Patent Publication Number: US-8122352-B2

Title: Parts marking system and method

Description:
CROSS REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATION 
     This application is a continuation of and claims priority to U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/252,408, entitled “Parts Marking System and Method” filed on Oct. 17, 2005 which is a continuation-in-part of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/818,964 filed on Oct. 15, 2005 and entitled “Parts Marking System and Method,” which claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 60/619,489 filed on Oct. 15, 2004 and entitled “Parts Marking System and Method,” each of which are incorporated herein by reference. 
    
    
     BACKGROUND 
     Oftentimes, large entities, e.g., a government or a large corporation, manage and maintain numerous assets such as fleets of vehicles or other heavy equipment, e.g., delivery trucks or tanks. In so managing and maintaining, these large entities sometimes find it difficult to gather and retain complete and reliable information for life cycle management of property and equipment. Thus, such entities are oftentimes unable to determine that all assets are reported, verify the existence of inventory, substantiate the amount of reported inventory and property, or optimally use historical information for physical asset management. 
     In light of the foregoing, it is difficult for the large entities to achieve goals of financial reporting and accountability, e.g., legislative goals set for government entities related to financial reporting, accountability, and life cycle management. In this regard, the entities are oftentimes unable to know the quantity, location, condition, and value of assets it owns, safeguard its assets from physical deterioration, theft, loss, or mismanagement, prevent unnecessary storage and maintenance costs or purchase of assets already on hand, and determine the full costs of programs that use these assets, e.g., government programs. 
     Thus, it is possible that those who manage government assets are not receiving accurate information for making informed decisions about future funding, oversight of federal programs involving inventory, and operational readiness. 
     As an example, each vehicle in a large fleet is made up of a plurality of parts, each of which is owned and inventoried by the entity. However, information related to parts used in maintenance or parts that are already installed on vehicles can be difficult to track. 
    
    
     
       BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS 
       The invention can be better understood with reference to the following drawings. The elements of the drawings are not necessarily to scale relative to each other, emphasis instead being placed upon clearly illustrating the principles of the disclosure. Furthermore, like reference numerals designate corresponding parts throughout the several views. 
         FIG. 1  is a block diagram illustrating a part marking system (PMS) in accordance with an exemplary embodiment of the present disclosure. 
         FIG. 2  depicts exemplary implementation data, algorithms, and marking options for use in the PMS of  FIG. 1   
         FIG. 3  depicts exemplary marking options for use in the PMS of  FIG. 1   
         FIG. 4  is a block diagram illustrating a more detailed depiction of the parts marking system of  FIG. 1 . 
         FIG. 5  is a depiction of an exemplary menu graphical facilitator  101  interface 
       (GUI) of the parts marking system of  FIG. 2 . 
         FIG. 6  is a depiction of an exemplary Add/Search GUI of the parts marking system of  FIG. 2 . 
         FIG. 7  is a depiction of an exemplary “When to Mark Part” GUI of the parts marking system of  FIG. 2 . 
         FIG. 8  is a depiction of an exemplary “Main” GUI of the parts marking system of  FIG. 2 . 
         FIG. 9  is a depiction of an exemplary “Part Number Status Lists” GUI of the parts marking system of  FIG. 2 . 
         FIG. 10  is a depiction of an exemplary “Approval Status Update” GUI of the parts marking system of  FIG. 2 . 
         FIG. 11  is a depiction of an exemplary report generated by the parts marking system of  FIG. 2 . 
         FIG. 12  is a depiction of an exemplary “Import Data” GUI of the parts marking system of  FIG. 2 . 
         FIG. 13  is a depiction of an exemplary “General” GUI of the parts marking system of  FIG. 2 . 
         FIG. 14  is a depiction of an exemplary “Label Analysis” GUI of the parts marking system of  FIG. 2 . 
         FIG. 15  is a depiction of an exemplary “Information Worksheet” GUI of the parts marking system of  FIG. 2 . 
         FIG. 16  is a depiction of an exemplary “Label Consequences” GUI of the parts marking system of  FIG. 2 . 
         FIG. 17  is a depiction of an exemplary direct parts marking (DPM) GUI of the parts marking system of  FIG. 2 . 
         FIG. 18  is a depiction of an exemplary DPM algorithm GUI of the parts marking system of  FIG. 2 . 
         FIG. 19  is a depiction of an exemplary “Enter decision” GUI of the parts marking system of  FIG. 2 . 
         FIG. 20  is a depiction of an exemplary advantages versus limitations GUI corresponding to laser bonding of the parts marking system of  FIG. 2 . 
         FIG. 21  is a flowchart illustrating an exemplary parts marking process performed using the parts marking system of  FIG. 2 . 
         FIG. 22  is a flowchart illustrating exemplary architecture and functionality of parts marking logic of the parts marking system of  FIG. 2 . 
     
    
    
     SUMMARY 
     A parts marking system in accordance with an exemplary embodiment of the present disclosure has memory for storing data indicative of at least one algorithm associated with at least one object material and logic configured to display the at least one algorithm to a display device and receive a user input for at least one part in response to the displayed algorithm. 
     A parts marking method in accordance with an exemplary embodiment of the present disclosure comprises the steps of storing data indicative of at least one algorithm associated with at least one object material and displaying the at least one algorithm to a display device. The method further comprises receiving a user input for at least one part in response to the displayed algorithm. 
     DETAILED DESCRIPTION 
     Embodiments of the present disclosure generally pertain to parts marking systems and methods. Specifically, a parts marking system (PMS) of the present disclosure facilitates making optimal choices regarding the application of an identifier on a part, hereinafter referred to as an “object identifier” (OD, and the object identifier&#39;s location on the part. Furthermore, the system facilitates in identifying a technically appropriate parts marking application. Exemplary types of marking applications include, but are not limited to labels, dot peen (DP) marking, laser bond (LB) marking, ink jet (IJ) marking, and chemical etching (CE). Note that such list is not exhaustive and other parts marking applications in other embodiments are possible. Note that label refers to any article that can be attached to an object for identification or description purposes, e.g., a slip, a tag, a data plate, or tape. 
     When determining whether a label is technically appropriate for a part and determining what type of label is technically appropriate for the part, an exemplary PMS is used to perform a label analysis. A label analysis, among other things, includes identifying functions, functional failures, failure modes, failure effects, and consequences associated with each label analysis. Notably, the PMS provides a proactive analysis technique that enables the identification of plausible failure modes related to marking a part with a particular label, so that appropriate action can be identified to manage the consequences of such plausible failure modes. 
     Furthermore, when determining whether a direct parts marking (DPM) application, e.g., DP marking, LB marking, IJ marking, or CE is technically appropriate, an exemplary PMS is used to facilitate a direct parts marking (DPM) analysis. In the DPM analysis, the PMS facilitates selecting options corresponding to particular technical limitations associated with available parts marking applications. Whether a parts marking application is technically appropriate for a particular part depends on a plurality of factors, which are described further herein. 
       FIG. 1  illustrates a PMS  100  in accordance with an exemplary embodiment of the present disclosure. Prior to beginning a parts marking analysis using the PMS  100  in accordance with an exemplary embodiment, a facilitator  101  and any required team members gather implementation strategy data related to the types of parts that are to be marked, the kinds of materials that the parts will consist of, entity restraints related to the marking of parts, e.g., government regulations or corporate guidelines, monetary factors related to the marking of parts, safety factors, whether the entity desires to track particular parts, and the like. In addition, technical limitations corresponding to specific equipment that may be used to perform DPM techniques is gathered. Such list is not exhaustive, and other types of factors may be considered in other embodiments. 
     The PMS  100  is then configured to reflect such gathered information, which will now be described in more detail with reference to  FIGS. 2-4 . 
     After the PMS system  100  is configured according to the implementation information and strategies, the facilitator  101  gathers with a plurality of team members  102 - 106 . The facilitator  101  requests data identifying a part for analysis, which is described in more detail hereafter, and the facilitator  101  queries the team members  102 - 106  in accordance with the implementation strategy data with which the PMS system  100  was configured. In this regard, the PMS system  100  provides a plurality of options from which the facilitator  101  may select corresponding to particular factors, as described herein, related to the implementation strategy. The team members  102 - 106  preferably communicate data corresponding to such requests to the facilitator  101 . The number of team members  102 - 106  shown in  FIG. 1  is merely an exemplary number and other numbers of team members are possible in other embodiments. 
     Notably, the facilitator  101  leads a parts marking analysis for an identified part(s) by requesting particular data from the team members  102 - 106  associated with the implementation strategies. In particular, the facilitator  101  and the team members  102 - 106 , hereinafter referred to as the PMS team, perform a parts marking analysis so that an optimal marking application and marking location for the identified part is achieved. 
