RE: [plcs-dex] Questions regarding Next_assembly_usage

["Rob Bodington" <rob.bodington@eurostep.com>]

The issue is not really to do with whether something is a part or an assembly - just about every part is an assembly to someone.
The issue is more about the relationships that make up an assembly, Next_assembly_usage. Namely: 


1) Is an instance of Next_assembly_usage always bound to have an identifier assigned? 

2) Should it always have a classification, i.e. asg_ref_data (required by template repr_assembly_structure)? 

3) Should the attribute location_indicator be used as is, or is there any reason for using e.g. asg_descriptor or asg_identification_with_no_organization (required by template repr_promissary_usage) instead?

Regards
Rob


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Barker, Sean (UK) [mailto:Sean.Barker@baesystems.com]
> Sent: 02 April 2007 09:00
> To: David Price; plcs-dex@lists.oasis-open.org
> Cc: Peter Bergström
> Subject: RE: [plcs-dex] Questions regarding Next_assembly_usage
> 
> 
> In aerospace, the distinction between part and assembly was not so strong.
> Indeed, in redesigning some parts, a fabricated assembly could be replaced
> by a single machined part, and carbon composite structures were a single
> part made from an assembly.
> 
> Sean Barker
> 0117 302 8184
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: David Price [mailto:david.price@eurostep.com]
> > Sent: 31 March 2007 12:38
> > To: plcs-dex@lists.oasis-open.org
> > Cc: Peter Bergström
> > Subject: Re: [plcs-dex] Questions regarding Next_assembly_usage
> >
> >                *** WARNING ***
> >
> > This mail has originated outside your organization, either
> > from an external partner or the Global Internet.
> >      Keep this in mind if you answer this message.
> >
> > Hmmm....  we may be talking about different things. R1 on a
> > circuit board, as I understand it, is a logical thing - not a
> > physical thing. That R1 identifier was created in the ee
> > logic design system long before things got physical. At least
> > that's my recollection, although this was many years ago.
> >
> > Either way, left from wheel or R1 are not a parts in an
> > assembly. "Part" has a special meaning - or at least did in
> > IBM and similar mfg orgs - of being the smallest physical
> > component in a design. Of course, some of IBM's Parts were
> > other people's assemblies but in no case was Part used to
> > define a logical/functional item.
> >
> > Hope this is helping,
> > DP
> >
> > On Saturday 31 March 2007 09:43, Peter Bergström wrote:
> > > In a breakdown (although for this particular example I should use a
> > > physical breakdown, not a functional) you would instantiate
> > different
> > > breakdown_elements for the different locations, but I don't
> > think it
> > > is the same as to say that it's the left or right wheel in
> > an assembly
> > > of a car, or that an electronic component should be place in a
> > > specific place (named
> > > location) on a circuit board. In the latter we are actually talking
> > > about parts in a parts assembly, where we have a
> > requirement for how
> > > or where the assembly is done.
> > >
> > > You could do the same with a breakdown structure, but there you are
> > > not really talking about designed parts directly - you
> > would have to
> > > realize the breakdown elements into parts to achieve the same.
> > >
> > > In some cases that is desired, e.g. early design and
> > in-support, but
> > > for the detailed design phase it is necessary to be able to talk of
> > > the location of a part in context of its upper level part
> > in a parts
> > > assembly, as well. At least, that is my understanding...
> > >
> > > Peter
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: David Price [mailto:david.price@eurostep.com]
> > > Sent: den 31 mars 2007 01:50
> > > To: plcs-dex@lists.oasis-open.org
> > > Subject: Re: [plcs-dex] Questions regarding Next_assembly_usage
> > >
> > > On Friday 30 March 2007 19:48, Peter Bergström wrote:
> > > > Regarding location_indicator:
> > > > If this is just a hangover, what in PLCS is replacing it?
> > >
> > > I assumed a functional breakdowns covered this requirement.
> > Is that wrong?
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > David
> > >
> > > This message contains information that may be privileged or
> > > confidential and is the property of Eurostep Group. It is intended
> > > only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the
> > > intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain,
> > > copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part
> > > thereof. If you receive this message in error, please
> > notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message.
> >
> > --
> > Mobile +44 7788 561308
> > UK +44 2072217307
> > Skype +1 336 283 0606
> > http://www.eurostep.com
> >
> >
> 
> ********************************************************************
> This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended
> recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended
> recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender.
> You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or
> distribute its contents to any other person.
> ********************************************************************