Best Practices of Part Numbering Logic in PLM

Current best practice, when using a computer planning system, is for the part number to be non-significant (not descriptive), all numeric and as short as possible to accommodate the largest number of parts envisaged. As this is a surprise to many people who are used to using long part numbers containing characters to denote the part's characteristics and/or description, I have listed below 12 good reasons for this approach.

1. The part number is entered many times daily. A descriptive part number is re-entering the description which is already held by the system so is double entry and a waste of time and effort.
2. Descriptive part numbers frequently contain alpha (letters) as well as numeric characters which are in different parts of the key board so cause a disproportionate increase in entry time. If alpha characters are case sensitive the entry time (and aggravation) increases again.
3. Long part numbers often have to have spacing characters such as hyphens and slashes to make them readable which add to the entry cost.
4. The more characters that are entered the greater the chance of errors. People can remember up to 6 characters easily (e.g. a telephone number) after that errors increase.
5. People can guess descriptive part numbers but, because they are close, errors are harder to spot. An error in a non-significant part number is more obvious.
6. The increasing use of bar codes is another incentive for a short part number. Short bar codes are easier to read and the equipment is cheaper and smaller. Alpha numeric bar codes are over twice the length of numeric bar codes.
7. All new employees need training in a significant part numbering system. In practice it is rare that everyone really understand the part numbering systems eliminating any advantage. If "wrong" part numbers are created, parts change their use, have multiple use or are inherited from other sites or companies, descriptive part numbers just add to the confusion. Incorrect significance in part numbers is expensive double trouble.
8. Most systems have part type, classification or codes which are quicker and easier to use to find a type of part and for reports than a descriptive part number. In addition, if there are strict rules for the layout of the description field, it is more flexible and efficient to find a part using the description field than by using a description coded into the part number.
9. Even significant part numbers still have to be unique which means adding a non-significant element or adding extensions to the part numbers as and when new product variations are introduced. If the part numbering system is updated, do you update all the old part numbers or allow them to be incorrect?
10. New significant part numbers have to be created manually whilst non-significant part numbers can be allocated by the system which saves time and administration costs.
11. If absolutely necessary, sales catalogs can carry on using the old part numbering system. Systems can convert the short, numeric "internal" part number to a sales number for invoicing etc. New products should adopt the new codes from the start (your customers are more interested in your description and specification than your part number). It is also possible to convert suppliers part numbers to the internal number.
12. Finally, for the dinosaurs who will not change (people do get very attached to their antiquated but familiar part numbering systems) the old part number can be stored in an "external" field for them to use. In practice people very soon get used to the new part numbers.

Some people advocate the use of check digits after the part number. In practice, most planning systems will display the description after a part number has been entered and the vast majority of people will check the description before proceeding. Check digits do not therefore justify the extra digit in planning applications.

Note : sensible and logical use of the description field aids the transition to non-descriptive part numbers. 

There are but a few basic rules of item numbering that should not be broken if at all possible.  These are as follows:

1.  Never include any information in the item number that may change over time.

2.  Never adopt a part numbering scheme that comes from an external source, such as customers or vendors.  If they ever decide to change their part numbers, you should never be forced to change yours.

3.  Avoid special characters and bad character combinations like the Plague (spaces, dashes, underlines, slashes, leading zeroes, O and 0 in the same item number, etc.) These lead to more transcription errors.

4.  Keep the part number to the lowest number of characters, but design to have all of your part numbers of the same length.

Reference collected info from Google & my hands on experience,,

Anil 

ERP Systems and PLM Part Numbering

Many of the companies we work with operate a production environment that necessitates the tracking of hundreds – if not hundreds of thousands – of parts.

Parts must be managed, stored, retrieved and handled in ways specific to the manufacturer’s unique operation, especially in high mix production environments.

To help manage and effectively track parts, ERP systems and part numbering systems have evolved as a way to reference each part in a standard fashion.