     As the facilitator  101  queries the team members  102 - 106 , the team members  102 - 106  provide information corresponding to the queries of the facilitator  101 . The facilitator  101  enters data or selects displayed options corresponding to the information provided from the team members  102 - 106  into the PMS  100 . Furthermore, as the facilitator  101  enters the data into the PMS  100 , the PMS  100  communicates the entered data to the visual device  110 . Such process is described in more detail throughout the present disclosure. 
     The team members  102 - 106  preferably comprise a group of individuals who are knowledgeable in a particular technical area directly related to the identified part. For example, if the part that is the subject of the analysis pertains to the aerospace industry, the team members  102 - 106  may comprise a system engineer, a mechanic, a depot representative, a person responsible for technical publications, a maintenance test pilot, an instructor pilot, a crew member, and/or an original equipment manufacturer (OEM). Such a team comprising the members  102 - 106  provides a knowledge base relative to the technical area that is being analyzed. Note that the depot is a maintenance area, where particular pieces of equipment are taken, for example, to be overhauled or repaired. 
     During the course of an analysis by the team members  102 - 106  and the facilitator  101  using the PMS  100  of the present disclosure, there may be required data identified during the analysis that the team members  102 - 106  are unable to provide. In such a scenario, the PMS  100  retains information corresponding to the data needed for a complete analysis, so that such data may be sought from other sources, e.g., other experts not on the team. 
     Prior to initiating the parts marking analysis, the facilitator  101  preferably compiles implementation information and strategies related to a plurality of assets and corresponding parts. Thus, some information related to such parts is already stored in the PMS. For example, the implementation information and strategies may identify a list of parts that are to be marked, including part numbers, common names for the parts, nomenclature related to the parts, and the like. Additionally, the implementation information and strategies may include a list of marking equipment available, for example, dot peen equipment, laser-bonding equipment, chemical etching equipment, and/or ink jet equipment. The marking equipment information may further comprise technical limitations associated with the marking equipment available. Additionally, there may be desired factors associated with marking the selected parts. For example, an entity may desire to mark all parts that cost more than $10,000, mark each part that may result in safety consequences if the part fails, mark each part that may result in environmental consequences if the part fails, or mark each part that the entity desires to track generally. Note that the options for inclusion in the parts marking implementation and strategies noted above are merely exemplary. Such information and strategies may change and adapt depending upon the use of the PMS  100 . 
     The parts marking analysis preferably comprises numerous parts. For example, the analysis might comprise a label analysis for determining the physical aspects of the label, i.e., one-part label, two-part label, and/or other type of label known in the art and for determining if a label is a possible marking technique for a particular part. Further, the PMS team populates an information worksheet, which includes functions, functional failures, failure modes, and failure effects, as described hereinabove, and a label consequences analysis to determine the consequences of a label falling off of a particular location. Furthermore, the PMS team might analyze the use of DPM for a particular part, including separately analyzing the use of a particular DPM technique for each part. 
       FIG. 2  further illustrates how the PMS  100  uses a portion of the implementation strategy data  2800  that is gathered by the facilitator  101  or other individual(s). As described herein, the PMS  100  is to be used by the facilitator  101  and the PMS team to determine how a part will be marked, e.g., a label or via DPM, the location on the part where the part will be marked, and marking instructions technically appropriate for each part. 
     Further as described herein, the implementation strategy data  2800  comprises data indicating the types of DPM equipment that will be used and the type of labels that may be used to mark particular parts. Furthermore, the implementation strategy data  2800  may comprise data defining the technical limitations of the DPM equipment and/or the technical limitations of the labels. For example, some DPM techniques may only be able to be used on certain types of metals, e.g., aluminum or titanium, or some labels may not be applicable to a part because of the label&#39;s technical limitations, e.g., the label&#39;s size or the type of adhesive that is used on a particular label. 
     Therefore, the PMS  100  is configured such that marking options identified in the implementation strategy data  2800  are those desired by the implementing entity, mandated by the available equipment, or necessary for a particular part material and are available for selection by the facilitator  101  as identified by the PMS team. Data that may be identified in implementation information and strategies and used to configure the PMS system  100  will be identified throughout. 
     As shown in  FIG. 2 , the implementation strategy data  2800  is preferably used to generate a plurality of algorithms  2801 - 2804 . An “algorithm” in this disclosure is a compilation of technical limitations associated with one or more particular parts marking techniques, and the technical limitations may be expressed in the form of questions having selectable options, e.g., yes/no, 1/0, or the like. The algorithms  2801 - 2804  are generated based upon the implementation information and strategies, including the type of mark, e.g., label or DPM and the type of equipment that will be used to adhere the mark to the part or directly mark the part in order to determine one or more technically appropriate marking techniques. 
     Therefore, an exemplary algorithm  2801  may be generated for determining a technically appropriate DPM technique for a part consisting of a particular material, “Material A,” where a plurality of options is available. Note that exemplary materials might be, for example, aluminum, titanium, rubber, composite, or the like. Such list is exemplary, and other types of materials are possible in other embodiments. 
     For example, the algorithm  2801  indicates that for DPM for a part consisting of Material A, the following marking techniques are available, including a “Dot Peen Marking Option”  2805 , an “Ink Jet Marking Option”  2806 , a “Chemical Etching Marking Option”  2807 , and a “Laser-Bonding Marking Option”  2808 . As will be described further herein, while each of these techniques may be available, the parts marking analysis will further indicate, based upon any technical limitations of the equipment or the technique, which of the marking options  2805 - 2808  is technically appropriate for the particular part. 
     In another example, the exemplary algorithm  2802  may be generated for determining a technically appropriate DPM technique for a part consisting of a particular material, “Material B,” where only two marking options are available. Notably, the algorithm  2802  indicates that the “Dot Peen Marking Option”  2805  and the “Chemical Etching Marking Option”  2807  are technically possible for “Material B” and so is available for analysis. As described herein, while each of these techniques may be available, the parts marking analysis will further indicate, based upon any technical limitations of the equipment or the technique, which of the marking options  2805  and/or  2807  is technically appropriate and therefore possible for the particular part. 
     In another example, the exemplary algorithm  2803  may be generated for determining a technically appropriate DPM technique for a part consisting either of “Material C” or “Material D.” In this regard, a particular algorithm  2803  may be used for parts consisting of different kinds of metals. For example, the algorithm  2803  may be used to analyze parts consisting of titanium or consisting of aluminum. The algorithm  2803  indicates two available marking options “Ink Jet”  2806  and “Chemical Etching”  2807 . 
     In another example, the exemplary algorithm  2804  may be generated for determining a technically appropriate label for a part. In this regard, a particular algorithm  2804  may be used to determine whether a “One-Part Label Marking Option”  2809  or a “two-part Label Marking Option”  2810  is desirable. As described further herein, such an algorithm  2804  for determining whether a label should be used and what type of label should be used may include a failure modes and effects analysis, as described further herein. 
       FIG. 3  further describes the marking options  2805 - 2810 . In this regard, each marking option that is available in a particular algorithm  2801 - 2804  ( FIG. 2 ) further comprises a plurality of technical limitations  1161 - 1164  and  1188 - 1189 . For example, the “Dot Peen Marking Option” for a particular metal, e.g., aluminum, may only be plausible if the part under analysis is less than or equal to “54” on the Rockwell Hardness C-Scale, if the part is not used in a high pressure operating context, or the part is greater than 0.020 inches thick. Thus each of the foregoing is a “DP Technical Limitation”  1161  corresponding to the particular marking option, e.g., dot peen. Such technical limitations are preferably displayed to the facilitator  101  and/or PMS team in the form of questions and/or statements, which is described in more detail with reference to  FIG. 18 . Such technical limitations may be associated with a plurality of options for the user to select, e.g., yes/no if the limitation is in the form of a question. Further, however, some technical limitations may be in the form of a statement, and the facilitator  101 , with input from the PMS team, enters data addressing such statement. For example, the One-Part Label Technical limitations  1188  may comprise data indicative of failure modes and effects analysis. Technical limitations are described further here. 
     Furthermore, in each algorithm  2801 - 2804  there may be general limitations related to DPM. For example, DPM may not be possible if the surface roughness is not between 8 and 250 micro-inches, which may be a general technical limitation to using DPM. Thus, if the marking area can not be prepared for DPM applications, then DPM may not be technically appropriate at all for the particular part and thus not available to the PMS team as a marking option. 
