Re: Repair Parts List Organization

["Gene Kim-Eng" <techwr -at- genek -dot- com>]

It would depend on what I was writing.

For factory build procedures, I would attach the parts lists to the
sub-assembly procedures, with separate lists for each procedure
and the procedures organized in the order of the build, from the
ground up.  A master list for the entire product would probably
not be necessary, as your assemblers would most likely be
drawing parts for each procedure from a large central parts
supply as they perform them.

For field assembly procedures, I would add a master parts list,
to enable the user to order all parts needed in advance of build.

For field service procedures, I would reorganize the disassembly-
reassembly procedures and their attached parts lists in whatever
order the troubleshooting analysis dictated as appropriate.  A
master parts list might or might not be needed, depending on
whether the field service will be performed by service depots
with parts supplies similar to your factory or by customers who
have to order parts.

I would only include the parts that support operations the
readers are supposed to be able to do.  If a field procedure
says to install or replace a certain subassembly as one piece,
the parts list for that procedure would not list the parts within
that subassembly.

For all cases, I would list the parts in both the procedural and
master parts lists in numerical order by the company's part
numbers (the parts lists are used to order or inventory parts,
the procedures should instruct the reader which part numbered
items are used and in what order).  The OEM information is
of secondary importance, or might not be included at all.  For
most companies, parts are a big revenue source, and you
normally want your customers to order them from you, not the
OEMs.

Gene Kim-Eng



<tjohnson -at- starcutter -dot- com> wrote in message news:283841 -at- techwr-l -dot-  -dot-  -dot-