Barry Stump wrote:
I wanted to uses the Designers initials as part of the Development Number.
Why would you want to do that? You can have endless variables attached to a file; I would stay away from any type of 'smart' numbering and use non-significant numbers. (Use meta data.)
These development numbers are meant to be Sandbox Numbers. A method to allow unique numbers when the designer needs to play in their sandbox. And when you add the designers Initials to it it just keeps the numbers sammaler (but yes I could just attached the initails as a variable or use the designed by field). But there are to be throw away numbers untill they get firmed up and then and only then are the files moved to the production area and renamed with real numbers.
For serial numbers with intelligence built into them I would suggest making a serial the actual file name and then you could concatenate the serial plus the user who made it into a new field to be displayed on the card.
And then for work-in-progress just set up certain user groups so that only a specified group of individuals could get access to unreleased information in a specific folder.
Hello Barry -
It is possible for you to combine the comments from Lee and Tony along with the use of Virtual Components in assemblies? If this is not an option - and I understand the need for a sandbox - R&D is required and should be tracked - then maybe an option to Alternate Serial Numbers is an Alternate Revision Scheme. Some companies utilize a diffrerent revision Schema for Sandbox parts than Production parts - i.e. A-Z for production and X1-X99 for R&D.
May I suggest some reseach into an Alternate revision scheme for Sandbox instead of alternate Serial Numbers, when the project or part are required to go from Sandbox to Live Production, change the revision Scheme.
Production Revision A thru ZZ (skipping "I, O, S, X" to eliminate confusion)
Sand Box Revisions "X1, X2 ... X99"
Utilize Production Numbers for every part - numbers are free ... Renaming parts and assembly references can be cunbersome, in some cases even dangerous.
Based on special Revision Value .. companies have identified the following ...
Quick Accounting reports of R&D projects
Project management reports - i.e. # of Prototype parts in process
Manufacturing Quickly recognizes "X" revision with appropriate attention
"X" revisons cannot leave the premisis
one last thought when deploying this type of schema - one important rule that you may want to consider ...
Objects can only be promoted from R&D "Sandbox" to Live Production.
Implementing an alternate revision schema with EPDM will require some scripting, but in the end it may be a better solution.
I hope this alternative helps your thought processes.
I am leaning towards this method for the reasons mentioned. But the thing I need convince people of is that the part numbers will jump around a lot and they should not focus on what they are per se. We can generate Productions Secondary Numbers via a serial number that the divisions see. Both would be unique. This may be the best way to get around this issue. In at least one divisions case they have two numbers (no I have no idea why).