The Evolution of Parts Numbering

Looking back, traditional part numbering systems and document identification methods originated well over five decades ago.  The organizational system has its root in manual paper-based record keeping, and involved the use of document identifiers and descriptive part numbers that give an idea of what the item is.

The structure was such that each lengthy part number served as a detailed description of the particular part or assembly.

As researchers note, over time part numbering moved away from this “descriptive” approach, or what some call “smart” part numbers, and moved toward “insignificant” – essentially a sequence of 5-6 letters and digits without any embedded description or particular meaning.

This streamlined approach serves as the next generation of part numbers or unique IDs. In database terms, the part number is “insignificant” and relevant data fields are attached providing for complex query and data analysis.

This move from “smart” numbers to unique or “insignificant” part number IDs makes sense in this age of modern ERP systems and part numbering. These part numbers can easily be integrated into parts database that can be accessed by materials handling, production, engineering, production control, purchasing, or sales.

Practically speaking, there are many advantages to moving away from “smart” part numbers, which end up being far more cumbersome than unique part numbers.

“Insignificant” part numbers offer substantial benefits including:

·         Reduced training costs: In order to take advantage of “smart” part numbering, everyone throughout the company must be trained in the decoding the part number.  As companies grow and personnel change, more and more time is wasted in training and interpreting these so called “smart” part numbers.  However, with “insignificant” part numbers, reduced training is required to create new part numbers and perform multi-field data queries.

·         Decreased complexity: Instead of relying on lengthy and cumbersome “Smart” part numbers that attempt to describe the particular part or assembly, unique IDs are much shorter and easier to track. Unique IDs traditionally are made up of a sequence of 5 uppercase letters and digits, which is easy to remember.

·         Reduced chance of errors: One of the biggest practical limitations of “Smart” part numbers is that they give similar names to similar parts, which makes them difficult to tell apart during picking and increases the risk of picking errors. Unique IDs are just that – unique to each part, and quickly assessed for accuracy during picking.  Unique IDs also mean part labels are easier for workers to read.

·         Improved part life-cycle management: Unique IDs are not affected when product information changes, as a descriptive part number is.  Instead, a unique ID is assigned to each part as it changes and moves through the life cycle.

ERP Systems and Parts Numbering

In all, the move away from “smart” parts numbering helps in data mining, automated queries and business analytics, especially as relates to ERP systems.

With “insignificant” parts numbers, product catalogs from different companies can be merged without loss of information.  In addition, during an ERP selection project, a reliance on Unique IDs makes the transition and implementation much easier.

We find that many of our clients that have been using older legacy systems are also using some sort of home-grown “smart” part numbering system.  Many use the implementation of a new ERP system as an opportunity to cleanse their data and develop new “insignificant” part numbering system.  However, others find that changing from a “smart” part numbering system that many are comfortable with, combined with the change to a new ERP system is too much change to absorb – and stick with their “smart” part numbering system.  Some use a hybrid approach and retain the old “smart” part numbering system for their old part numbers, but use “insignificant” part numbers for all new parts going forward.

Regardless of the approach, most companies have realized “smart” part numbering is an antiquated approach to part numbering and data analysis. Many are putting plans in place to shift from “smart” to “insignificant” part numbers in the near future.

We discuss few of the best practices of Numbering in next post.

Reference By Google... 

Anil 

The Biggest Challenges any Firm can Face in PLM Implementation

• Lack of strategic direction
•  Resource constraints (time and people)
•  Budget constraints
•  Our culture fears failure and/or the repercussions from failure
•  Cross-functional coordination
•  Lack management commitment and incentives
•  Limited enterprise systems integration
•  PLM payback opportunities are not clearly understood or measured
•  Executive sponsorship is missing or slipping
•  Culture and practice differences across business units
•  Lack of user involvement and training
• Poor support from chosen PLM solution and/or service provider
• Aligning R&D strategy with the organization’s long-term corporate strategy
• Building an effective technology roadmap
• Prioritizing innovation concepts
• Implementing an effective innovation portfolio management systems
• Finding viable new applications for existing products/capabilities
• Generating breakthrough innovation concepts
• Embedding the voice of the customer in the innovation process
• Measuring innovation performance (at the project and portfolio levels)

BR,

Anil 

Inconsistent Manufacturing Strategy

Reasons for Inconsistent Manufacturing Structures:

1. Manufacturing has a new manufacturing task but continues the old manufacturing policies and structure.

2. Responsible people in manufacturing have no clear, consistent definition or understanding of the manufacturing task facing the organization.