       FIG. 4  depicts a PMS  100  in accordance with an exemplary embodiment of the present disclosure. The exemplary PMS  100  generally comprises a processing unit  204 , an input device  208 , a display device  210 , a projection device  212 , and an output device  240 . 
     The PMS  100  further comprises parts marking logic (PML)  214  and a parts marking database (PMD)  216 . The PMD  216  comprises part data  226 , information worksheet data  218 , consequence data  225 , label analysis data  221 , report data  220 , transfer data  219 , import data  281 , DPM data  227 , and algorithm data  230 . The algorithm data  230  further comprises DPM algorithm data  231  and label algorithm data  232 . Each is described further herein. 
     In the exemplary PMS  100  shown by  FIG. 4 , the PMD  216  and the PML  214  are implemented in software and stored in memory  202 . In other embodiments, any of the foregoing components may be implemented in hardware and/or a combination of hardware and software. 
     The processing unit  204  may be a digital processor or other type of circuitry configured to run the PML  214  and/or other software components of the PMS  100  by processing and executing the instructions of such components. The processing unit  204  communicates to and drives the other elements within the PMS  100  via a local interface  206 , which can include one or more buses. Furthermore, an input device  208 , for example, a keyboard, a switch, a mouse, and/or other types of interfaces, can be used to input data from a facilitator  101  of the PMS  100 , and display device  210  can be used to output data to the facilitator  101  ( FIG. 1 ). 
     The PMS  100  may further comprise a projection device  212  that can be connected to the local interface  206 . The projection device  212  may capture information that the facilitator  101  enters into the PMS  100  via the input device  208 . An exemplary input device  208  may include, but is not limited to, a keyboard device, serial port, scanner, camera, microphone, or local access network connection. An exemplary display device  210  may include, but is not limited to, a video display. 
     As noted herein, various components, such as the PML  214  and the PMD  216 , are shown in  FIG. 2  as software stored in memory  202 . Such components can be stored and transported on any computer-readable medium for use by or in connection with an instruction execution system, apparatus, or device, such as a computer-based system, processor-containing system, or other system that can fetch the instructions from the instruction execution system, apparatus, or device and execute the instructions. In the context of this document, a “computer-readable medium” can be any means that can contain, store, communicate, propagate, or transport the program for use by or in connection with the instruction execution system, apparatus, or device. The computer readable medium can be, for example but not limited to, an electronic, magnetic, optical, electromagnetic, infrared, or semiconductor system, apparatus, device, or propagation medium. Note that the computer-readable medium could even be paper or another suitable medium upon which the program is printed, as the program can be electronically captured, via for instance optical scanning of the paper or other medium, then compiled, interpreted or otherwise processed in a suitable manner if necessary, and then stored in a computer memory. 
     As described hereinabove, portions of the data, including the algorithm data  230  and a portion of the part data  226 , may be pre-populated based upon the implementation information and strategies  2800  ( FIG. 2 ). Thus, when a parts marking analysis begins, the facilitator  101  may request information identifying a part for analysis, and when the facilitator  101  enters such data, the PML  214  may retrieve data describing the part under analysis from the part data  225  and display the retrieved part data  225  to the display device  210  and the projection device  212 . If the logic  214  does not locate data corresponding to the identified part in the part data  225 , the facilitator  101  can add a new part to the part data  226  for analysis. 
     If the PMS team desires to perform a label analysis on the part, the facilitator  101  initiates a label analysis via the input device  208 , which is described further herein, and the PML  214  displays label algorithm data  232  to the display device  210 . As described hereinabove, the label algorithm data  232  may comprise a series of technical limitations in the form of questions. Further, the algorithm data  232  comprises selectable options corresponding to each of the technical limitations and may include a failure modes and effects analysis and a consequence evaluation, each of which is described further herein. 
     Thus, the facilitator  101  elicits selections corresponding to the label algorithm data  232  and the facilitator  101  enters such selections via the input device  208 . The PML  214  stores such responses in label analysis data  221  for the identified part under analysis. In this regard, label analysis data  221  preferably comprises general data related to attaching a label or labels to the identified part. For example, the label analysis data  221  may comprise data indicative of whether the part is conducive to a two-part label or a one-part label described further herein. Such information is merely exemplary, and other label analysis data  221  is possible in other embodiments. The facilitator  101  enters label analysis data  221  via the input device  208 , and the logic  214  stores such label analysis data  221  in memory  202 . 
     The facilitator  101  elicits information worksheet data  218  from the PMS team corresponding to the identified part. Information worksheet data  218  preferably comprises data identifying functions, functional failures, failure modes, and failure effects corresponding to attaching a label to the identified part. Information worksheet data  218  is described in more detail with reference to  FIG. 15 . The facilitator  101  enters Information worksheet data  218  via the input device  208 , and the logic  214  stores such information worksheet data  218  in memory  202 . 
     The facilitator  101  elicits consequence data  225  from the PMS team corresponding to the identified part. Consequence data  225  preferably comprises data detailing identified consequences of a label falling off of an identified part. Consequence data  225  is described in more detail with reference to  FIG. 16 . The facilitator  101  enters consequence data  225  via the input device  208 , and the logic  214  stores such consequence data  225  in memory  202 . 
     If the PMS team desires to perform a DPM analysis on the part, the facilitator  101  initiates DPM analysis via the input device  208 , which is described further herein, and the PML  214  displays DPM algorithm data  231  to the display device  210 . As described hereinabove, the DPM algorithm data  231  may comprise a series of technical limitations in the form of questions or statements. Further, the DPM algorithm data  231  comprises selectable options corresponding to each of the DPM technique technical limitations. 
     Thus, the facilitator  101  elicits selections corresponding to the DPM algorithm data  231  and the facilitator  101  enters such selections via the input device  208 . As described hereinabove, the DPM algorithm data  231  comprises questions corresponding to the materials, environment, and DPM application limitations related to the part. The PML  214  stores such responses in DPM data  227  for the identified part under analysis. In this regard, DPM data  227  preferably comprises general data related to marking a part via one or more DPM techniques. For example, the DPM data  227  may comprise data indicative of whether the part is metallic or nonmetallic, whether the part is coated, and/or what type of metal makes up the identified part. DPM data  227  is described in more detail with reference to  FIG. 17 . The facilitator  101  enters DPM data  226  via the input device  208 , and the logic  214  stores such DPM data  227  in the PMD  216  in memory  202 . 
     As described hereinabove, the DPM algorithm data  231  preferably comprises specific inquiries for determining whether a part is conducive to a particular DPM application, i.e., chemical etching, laser bonding, ink jet marking, dot peen marking, etc. Further, the DPM algorithm data  231  comprises data indicative of which types of DPM techniques are identified for use in the implementation information and strategies for a particular implementing entity. Such data is used in order to configure the PMS  100  specific to each implementing entity, including options related to such inquiries as described hereinabove. DPM algorithm data  231  is described in more detail with reference to  FIG. 18 . The DPM algorithm data  231  is pre-populated in the PMS  100  prior to a parts marking analysis via the input device  208 , and the logic  214  stores such DPM algorithm data  231  in memory  202 . 
     Furthermore, data related to the parts marking analysis is stored in the PMD  216 , and the PML  214  generates reports  220  corresponding to the data stored in PMD  216 . For example, the PML  214  may generate a report detailing the status of a plurality of parts, e.g., whether the parts have been analyzed, whether an analysis of the parts has been sent to a validating authority, or whether the parts marking analysis and recommendations have been approved by an approval authority. 
       FIG. 5  depicts a graphical user interface (GUI)  300  in accordance with an exemplary embodiment of the present disclosure. 
     The “Parts Marking” GUI  300  preferably comprises pushbuttons  301 - 305 , and each button  301 - 305  displays a window, each of which is described further herein, when selected by the facilitator  101  ( FIG. 1 ). 
     The “Add/Search Menu” pushbutton  301  enables the facilitator  101  to add a particular part and its associated data to the PMD  216  and navigate existing parts stored in the PMD  216 . When the facilitator  101  selects the pushbutton  301 , the PML  214  displays to the display device  210  an “Add/Search Menu” GUI  400 , which is described in more detail with reference to  FIG. 6 . 
     The “Part Number Status Lists” pushbutton  302 , when selected, displays a plurality of pushbuttons (not shown) that enable the facilitator  101  to retrieve lists of part numbers from the PMD  216  based on specific criteria. Thus, the pushbutton  302 , when selected, displays a “Status Lists” GUI  1900 , as depicted in  FIG. 9 . 
     With reference to  FIG. 9 , the GUI  1900  enables a facilitator  101  to view a plurality of status lists corresponding to a part or a plurality of parts. 
