RE: [plcs-dex] Representation of scrap

[Tim King <tmk@lsc.co.uk>]

Title: RE: [plcs-dex] Representation of scrap

My preference is for classification.  I was only intending that the next_assembly_usage establishes that the bits are the constituents of the original whole part.  I did not mean to sound definitive that tracking of the scrapped parts was not appropriate.  I just wanted to make the point that I would see the one original product_as_realized instance being able to refer to the broken bits in some circumstances.  But if the part was out of a nuclear reactor then each bit is likely to become significant for tracking purposes.

Cheers,
Tim.

-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Bodington [mailto:rob.bodington@eurostep.com]
Sent: 11 August 2004 14:35
To: plcs-dex@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [plcs-dex] Representation of scrap

My understanding of the business requirement is that in the aircraft industry they want to be able to track scrapped parts to make sure that they don't somehow end up refitted to an aircraft. Hence the requirement to mark the actual product as scrapped. You won't do this if you only use next_assembly_usage as that only indicates that the usage is scrap. You'll need to indicate that the  product_as_realized is "scrapped". Either by a new entity or by a classification. My question is which approach should we take.

Sean - why is important to track the bits of a broken part? Surely the requirement is track the part that has been scrapped? I agree with Tim, I see no business significance in tracking the fragments of a scrapped part.

Regards
Rob
-------------------------------------------  
Rob Bodington
Eurostep Limited
Web Page: http://www.eurostep.com http://www.share-a-space.com
Email: Rob.Bodington@eurostep.com
Phone: +44 (0)1454 270030
Mobile: +44 (0)7796 176 401
-----Original Message-----
From: Tim King [mailto:tmk@lsc.co.uk]
Sent: 11 August 2004 14:15
To: 'Rob Bodington'; plcs-dex@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [plcs-dex] Representation of scrap

The option that comes to my mind is to use product assembly structure to link together the two or more "scrapped" product_as_realized bits to the product_as_realized original.  The constituent links would have dates that reflect when the original was broken.  The original would have the same date to reflect the breaking.  I do not think that breaking destroys the identity of the original part.  If glue can put the parts back together then the temporary existence of two parts might be considered to be of no business significance and those parts need never be given an identity.

Cheers,
Tim.
-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Bodington [mailto:rob.bodington@eurostep.com]
Sent: 11 August 2004 13:57
To: plcs-dex@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [plcs-dex] Representation of scrap

Hi
Sean has raised the following issue against: Capability (C045): representing_product_as_realized
Issue: SMB-1 by Sean Barker (04-06-23) minor_technical issue
Resolution: Accept. Status: open
How are scrap items to be designated? (I would suspect that merely classifying them as "scrap" would be unsafe, and would not cope with items broken in two.)

I think that there are two ways of addressing this. Either by classification, or adding the entity "product_as_scrapped" to the product_as_individual module.

In other words, modifying the EXPRESS to
ENTITY Product_as_individual
  ABSTRACT SUPERTYPE OF (ONEOF (Product_as_planned,
                                Product_as_realized,
                                Product_as_scrapped))
  SUBTYPE OF (Product_version);
END_ENTITY;
ENTITY Product_as_planned
  SUBTYPE OF (Product_as_individual);
END_ENTITY;
ENTITY Product_planned_to_realized;
  realized_product : Product_as_realized;
  scrapped_product : Product_as_scrapped;
END_ENTITY;
We may want a different term to scrapped.
Any views?
Regards
Rob
-------------------------------------------  
Rob Bodington
Eurostep Limited
Web Page: http://www.eurostep.com http://www.share-a-space.com
Email: Rob.Bodington@eurostep.com
Phone: +44 (0)1454 270030
Mobile: +44 (0)7796 176 401

DISCLAIMER: ***SECURITY LABEL: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED***   The information in this message is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee.  Access to this message by anyone else is unauthorised.  If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, or distribution of the message, or any action or omission taken by you in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful.  Please immediately contact the sender if you have received this message in error. This e-mail originates from LSC Group. Registered in England & Wales No 2275471 Registered Office: Devonport Royal Dockyard, Devonport, Plymouth, PL1 4SG

DISCLAIMER: ***SECURITY LABEL: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED***   The information in this message is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee.  Access to this message by anyone else is unauthorised.  If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, or distribution of the message, or any action or omission taken by you in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful.  Please immediately contact the sender if you have received this message in error. This e-mail originates from LSC Group. Registered in England & Wales No 2275471 Registered Office: Devonport Royal Dockyard, Devonport, Plymouth, PL1 4SG