How to organize company parts library

[Varal]

Hello Everyone,

I’ve been entrusted with a task to create a common Altium Designer library to use by every designer in the company I work for. So far the idea is to go with a MySQL server to store all the necessary info like datasheet location, manufacturer part number, supplier part number, footprint location, etc. and an SVN server to store all the physical files like SchLib, PcbLib and datasheet PDFs. My only concern for now is how to make it possible for designers to upload their own components to the database / SVN server but without the possibility of altering any other data residing within. Also some sort of information that the newly uploaded component needs revision is necessary.

Can anyone of you please share your experience on how your company databases are organized? I know that the new Vault technology has the capabilities to do everything I need but that is not an option for now due to costs.

Thanks a lot for all your answers

[HWgeek]

With 130 views, no one can comment on how their company organizes the libraries?   We are actually in the same boat, and investigating the "how best" to do this too.   Hoping some folks here can chime in with their experience(s).

[ohmineer]

This is a topic that I had interest for some months ago. I did not have enough time to do a complete research but I found some applications you might want to look at.
Sorry, I could not test any of them, so I don't know whether they meet your requirements:

http://sourceforge.net/projects/billofmaterialsmanagement/
http://www.ecdb.net/about.php
http://www.partkeepr.org/about/screenshots/

To my knowledge, when you use a Version Control System, there is less danger when uploading changes on the repository because you can always (unless disaster) go back and recover the original file.

I hope it helps...

[HackedFridgeMagnet]

I have never come across a system like you describe though I would imagine larger companies have this de rigeur.

But I think you have the building blocks of your system in front of you, ie source control and a DB.

All you really need is a front end so users can easily do what they need to do while minimising mistakes.
If you cant find a 3rd party app, which is likely, you will have to roll your own.
If you do find something off the shelf which fits your needs then let us know.

Could be web or it could be a thick client. I think I would go thick client.
Maybe you could even dispense with SVN as it is really only a db and a front end itself.
If you did start to develop something like this then you could do in as small a chunks as possible, sort of Agile fashion.
 

[free_electron]

why do you want to roll your own crazy system ?

That is what the Vault is for.
Deploy the vault server , set admins for the vault and start plugging away parts in the vault. you can attach all data to a vault item. schematic symbol , pcb footprint, vendors, alternate vendors, datasheets, simulation models, mechanical models . everything.

Your users simply connect to the vault and when they place a part everything is populated automatically.
you can release parts, set parts as obsolete or deprecated and it all propagates automatically to designs.

when a design is to be released the vault engine will pull and verify all data and flag if parts have gone out of sync.

[twistedresistor]

Varal,

if you want to go full out with lifecycle and so on, Vault is the way to go. But i can understand the argument with the extra cost.
You basically answered your question yourself. If you want to have control what someone uploads or changes the only way to go is a SVNDBlib.
We have the same problem, too. Also we are a small company for which a database solution seemed too overkill at the time. But after getting started with component creation I wish we would have implemented that from the start.

Concerning the managing and organizing your databases I can recommend you to read through the three parts of the Altium Blog from Dave Read about component management and their comment section.
http://blog.live.altium.com/Blogs/component-development-best-practices-part1
http://blog.live.altium.com/Blogs/component-development-best-practices-part2
http://blog.live.altium.com/Blogs/component-development-best-practices-part3

Those gave me quite a few tips.

One thing made me thinking: Why would you let everyone upload their components? I'll guarantee you that your collection of components will soon be a mess. Make someone a dedicated "librarian". Of course if that is possible within the structure of your company.

[jamiechi]

I worked in a small group within our company that normally had only a couple of people using Altium. Me and one other engineer. I maintained the master library myself and updated and checked the libraries in as needed. The other engineer updated his own library which I would also periodically merge into the main one.  I don't think I would use a database for small groups. The vault didn't exist for us then. If I did it again now, I would probably consider using the vault even for small engineering groups or companies.

[abbotsmike]

Our system uses TortoiseSVN, Subversion and Redmine for issue tracking. I can't offer any advice in terms of how it's all setup, as I wasn't involved in that side of things. I do know that it takes time and discipline to use it properly, and even with our fairly modest design requirements, it could really do with some spending at least half a day each week keeping components added and up to date to keep pace with new projects!

[VK3DRB]

Our system uses TortoiseSVN, Subversion and Redmine for issue tracking.

We use Tortoise SVN. It is pretty good and free.

I looked at Redmine but rejected it because it was a mess to set up, so I settled on Jira after some further research and recommendations from friends. Jira is excellent for project management of PCB designs or software. It is easy to use, is hosted on the cloud (no set up needed) and costs $10 per month for up to 10 users total. Once you go over 10 users, the cost escalates to a serious amount. You can also host it on your own server for a one off cost of $10. I think it is free for home use, but I have not told the wife - it could be used for home maintenance project management.

[VK3DRB]

A good idea is to have a tick box field in a database or library called "Verified". A verified part is one that has been used on an actual PCB where the footprint was fit for purpose and met your design standards. Then it can be used with absolute confidence in the future.

Another but labour intensive idea is to have a "Checked" tick box. This means a colleague has checked your footprint against a datasheet. Depending upon timing, it might be cheaper to have a board re-spin in case of mistakes, rather than have a peer check all the footprints. But getting it right the first time is usually the best practice.

In any case, you can't beat a part that has been verified.

I once worked with a company that has two sets of parts libraries run by two departments working on similar products. The reason is the two teams did not trust each other's parts and there were some big egos at play. Expensive and idiotic.

cheers,
Dave

[zare.zz]

I have the same issue(not exactly).I am starting a job in a company. They have some old project that they don't have any BOM. How can I make BOM for all project in a short way. Is there any way to do it together and entirely? 

[alexwhittemore]

I have the same issue(not exactly).I am starting a job in a company. They have some old project that they don't have any BOM. How can I make BOM for all project in a short way. Is there any way to do it together and entirely?

For one, you're posting in a thread from 2013 - BOM management in altium has changed a whole bunch since then, in terms of strategies available now that weren't.

But a common theme is that the board has to have been designed with a strategy in mind. It's absolutely possible to put together a project that leaves you completely scratching your head about the canonical BOM, and I'm guessing that's what you'll find.

For instance, one schematic strategy is to use generic components and fill in the BOM later: 1k resistor here, 10k there, .1uF cap over here, then attach them all to an 0603 footprint. Zero BOM info whatsoever, at any stage. Your only choice is to go manually find a MPN that matches the designed characteristics, i.e. 1k 0603 resistor (make sure you get the tolerances right too, etc).

Another strategy is to ONLY EVER put down components from your managed vault, where the 1k resistor has been crafted carefully with an 0603 footprint that's been tested with 6 different MPNs, any of which will do. Use a BomDoc or the legacy BOM output in an outjob, and boom whole board's ready to go.

Which of those applies to you is totally dependent on how the project was designed in the first place, and it's probably somewhere in the middle. The only guaranteed strategy is to make a BomDoc and go through line by line to make sure every individual footprint has a function-matching MPN to stuff it.