     The GUI  1900  comprises pushbuttons  1901 - 1912 . The “All Records” pushbutton  1901 , when selected, displays a list of parts and corresponding parts marking information and where such part is in an approval process. As described further herein, the PMS  100  is used in order to generate parts marking procedures for a plurality of parts. Such procedures for marking the parts may undergo an approval process, e.g., the team generates the information, a validation team reviews the information, and an approval authority approves the information. Thus, the “All Records” pushbutton  1901  may further display where each part is in the approval process. 
     The “Batch Numbers” pushbutton  1902  may display, when selected, a window that enables a facilitator  101  to display a plurality of parts associated with a batch number. In this regard, the facilitator  101  may enter the batch number and all the parts associated with that batch number are displayed, including the parts&#39; common names and approval status. 
     The “In Queue to Validation Team” pushbutton  1903  may display, when selected, a window that exhibits a list of parts that are to be sent to an approval authority, e.g., a second or third tier. In this regard, an analysis has been performed on the parts, and the parts and associated information are to be provided to another tier for validation. For example, the list may indicate part numbers, common names and nomenclature for those parts in queue to the validation team. 
     The “Approval Status” pushbutton  1904  may display, when selected, a window that exhibits a list of part numbers and their associated approval status when that status is chosen. 
     The “Type of Object Identification” pushbutton  1905  may display, when selected, a window that exhibits a list of parts and status by their associated type of object identifier, when that object identification is chosen. In this regard, parts may be listed indicating DPM, DPM candidate, or Label. Note that a DPM candidate refers to a part that is waiting for a DPM analysis to be performed. 
     The “Investigate DPM” pushbutton  1906  may display, when selected, a window that exhibits a list of parts that is waiting for a DPM analysis. In this regard, such a list comprises part numbers associated with parts that the PMS team desires to analyze for a DPM method. 
     Further lists that may be generated include a list of parts by date entered by selecting the “Facilitator by Date Entered” pushbutton  1907 , a list of parts having parking lot data by selecting the “Parking Lot” pushbutton  1908 , or a list of by analysis date by selecting “Analyzed by Date” pushbutton  1909 . Furthermore, a facilitator  101  may generate a status list showing a list of parts having action items by selecting the “Action Items” pushbutton  1910 , or a list of parts that are not parts marking candidates by selecting the “Not a Parts Marking Candidate” pushbutton  1911 . 
     The GUI  1900  further comprises an “Approval Status Update; Transfer Data to Validation Team; Import Data from Validation Team” pushbutton  1912 . When pushbutton  1912  is selected, a GUI  2100  is displayed as depicted in  FIG. 10 . The GUI  2100  enables a facilitator  101  to review data related to the status of a part or a batch of parts, change data related to the status of parts, and/or transfer data related to a part or a batch to a validation team or an approval authority, e.g., manager or the like, so that they can add to or comment on the data. 
     GUI  2100  comprises a “Choose Criteria to Populate List Below” menu  2050 , a “Select New Status” menu  2051 , an “Update Current Status” menu  2052 , and a “Set List for Transfer” menu  2053 . 
     The menu  2050  enables a facilitator  101  to display a part or a list of parts in the listing window  2054 . In this regard, the menu  2050  comprises a text field  2101  for selecting data indicative of the current status of a part or a batch of parts. Thus, for example, if the facilitator  101  selects data indicative of a status “In Queue for Validation Team,” as described hereinabove, then the PML  214  displays the parts in the window  2054  from the part data  226  associated with the status identifier entered by the facilitator  101 . Note that the exemplary window  2054  lists the parts by part number and associated procedure number, nomenclature, batch number, and current status identifier. In addition, the facilitator  101  may retrieve parts for display in the window  2054  by selecting a batch number in text box  2102  or by entering a procedure string in text box  2103 . The text box  2104  displays the total number of parts, i.e., records retrieved. Further pushbutton  2180 , when selected, displays all part numbers associated with all batch numbers in the part data  226 . For example, if text box  2101  indicated “In Queue to Validation Team” and the text field  2102  indicated batch number “3” for example, if the facilitator  101  selects “All Batches,” then the PML  214  removes the “3” limitation on the search and displays all records from all batches that have a status of in queue to validation team. 
     Note that the window  2054  comprises a plurality of text boxes  2112 - 2115  for displaying part numbers retrieved based upon criteria entered in menu  2050 . Only four text boxes  2112 - 2115  are shown for exemplary purposes. However, the number of text boxes  2112 - 2115  displayed will directly reflect the number of parts retrieved based upon the criteria entered. Furthermore, text boxes  2116 - 2119  display alphanumeric codes identifying parts marking procedure, text boxes  2120 - 2123  display nomenclature, text boxes  2124 - 2127  display batch numbers, and text boxes  2128 - 2131  display current status identifiers corresponding to the part number text boxes  2112 - 2115 , respectively. 
     After the facilitator  101  has selected one or more parts for display to the window  2054 , the facilitator  101  may then change the status of the parts listed. In this regard, the text boxes  2128 - 2131  display the current status of each part listed. The facilitator  101  may select a new status identifier, e.g., awaiting approval, or approved, and enter the new status in a text box  2105 . The “Populate Temp Status” pushbutton, when selected, then populates “Temp Status” text boxes  2132 - 2135  with the new status selected in box  2105 . Note that “Delete Temp Status” may be selected in order to delete the new status identifiers populated in the “Temp Status” text boxes  2132 - 2135 . 
     Once the facilitator  101  has selected a status identifier for the “Temp Status” text boxes associated with each part, the facilitator  101  may then update the “Current Status” text boxes  2128 - 2131  by selecting the “Update Current Status with Temp Status” pushbutton  2108 . When the facilitator  101  selects the pushbutton  2108 , the PML  214  changes the data stored in the PMD  216  associated with the corresponding parts to reflect the new status identifier. In addition, the PML  214  also displays the new status identifiers to the current status text boxes  2128 - 2131 . 
     The “Set List for Transfer” menu  2053  comprises three pushbuttons  2109 - 2111 . When the “Transfer Database” pushbutton  2109  is selected, the PML  214  generates a transfer data  219  that the PML  214  stores in memory  202 , as described herein. In this regard, the PML  214  retrieves data describing the parts associated with the part numbers displayed in window  2054 . The PML  214  then generates the PMD  219 . 
     The GUI  2100  may further comprise a pushbutton (not shown) that, when selected, displays a window (not shown) for receiving recipient information, e.g., email address or web site address. Thus, the facilitator  101  may then select a transfer button (not shown) based upon the recipient information entered, and the PML  214  transmits the PMD  219  to the recipient. Thus, the listed parts and associated parts marking data making up a record in the PMD  216  may be transmitted to a validation team and/or an approving authority for review, as described herein. 
     In addition, the GUI  2100  comprises an “Import Database” pushbutton  2110 . When the pushbutton  2110  is selected, the PML  214  may retrieve import data  281  and store the import data  281  in the PMD  216 . The PMS  100  may receive import data  281  from a validation team and/or an approving authority, and the received import data  281  may comprise changes to a previous transfer data  219 . 
     Thus, the GUI  2100  further comprises a “Compare/Transfer Data” pushbutton  2111 . When the pushbutton  2111  is selected, the PML  214  displays a window  2300  as depicted in  FIG. 5F . 
     The GUI  2300  displays a window  2301  populated with data related to a part number currently stored in the PMD  216 . Furthermore, the GUI  2300  displays a window  2302  populated with data related to the same part number, however, the data displayed is retrieved from the imported database  219 . The GUI  2300  further comprises check boxes  2304 - 2313  corresponding at least a portion of the data contained in each of the “PMD Record”  2301  and the “Import Record  2302 .” Note that the records  2301  and  2302  have a plurality of text fields  2316 - 2328  and  2329 - 2341 , respectively. 
     When a facilitator  101  desires to transfer augmented data from the “Import Record”  2302  to the “PMD Record”  2301 , facilitator  101  selects a check box  2304 - 2313  corresponding to that portion of the data  2316 - 2328  and  2329 - 2341  that the facilitator  101  desires to transfer and selects the “Transfer Checked Items” pushbutton  2315 . The PML  214  then replaces the data related to the data checked in the PMD for the currently displayed part number data in the “Import Record”  2302 . Additionally, the facilitator  101  may select the “Check All” pushbutton to move all the data in the “Import Record”  2302  to the “PMD Record”  2301 . 
