So "Design by DigiKey" seems to be a common practice in the maker/hacker
world. For long life products, the manufacturer, and manufacturer part
number should be captured. Eventually, the part will go obsolete, the
distributor may take it off their website, disappear, or something, and you
have no traceability to the manufactured part. I assume Blue Origin may
want to support their systems for a while, and electronic part lifecycles
are shortening to match cell phone life cycles.
If the footprints are wrong, you may also want to check out design rules
and the layouts. They may be adding unnecessary trace/space requirements or
poor assembly thermal layouts that are driving up the prices of your boards.
Regards,
Stephen Golemme
Manufacturing Engineer, Makani
650-214-5647
solveforx.com/makani
On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 10:07 AM, Gerald Bogert (Contractor) <
[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> June 1, 2016
>
> Although I recognize that some OEMs assign their own unique part numbers to
> EEE parts but I am not in favor of doing this because it complicates things
> and makes it difficult if you are using the drawing or separate parts list
> for a competitive bid situation. For example, if a semiconductor is being
> purchased as JANTX XXXXXX per MIL-PRF-19500/XXX, with a detailed
> description of the part in the drawing remarks column, this is normally
> sufficient for ordering the part using the MRP electronic system. However,
> if only the OEMs P/N XXXXXX is listed, then this normally requires a
> detailed drawing or parts card to capture the part ordering information.
> Using an OEM number makes it difficult to search to determine if a suspect
> counterfeit part may have been used on an assembly unless there is an
> electronic method to translate the OEMs part number to the military
> specification part number. I also believe that the practice may violate
> standard drawing practices. Normally, per standard drawing practices, OEM
> documents can be listed as references along with the base requirement. As
> example, Solder per J-STD-001 Class 3 [OEM XXXXX] where the OEM XXXXX is
> the local OEM procedure that implements the soldering requirements. If the
> BOM includes both the OMs part numbers and the generic part numbers such as
> the military part numbers, this may be an acceptable practice. Normally,
> detail or source control drawings for an EEE part are not needed unless the
> part cannot be purchased without invoking additional requirements via a
> detail or source control drawing.
>
> On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Ken Barton <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>
> > Greetings TechNet gurus,
> >
> > Just arrived at my present employer charged with creating process for
> > PCB/CCA libraries. We have a turnkey layout vendor, this relationship is
> > somewhat problematic: Wrong footprints & component subs. We have
> absolutely
> > no correlation with Orcad CIS & our MRP/ECAD system. All board components
> > are using vendor PNs. So, I want to toss this out to all for a reality
> > check: My experience over a wide range of OEMs I have worked for is to
> > issue each component a "Company" 10 digit PN. All critical attributes
> will
> > be entered & fall into CIS explorer. The MRP/ECAD we have has all
> > capability for handling the mechanical AND electrical assy structures. As
> > my employer is the first time I have seen vendor PNs go on EBOMs &
> released
> > out into the wild, I've been informed that other huge companies have done
> > the same.
> >
> > Am I just an old guy using the "We always do it this way, it works?" I am
> > willing to hear the pros & cons, has anybody else been in the middle of
> > this?
> >
> > Ken Barton
> > Technical Designer,
> > Vehicles & GSE/
> > Avionics HW
> >
> > Blue Origin, LLC
> > 21218 76th Avenue S.
> > Kent, WA 98032
> > (253) 437-5625 x625
> > [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> >
> >
> >
> > ______________________________________________________________________
> > This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
> > For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or
> [log in to unmask]
> > ______________________________________________________________________
> >
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
> For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask]
> ______________________________________________________________________
>
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please contact helpdesk at x2960 or [log in to unmask]
______________________________________________________________________
|
