list.?
Please assist..

Just do what works best with your system.
I don't beleive there are any rules that a part number has to represent anything - it could just be a random string of numbers and letters if you want.

Meaningful part numbers certainly make sense though - especially for new people trying to learn the business.

I mean a part number like "BV-.75-F-F" for a Ball Valve, .75", Female, Female is a lot more intuitive than g4563j673r for the same part.

but the bottom line is you have to work with what your production/inventory tracking system is capable of.

Part number assignment should be simple. If you really want to add a single digit to classify a component that's OK but the more significant digits you add the faster the numbering systems falls apart and you end up with more confusion than significance.

The scheme should be consistent such as 6 digits with a dash number (123456-01). Just keep it simple.

Agree with Scott - do what suits your system. Bottom line, there should be a nomenclature system to identify as its for your own good.

Part number assignment should be simple. If you really want to add a single digit to classify a component that's OK but the more significant digits you add the faster the numbering systems falls apart and you end up with more confusion than significance.

The scheme should be consistent such as 6 digits with a dash number (123456-01). Just keep it simple.

Thank you, I have often found this -01 added to the end of the part number. Wonder, if this is a revision to the part mandated by some changes or a new part qualified for the same part number?.

Thank you, I have often found this -01 added to the end of the part number. Wonder, if this is a revision to the part mandated by some changes or a new part qualified for the same part number?.

The "-01, -02..." can be used to define different configurations of the same basic item. If you use a dash (tab) number you must differentiate between the drawing number and the part number. (drawing number 123456, part numbers 123456-01, 123456-02...)

Thanks Mr. Dunn..that was informative