     The “Report Menu” pushbutton  303  enables the facilitator  101  to request reports  220  from the PMD  216  corresponding to the PMD  216  and the algorithmic data  230  described further herein. When the facilitator  101  selects the pushbutton  303  from the GUI  300 , the PML  214  displays to the display device  210  a list of reports that the PML  214  can create or has already created. Thus, the facilitator  101  can retrieve a report and display it to display device  210  or print the report to an output device  240  or display such report to the display device  210  or visual device  110 . 
     An exemplary report  2400  is illustrated in  FIG. 11 . The report  2400  depicts a label procedure report for a part named “FWD Rotary Wing Blade.” The report  2400  provides the part number “118P229-71,” a common name “FWD Blade,” a procedure number “CH88-PM-07-888A,” and a date “12 May 2005.” 
     Additionally, the report  2400  provides a labeling procedure including the type of label, “2-Part Label,” and a label location, “on the damper attachment lug.” The report further exhibits a photograph or drawing that may show the label location and the placement on the part and any special installation instructions. 
     The “Miscellaneous Notes” pushbutton  304  may display a window (not shown) that enables the facilitator  101  to enter notes regarding a particular part of analysis. 
     The “When to Mark Part” pushbutton  305  displays a GUI  2000  depicted in  FIG. 7  when selected. The GUI  2000  enables a facilitator  101  and/or the PMS team to determine/view when a part is to be marked. In this regard, the GUI  2000  comprises a pull down menu  2001  that the facilitator  101  can use to select a particular “When to Mark Part” opportunity and thus the PML  214  displays the parts to be marked at that time. For example, the facilitator  101  may choose “400 HR Maintenance Cycle” and thus the PML  214  displays the parts that have been identified to be marked at the 400 HR Maintenance Cycle. GUI  2000  further comprises a “Common Name” text box  2002  that displays the common name of the part, a “Part Number” text box  2003  that displays the part number of the part, and a “Type OI” text box  2004  that displays the type of object identifier, e.g., a label or particular DPM technique, chosen by the PMS team to be used to mark the part. In addition, the GUI  2000  comprises check boxes  2005  and  2006  that indicate if the part is subject to overhaul or to be at the depot, respectively. Additionally, a “Click-CM” pushbutton, when selected, displays a current maintenance schedule for the part. The GUI  2000  also displays in text box  2008  that allows the facilitator  101  and the PMS team to choose or view when the part is to be marked based on the opportunities shown in  2005 ,  2006 , and  2007 . 
     As mentioned hereinabove, when the facilitator  101  selects the pushbutton  301  ( FIG. 5 ), the PML  214  displays the GUI  400  ( FIG. 6 ) to the display device  210 . The GUI  400  comprises a text box  402  in which the facilitator  101  may enter data, via the input device  208 , indicative of a part number. After the facilitator  101  has entered the text into the text box  402 , the facilitator  101  selects a “Click to Add” pushbutton  414 . 
     When the facilitator  101  selects the pushbutton  414 , the PML  214  stores the part number in the part data  226  of the PMD  216  and displays to the display device  210  the “Main” GUI  500  of  FIG. 8 , which is described in more detail hereafter. 
     Furthermore, the GUI  400  enables a facilitator  101  to search the PMD  216  for existing part numbers. In this regard, the facilitator  101  may search existing part numbers by part number, common name, national stock number (NSN), or nomenclature. Thus, the GUI  400  comprises an “Enter a Part Number String” text box  404 , an “Enter a Common Name String” text box  405 , an “Enter an NSN String” text box  406 , and an “Enter a Nomenclature String” text box  407 . 
     When the facilitator  101  enters data into any one of the text boxes  404 - 407  and selects a “Search” pushbutton  416 , the PML  214  displays a list of part numbers associated with the entered search string, i.e., part number, common name, NSN number, and/or nomenclature. The facilitator  101  can then select the part from the list of parts, and when the facilitator  101  selects the desired part, the PML  214  displays the “Main” GUI  500  ( FIG. 8 ) exhibiting the selected part. 
     Additionally, the GUI  400  enables a facilitator  101  to edit and/or view a part number. Thus, the GUI  400  comprises a “Choose a Part Number” text box  420 . When the facilitator  101  enters/chooses data into the text box  420  and selects an “Edit/View” pushbutton  421 , the PML  214  retrieves information from the PMD  216  corresponding to a part that matches the data entered/chosen into the text box  420 . The PML  214  displays the retrieved information in the “Main” GUI  500  described in more detail with reference to  FIG. 8 . 
     In addition, the GUI  400  comprises a “Choose a Procedure to Edit” text box  422  and corresponding “Edit/View” pushbutton  423  that, when selected, displays the GUI  500  of  FIG. 8  exhibiting the part number associated with the procedure number entered/chosen into the text box  422  ( FIG. 6 ). Therefore, if the facilitator  101  desires to edit a procedure, the facilitator  101  can enter/choose the procedure number into text box  422 , select the pushbutton  423 , and the PML  214  displays the GUI  500  corresponding to the particular part number. 
     In addition, the GUI  400  comprises a “Choose a Recently Added, Searched or Edited Part number” pull down menu  424 . Therefore, the facilitator  101  may select a recently added, searched or edited part number and select the “Edit/View” pushbutton  425  to edit or view the part number or select the “Delete History” pushbutton  426  to delete the part numbers in the pull down menu  424  from history. 
     Further, the GUI  400  enables a facilitator  101  to delete a part number from the PMD  216 . In this regard, the facilitator  101  can enter/choose a part number into text box  427  and select the “Delete” pushbutton  428 . The PML  214  then deletes the part associated with the entered/chosen part number from the PMD  216 . 
       FIG. 8  depicts the “Main” GUI  500 . As described herein, the GUI  500  is generally displayed by the logic  214  when the facilitator  101  elects to retrieve information corresponding to a particular part or elects to edit an existing part stored in the PMD via the GUI  400  ( FIG. 6 ). In this regard, the PML  214  retrieves desired information from the PMD  216  and populates the GUI  500  with the information retrieved. 
     Furthermore, the “Main” GUI  500  is displayed by the logic  214  when the facilitator  101  selects the “Click to Add” button  414  ( FIG. 6 ). The GUI  500  displays the added part number and description information and the PML  214  stores data in PMD  216  corresponding to the new part number not already in the PMD  216 . In this regard, the PML  214  displays the GUI  500  to the display device  210 , and the facilitator enters data into the GUI  500  related to the part that the facilitator  101  desires to enter into the PMD  216 . 
     The GUI  500  of  FIG. 8  comprises a text box  502  that the logic  214  populates with a desired part number, which is entered into the GUI  400  as described herein. Note that the part number, common name, and/or nomenclature displayed in text boxes  502 ,  504 , or  506 , respectively, may already be stored and correlated in the PMD  216 . However, as described hereinabove, the facilitator  101  may desire to enter a new part number in GUI  400  ( FIG. 6 ) by selecting the “Click to Add” pushbutton  414  after entering a part number in text box  402  ( FIG. 6 ). Furthermore, the GUI  500  comprises a text box  508  for displaying or entering data that describes the location of the part identified in the “Part Number” text box  502 . 
     In one embodiment, the GUI  500  comprises a window  510  for displaying several photographs and/or drawings indicative of the part identified in the text box  502 . Note that the drawing may be in any format, e.g., portable document format (PDF), tagged image file format (TIFF), or a windows bitmap (BMP). 
     In this regard, the PML  214  may retrieve several photographs and/or drawings from the PMD  216  and display the photograph or drawing in the window  510  along with an associated caption describing the photograph or drawing in text box  512 . Additionally, the GUI  500  comprises a “Browse” button  511 . When the facilitator  101  selects the button  511 , the logic  214  displays data indicative of the file system (not shown) of the PMS  100 , and the facilitator can select from the file system a file name indicative of a file that contains data defining a photograph or drawing of a part, which the logic  214  can display in window  510 . 
     Furthermore, the GUI  500  may comprise an “Enlarge” pushbutton  1871 , a “Select Drive” pushbutton  1872 , and an “Add/Delete Label Location” pushbutton  1873 . The “Enlarge” pushbutton  1871 , when selected, may display an enlarged version of the drawing and/or photograph in window  510 . The facilitator  101  and the PMS team may then be able to view in better detail that which is displayed in window  510 . 
     The GUI  500  comprises a “Record Navigation” menu  515  and a “Mark Analysis” menu  519 . The “Record Navigation” menu  515  comprises a “General” pushbutton  516  and a “Main” pushbutton  518 , which generally enable a facilitator  101  to access data currently being stored in the PMD  216  ( FIG. 2 ). 