3. The manufacturing policies and the infrastructure being employed are inconsistent. Taken together, there is a distortion in coordination.

4. The organization lacks a focus. It is attempting to cover too many technologies or too many products and markets, too wide a range volume, and more than one manufacturing task.

5. The organization has the wrong equipment &process technology for the present manufacturing task.

6. Selection of products and processes for each plant in a multi-plant setup results in mixing together, somewhat at random, a product organization, a process organization, and a volume-focused organization (or any two of the three) instead of focusing around one type of organization.

Secretes of Industrial Success

1.      Beware of complacency

2.      Continually enlist the help of employees to improve product and process

3.      Deny every inch to actual and potential competitors

4.      Study competitors' sources of success

5.      Don't be too rational

Stages of the strategic role of manufacturing in a company

1.      Internally neutral minimize the “negative effect” of manufacturing

2.      Externally neutral achieve parity with competitors

3.      Internally supportive provide support to the business strategy

4.      Externally supportive

  

Manufacturing strategy is integrated engineering, finance, procurement, marketing/sales 100% of people are knowledge workers

Ø  contribute more with minds than hands

Ø  understand the business & job

Ø  mastery of all quality tools

Ø  sought after by competitors

Ø  leadership, teamwork

Ø  continuous learning and teaching

Ø  culture of experimentation

Ø  desirable place to work

Ø  challenging, fulfilling careers

Characteristics

Process

-technology leader

-process devel & improv

-innovation in methods & equip

In-control & capable (cpk > 2)

Intelligent use of information technology

Value chain

Benchmark-driven

-world-class practices

-world-class measures

-reverse engineering

-info exchange with the best

Suppliers send their best people and parts

Test bed for technology innovators

Networked with customers

Sample manufacturing strategy text

Manufacturing vision

Manufacture world-class quality auto components in the prescribed volumes, on schedule, at the lowest cost

Manufacturing mission

Achieve world-class status (by the year 20xx) in quality cost, time, and flexibility with people who have a shared vision and objectives that are based on a culture of continuous process improvement

Performance metrics

                                                    Quality: product& process

                                                    Cost/productivity

                                                    Time

                                                    Flexibility

Bye,

Anil 

Lean Manufacturing Strategy

1980’s: Japanese companies were succeeding not because they carefully made the right set of trade-offs among different priorities in their operations, but because they were capable of surpassing their Western counterparts across several dimensions at once.

New, Competing Theory: Lean
·     Lean production achieves lower cost, higher quality, faster product introductions, and greater flexibility-all at the same time-
·        Lean production can dominate any competitive situation.
·        Lean production combines the advantages of craft and mass production, while avoiding the high cost of the former and the rigidity of the latter: requires fewer inventories, yields fewer defects, and produces an ever-growing variety of products.
·        People should be broadly trained, rather than specialized. Staff is "overhead" and, with a high degree of work force "empowerment," not necessary.
·        No amount of rejects or variance should be accepted (zero defects is the goal).
·        Communication should take place informally and horizontally, among line workers rather than through hierarchies.
·        Equipment should be general purpose and flexible. Production should be organized into "cells," rather than specialized by process stages.
·     Continuous processes, with as little work-in-process inventory as possible, is preferable to batch processes.
·        Inventory, like rejects, is waste.
·        Throughput time is more important than labor or equipment utilization rates.
·      Product development should be organized through cross-functional teams, which pursue activities in parallel rather than sequentially.

Implication:
Manufacturing Strategy should devote less effort to customizing a production system and more effort trying to adopt the principles of the already-proven Lean Production System.


Bye, 
Anil Kumar JR