     When the facilitator  101  selects the “General” pushbutton  516 , the PML  214  ( FIG. 4 ) displays to the display device  210  a “General” GUI  600 , which is described in more detail with reference to  FIG. 13 . The GUI  600  ( FIG. 13 ) provides general information about the part currently selected in the “Part Number” text box  502  of  FIG. 8 . 
     When the facilitator  101  selects the “Main” pushbutton  518 , the logic  214  ( FIG. 4 ) displays to the display device  210  the “Main” GUI  500 , which is described hereinabove with reference to  FIG. 8 . 
     The “Mark Analysis” menu  519  comprises a “Label Analysis” pushbutton  520 , an “Information Worksheet” pushbutton  522 , and a “Label Consequences” pushbutton  524 . Each button  520 ,  522 , and  524  provides a specific analysis functionality with respect to an object identifier that is to be used on the part identified in the text box  502 , and each is described in more detail with reference to  FIGS. 14-16 . 
     Additionally, the GUI  500  comprises a “Direct Parts Marking” (DPM) pushbutton  526 , a “Return to Search Results” pushbutton  528 , a “Main Menu” pushbutton  532 , and an “Edit Menu” pushbutton  530 . 
     When the facilitator  101  selects the DPM button  526 , the logic  214  displays to the display device  210  the GUI  1000 , which is described in more detail with reference to  FIG. 17 . When the pushbutton  528  is selected, the logic  214  displays a listing of parts that may have resulted in an earlier search as described with reference to  FIG. 6 . The button  532  displays the “Parts Marking” GUI  300  of  FIG. 5 , and the button  530  displays GUI  400  of  FIG. 6 . 
     The GUI  500  further comprises a text box  556  for providing the status of a record, and a button  560  that, when selected, displays the status history of a record. Further, the GUI  500  comprises a text box  554  for displaying the object identifier category of the currently displayed part, a text box  552  for displaying a procedure number associated with the part, and an automation button  558  for automatically formulating a procedure number. 
     When the part that is currently being displayed has associated validation remarks, such remarks are indicated in check box  586 . In this regard, a facilitator  101  can select “Validation Remarks” pushbutton  550  to open a window comprising an editable text box (not shown). The facilitator  101  can enter data indicative of validation remarks in the text box, and when the facilitator  101  returns back to the “Main” GUI  500 , the check box  586  exhibits a check indicating that there are validation remarks. 
     In addition, if the PMS team determines that the part currently displayed is not a parts marking candidate, then the facilitator  101  can select the push button  548 , and the PML  214  displays an editable text box (not shown) in which the facilitator  101  can enter data indicative of reason why the part is not a parts marking candidate even though the part meets other parts marking criteria laid out in the implementation information and strategies. When the facilitator  101  returns back to the “Main” GUI  500 , a check box  587  exhibits a check indicating that there are reasons indicated for why the part is not a parts marking candidate. 
     Furthermore, the “Facilitator Use” menu  581  comprises a “Revision Information” check box  589  to indicate that revisions of the information related to the part exist. In this regard, the “Revision Information” pushbutton  588 , when selected, displays an editable text box for entering revision information. When the facilitator  101  returns back to the “Main” GUI  500 , the check box  589  exhibits a check indicating that there is revision information. 
     As described herein, a part may be a member of a plurality of parts, wherein a batch number identifies the plurality. Data indicative of the batch in which the part number belongs is exhibited in text box  590 . As the approval process for parts marking descriptions for the plurality associated with the batch number is analyzed and reviewed, the parts can be retrieved by searching the PMD  216  via the batch number. 
     The GUI  500  further comprises a check box  562  that indicates that a part is currently listed in the “Parking Lot.” Note that when a part is listed in the “Parking Lot,” such indication means that prior to making a decision on the part&#39;s marking analysis, additional information may be needed. Thus, the facilitator  101  can enter data describing the reasons for the part being in the parking lot into editable text box  534 . Thus, when the facilitator  101  returns back to the “Main” GUI  500 , the check box  562  exhibits a check indicating that there is parking lot information. 
     Further, there may be additional remarks related to the part. If so, then the GUI  500  further comprises a “Remarks” pushbutton  536  and a corresponding check box  564 , which behave substantially similar to the “Parking Lot” pushbutton  534  and corresponding check box  562 . 
     The GUI  500  may further comprise a “Record Copy” pushbutton  540 , a “Spelling” pushbutton  538 , and a “Master Facilitator Copy” pushbutton  563 . The “Spelling” pushbutton  538 , when selected, checks the spelling in the displayed descriptions and other displayed text. The facilitator may select the pushbutton  538  in order to run a spell check on the information provided in the GUI  500 . 
     Further, the “Record Copy” pushbutton  540  is for providing a record copy of another part number to transport into the current working record. In one embodiment, the pushbutton  540  displays a window from which data can be cut and pasted into the GUI  500 . In another embodiment, the pushbutton  540  automatically transports selected data into the GUI  500  without the facilitator having to cut and paste the data. 
     “Master Facilitator Copy” pushbutton  563  is for displaying a master record copy (not shown) for use by the facilitator  101 . The master record copy preferably is a window that shows all the information related to the part including its marking information. 
     In addition, the “Facilitator Use” menu  581  comprises a “Date Entered” text box  544  for entering the origination date of the information relating to the part currently displayed in the text box  502 . Further the menu  581  comprises a “Date Analyzed” text box  546  for entering data indicative of the date on which a parts marking analysis was performed for the part number displayed in text box  502 . The “Facilitator Use” menu  581  further comprises an “Action Item” pushbutton  542 . The pushbutton  542 , when selected, displays a window (not shown) that enumerates at least one action item associated with the identified part. In this regard, the action item window may exhibit data indicative of the part number, common name, actionee (the individual or group that is to take the action), the action to be taken, the due date, and corresponding remarks. 
     Note that the data described hereinabove that is entered via the GUI  500  is preferably stored in the PMD  216  as part data  226 . 
     As described hereinabove, if the facilitator  101  selects the “General” pushbutton  516 , then the PML  214  displays to the display device  210  the GUI  600  described now with reference to  FIG. 13 . The GUI  600 , like the GUI  500 , displays or receives text via text boxes, pull down menus, and/or check boxes corresponding to the “Part Number”  502 , the part “Nomenclature”  504 , and/or the part “Common Name”  506 . 
     Additionally, the GUI  600  comprises a table that includes other part numbers  608 - 611  that are affiliated with the part currently displayed in text box  502  and each other part number&#39;s corresponding NSNs  612 - 615  including other cage codes. If other part numbers exist in the table, then the text box  616  provides an indication of additional part numbers, e.g., a check mark. 
     Additionally, the GUI  600  comprises an “Analysis Criteria” box  618 . As described herein, the type of criteria that is to be considered when analyzing a part is dependent upon several factors, including the desires of the implementing entity for which the part is being analyzed. In this regard, the “Analysis Criteria” box  618  can comprise a plurality of configurable check boxes to indicate if one or more of the listed criteria pertains to the displayed part number. For example, the box  618  comprises selection boxes  619 ,  620 ,  621 , and  622  and exhibit specific analysis criteria. When box  619  is selected, this indicates that the part costs more than $10,000, if the “safety” box  620  is checked this indicates that the part has safety consequences, if the “environmental” box  621  is selected, this indicates that failure of the part has environmental consequences, and the “tracked” box  622 , if checked, indicates that the implementing entity desires to track the part number for a particular reason. Thus, if one or more of these boxes is check, then there exists a reason(s) for labeling the part with an object identifier. As described hereinabove, other analysis criteria in other embodiments are possible depending upon the type of parts that are indicated in the implementation information and strategies for marking and any requirements that may be placed upon an implementing entity. Thus, the boxes  619 - 622  are configurable based upon such analysis criteria identified. 
     The GUI  600  comprises an “NSN” text box  624  for displaying the NSN information related to the part, a “Cage Code” text box  625  for displaying the cage code associated with the part number, an “Parts List Figure No.” text box  626  for displaying a figure number corresponding to a drawing associated with the part number, a source maintenance recoverability (“SMR) Code” text box  627  for entering and/or displaying the SMR code associated with the part number, a “Label Nomenclature” text box  628  for displaying the label nomenclature associated with the part number, and a work unit code (“WUC”) text box  629  for entering and/or displaying the WUC code associated with the part number. Further, the GUI  600  comprises a “Quantity of Object on Asset” text box  630  for entering and/or displaying the quantity or number of a particular part contained on a particular asset, e.g., two rotary blades on a helicopter. The “Latest Acquisition Cost” text box  631  may be provided for entering and/or displaying the latest acquisition cost associated with the part number, and the “Latest Acquisition Date” text box  632  may be provided for entering and/or displaying the latest acquisition date associated with the part number. Other information that may be provided including a “Field Cost” text box  633  for entering and/or displaying the field cost for which the displayed part is bought by the end user. 
     The GUI  600  further provides boxes  624 - 633 , check box  634 , and text boxes  635  and  636  for entering and/or displaying information provided by the facilitator  101  relating to the part number indicated in text box  502 . Such information is configurable based upon the application in which the PMS  100  is used. For example, the check boxes  624 - 634  may be used to provide additional tracking information or maintenance characteristics or additional maintenance and/or part management data. 
     Additionally, the GUI  600  comprises a “Priority” pushbutton  650 , a check box  655 , and “Add/Delete Priority” pushbutton  645 . When the pushbutton  650  is selected, the PML  214  displays a window comprising a list of priority indicators for marking of the part. Such data may include, for example, “funding availability” priority indicator or “immediate” indicator. The facilitator  101  can add priority indicators by selecting a pushbutton (not shown). If priority data is provided for the displayed part, the PML  214  displays an indicator in check box  655 . The GUI  600  further comprises a “Current Maintenance” push button  637  that, when depressed, displays an editable text box for entered current maintenance package information associated with the part being analyzed. When information is entered in the editable check box, the PML  214  displays an indicator in check box  636 . 
     Note that each of the informational check boxes  624 - 633  and  635 - 636  are populated with data that is provided prior to analysis. However, some of the data, for example the current maintenance data in the aforedescribed editable text box, may be retrieved from the team during analysis. Further note that the analysis criteria in box  618  and the additional information in text boxes  624 - 635  are exemplary criteria only, and other criteria can be used in other embodiments depending upon an implementing entity&#39;s requirements. 
     Once the facilitator  101  has entered information corresponding to the part number displayed in the text box  502 , the PMS team performs an analysis to determine if a label or labels are technically appropriate. In this regard, the facilitator  101  selects the “Label Analysis” pushbutton  520 , and the PML  214  displays to the display device  210  a GUI  700  illustrated in  FIG. 14 . 
     As described hereinabove, the “Label Analysis” screen is preferably generated based upon label algorithm data  232 , which is obtained from implementation information and strategies for a particular implementing entity. For example, if it is determine that there are two types of labels available, a one-part and a two-part, then the first question in the “Label Analysis” GUI  700  is “Is there room for a two-part label?” 
     The GUI  700  comprises a selection box  702  for selecting an option that is also provided by the label algorithm data  232 . For example, the selectable option data may be an affirmative or a negative response to whether there is room on the part being analyzed for placing a two-part label. Thus, the PMS team answers the question of whether there is room on the part for a two-part label, and if the PMS team determines that there is room for a two-part label, then the facilitator selects an affirmative indication for the box  702 . For example, the box  702  may provide a pull down menu when the down arrow  701  is selected. Thus, the facilitator  101  may select a “Yes” or a “Y” from the pull down menu to indicate an affirmative response. To the contrary, the part may not be suitable for a two-part label, thus the facilitator  101  would select a negative indication, for example a “No” or an “N,” for the text box  702 . 
     The GUI  700  further comprises a selection box  704  for selecting an affirmative or a negative response to the question of whether there is room on the part being analyzed for placing a one-part label. Thus, the PMS team answers the question of whether there is room on the part for a one-part label, and if the PMS team determines that there is room for a one-part label, then the facilitator selects an affirmative indication in the box  704 . For example, the box  704  may provide a pull down menu when the down arrow  703  is selected. Thus, the facilitator  101  may select a “Yes” or a “Y” from the pull down menu to indicate an affirmative response. To the contrary, the part may not be suitable for a one-part label, in which case the facilitator  101  would enter a negative indication, for example a “No” or a “N” in the text box  704 . 
     Notably, the queries made on the “Label Analysis” GUI  700  are configurable, as described hereinabove. For example, if an implementing entity that is to use the PMS  100  to perform a label analysis desires not to have any two-part labels, then the question corresponding to the box  702  would not be available. Likewise, if the entity desired to use other types of labels, e.g., tape, then such a selection would be available. Note that the questions that are asked in the label analysis are technical limitations with respect to the use of labels. In this regard, if the part is not big enough for a two-part label, then such a question describes a technical limitation to the use of the two-part label on the part being analyzed. 
     Once the PMS team determines whether a two-part label, a one-part label, and/or another type of label known in the art can be used on the part, the PML  214  automatically populates box  708  from question/answers from boxes  702 , and  704 . 
     Further, the PMS team describes the optimal location of the label determined. In this regard, the facilitator  101  enters information describing the location on the part for the label type indicated in the text box  708 . Notably, the PMS team may navigate to the GUI  500  described with reference to  FIG. 8 , by selecting the pushbutton  518 , and view the photograph or drawing of the part in making the location determination. 
     With reference to  FIG. 14 , the PMS team then provides information describing adverse conditions that the part may be subjected to during operation that may affect whether or not a label is technically appropriate. In this regard, the GUI  700  comprises boxes  712 - 714  including box  712  for indicating whether the label might be subject to fluid contamination, box  713  for indicating whether the label is subject to high traffic and/or maintenance traffic, and box  714  for indicating whether the label is subject to adverse environmental conditions. In addition, the GUI  700  comprises a check box  792  for indicating whether adverse conditions are described in more detail. In this regard, the facilitator  101  may select the “Adverse Conditions Details” pushbutton  791 . If selected, the PML  214  may display a window (not shown) for entering data further describing the details, and the PML  214  may store such data in the PMD  216  associated with the part. 
     These adverse conditions questions are technical limitations to the label analysis. The facilitator selects options from the pull down boxes  712 ,  713 , and  714 . These options and technical limitations are determined by the implementation information and strategies as described hereinabove for each implementing entity. In this regard, the adverse condition questions are also configurable depending upon the type of environment or external exposures that a part may endure during operation. 
     Further, the GUI  700  provides a box  718  for indicating whether the surface area is still conducive to label application in light of the previous analysis and exists to allow the PMS team to decide if label analysis should be continued. As described hereinabove, the GUI may provide a pull down functionality via the arrow  719 . Whether the surface area is still conducive to label application may depend upon a number of factors that the PMS team considers in making such a determination. 
     Additionally, the GUI  700  comprises a technical limitation described by the query of “Will adhesive adhere to the parts surface” and provides options in a pull down menu  788  for answering such a query. 
     Further, the GUI  700  provides a box  722  for providing an affirmative or negative option to indicate whether there are special installation instructions for applying the suggested label in box  708  to the part being analyzed. Additionally, the GUI  700  comprises a button  720 , and, when selected, the logic  214  displays to display device  210  an editable text box (not shown) in which the facilitator can enter information describing the special instructions determined by the PMS team. 
     Further, the GUI  700  comprises a box  724  for providing an affirmative or negative option to indicate whether the part can be marked without disassembly or removal. Thus, the facilitator  101  enters an affirmative or negative response determined by the PMS team in the box  724 . Corresponding text box  726  receives data indicating the removal or disassembly procedure/details. 
     The GUI  700  also comprises a box  730  for indicating affirmatively or negatively whether the OI is accessible using a hand-held scanner without disassembly or removal. Thus, the facilitator  101  enters an affirmative or negative response determined by the PMS team in the box  730 . Corresponding text box  728  receives data indicating the removal or disassembly procedure/details. 
     The “Label Analysis” GUI  700  embodies exemplary label algorithm data  232 . In this regard, the questions/statements and options provided to respond to the exemplary questions/statements make up an exemplary label algorithm. Other questions/statements in other embodiments of a “Label Analysis” GUI  700  can be used with other options, and such algorithms can be configured based upon the implementation information and strategies as described herein. 
     The PMS  100  stores data indicative of the selected options and other data entered in the “Label Analysis” GUI  700  in the label analysis data  221  of the PMD  216 . 
     Once the PMS team performs the basic label analysis using GUI  700 , the facilitator continues the analysis by selecting the “Information Worksheet” pushbutton  522 . When the pushbutton  522  is selected, the logic  214  displays the GUI  800  depicted in  FIG. 15  to the display device  210 . 
     The GUI  800  enables the PMS team to perform an information worksheet analysis via the display device  210  and the visual device  110 . In this regard, the PMS team begins by identifying a variety of functions, functional failures, failure modes, and failure effects related to the placing of a label on a part or such functions, functional failures, failure modes, and failure effects may be identified prior to the PMS team gathering, and the PMD  216  may be populated with function, functional failure, failure mode, and failure effect data. In this regard, the pre-populated identified functions, functional failures, failure modes, and failure effects may be technical limitations associated with an algorithm, and such functions and functional failures may be stored in the information worksheet data  218  ( FIG. 4 ). 
     Such function data is entered or displayed into text box  811 . When adding a function, the facilitator  101  selects the “Add” pushbutton  801 . As the facilitator  101  enters additional functions or scrolls through pre-populated functions, the PML  214  increments a counter in text box  837 . 
     Exemplary functions that may be identified by the PMS team include, for example, to safely and permanently display human and machine-readable part information so that it can be identified and traced, to avoid damage to the part and/or the vehicle in which the part is installed, and to avoid introducing any additional failure modes to the system in which the part is installed. Note that such functions may vary for different applications of the PMS  100 . 
     Once the PMS team has reviewed pre-populated functions and/or added new functions associated with the label under analysis, the PMS team identifies “Functional Failures” associated with each pre-populated function and/or added function. As functional failures are identified, the facilitator  101  enters such functional failure data by selecting an “Add” pushbutton  802  and entering data into the text box  812  describing the functional failure. A counter in text box  827  indicates the number associated with the displayed functional failure in text box  812 . 
     Exemplary functional failures associated with an identified function may include the label falls off, the label is humanly illegible, or the label is not machine-readable. Note that such functional failures may vary for different implementing entities of the PMS  100 . 
     Once the PMS team has identified functional failures associated with the label under analysis, the PMS team identifies “Failure Modes” associated with the identified functional failures. The facilitator  101  enters such failure mode data by selecting an “Add” pushbutton  803  and entering data describing the failure mode in text box  813 . 
     Once the PMS team has identified failure modes, the PMS team identifies “Failure Effects” associated with each failure mode identified. The facilitator  101  enters such failure effects into the text box  814  associated with each failure mode. The described compilation of failure modes and failure effects is hereinafter referred to as a “FMEA.” 
     Based on the FMEA, if the PMS team desires to continue the label analysis, the GUI  800  comprises a box  806  for indicating an affirmative or negative response as to whether to still continue the analysis. Further, the GUI  800  comprises a box  804  for indicating an affirmative or negative response as to whether the label determined in text box  708  ( FIG. 14 ) is recommended in light of the information provided in the FMEA. 
     Note that the “Record Navigation” menu  515  and the “Mark Analysis” menu  519  behave in substantially the same manner as described hereinabove. 
     Furthermore, the GUI  800  comprises a “Facilitator Use” box  599 . The box  599  comprises a “Spell Check” pushbutton  561  that, when selected, checks the spelling in the text boxes in the GUI  800 . The box  599  further comprises a “Totals” pushbutton  562  that when depressed displays a text box (not shown) that details the total number of functions, functional failures, failure modes, and failure effects contained in the information worksheet performed in the GUI  800 , when selected. The “Copy” pushbutton  563  displays a copy of the current window so that the facilitator  101  can copy data from one window to the working GUI  800 . Further, the “Copy” pushbutton  563  is for providing a record copy of another part number to transport into the current working record. In one embodiment, the pushbutton  563  displays a window from which data can be cut and pasted into the GUI  800 . In another embodiment, the pushbutton  563  automatically transports selected data into the GUI  800  without the facilitator having to cut and paste the data. 
     Finally, the box  599  comprises a “Renumber” pushbutton  564  that renumbers functions, functional failure, failure modes, and failure effects when selected. 
     The PML  214  stores the FMEA data and any other data entered in the “Information Worksheet” GUI  800  in the information worksheet data  218  ( FIG. 4 ). 
     Once the Information Worksheet GUI  800  is completed by the PMS team, the facilitator  101  may select the “Label Consequences” button  524 , and the logic  214  displays the GUI  900  described in more detail hereafter with reference to  FIG. 16 . 
     The GUI  900  further exhibits a plurality of questions indicative of technical limitations associated with the consequences of a particular label falling off of its location identified in text box  710  ( FIG. 14 ), as described hereinabove. In this regard, the GUI  900  comprises text boxes for entering data and selection boxes for selecting options corresponding to a plurality of queries aimed at gathering information corresponding to the consequences of a label falling off which allows the PMS team to select a label as a marking option. 
     The GUI  900  comprises a text box  902  for entering data describing where a label conducive to detachment might fall off. Thus, the facilitator  101  requests information from the PMS team corresponding to where a label(s) would fall off, and the facilitator  101  enters such information in text box  902 . 
     The PMS team further analyzes the consequences if the label falls off via the GUI  900  by entering data in boxes  903 - 907 . Furthermore, pushbuttons  910 - 914  may be selected so that the facilitator  101  can enter additional data regarding each box  903 - 907 . 
     In this regard, the GUI  900  comprises text box  903  for providing an affirmative or negative response as to whether, if the label being analyzed falls off, if such falling off might have adverse effects on operational safety. If the PMS team determines that there are or are not safety consequences, the GUI  900  further provides a pushbutton  910 , and when the button  910  is selected, the logic  214  displays an editable text box (not shown) for entering detailed information corresponding to safety consequences information identified by the PMS team. 
     The GUI  900  comprises text box  904  for providing an affirmative or negative response as to whether, if the label being analyzed falls off, such falling off might cause a breach of an environmental standard or regulation. If the PMS team determines affirmatively/negatively that there are environmental consequences, the GUI  900  further provides a pushbutton  911 , and when the button  911  is selected, the logic  214  displays an editable text box (not shown) for entering detailed information corresponding to the environmental consequences information identified by the PMS team. 
     The GUI  900  comprises text box  905  for providing an affirmative or negative response as to whether, if the label being analyzed falls off, such falling off might cause an adverse effect on operational capability. If the PMS team determines affirmatively/negatively that there are operational consequences, the GUI  900  further provides a pushbutton  912 , and when the button  912  is selected, the logic  214  displays an editable text box (not shown) for entering detailed information corresponding to the operational consequences information identified by the PMS team. 
     The GUI  900  comprises text box  906  for providing an affirmative or negative response as to whether, if the label being analyzed falls off, such falling off might cause equipment damage. If the PMS team determines affirmatively/negatively that there may be equipment damage consequences, the GUI  900  further provides a pushbutton  913 , and when the button  913  is selected, the logic  214  displays an editable text box (not shown) for entering detailed information corresponding to the equipment damage information identified by the PMS team. 
     The GUI  900  comprises text box  907  for providing an affirmative or negative response as to whether, if the label being analyzed falls off, is the level of risk associated with such falling acceptable. If the PMS team determines affirmatively/negatively that the level risk associated with the label falling off is acceptable, the GUI  900  further provides a pushbutton  914 , and when the button  914  is selected, the logic  214  displays an editable text box (not shown) for entering detailed information corresponding to details regarding the level of risk associated with the label(s) falling off identified by the PMS team. 
     In light of the information provided regarding the consequences of the label falling off, the PMS team then determines whether the label being analyzed is recommended. If the team determines that the label is recommended, the GUI  900  comprises a box  908  for entering an affirmative indication, i.e., a “Yes” or a “Y,” that indicates that the label is recommended. Otherwise, the facilitator  101  can enter data indicating that the team does not recommend the analyzed label, i.e., a “No” or a “N.” If a negative entry is made in text box  908 , the PML  214  displays a dialog box (not shown) that asks whether to continue to the DPM analysis, as described with respect to  FIG. 17 . 
     The GUI  900  further comprises a “First Iteration” selection box  961  for selecting whether the recommendation made in box  908  is a result of a first iteration of the algorithm exhibited by GUI  700  ( FIG. 14 ), GUI  800  ( FIG. 15 ), and GUI  900  ( FIG. 16 ). If it is not the first iteration, then the facilitator  101  selects a negative indication form the pull down box  961 . In one embodiment, the facilitator  101  selects the pushbutton  962 , and the PML  214  displays an editable text (not shown) for entering data describing the first iteration so that an audit trail of decisions can be maintained. 
     As described herein, DPM is distinguishable from marking via a label. In this regard, DPM refers to placing part information directly on the part. Thus, the PMS team determines whether the part is conducive to DPM by using the GUI  1000  depicted in  FIG. 17  and the GUI  1100  depicted in  FIG. 18 . 
     Furthermore, GUI  1000  and GUI  1100  embody an exemplary algorithm, e.g., algorithms  2801 - 2803  ( FIG. 2 ), which will be indicated further herein. 
     The exemplary GUI  1000  comprises a plurality of questions corresponding to an algorithm for deciding upon a DPM technique. In this regard, the GUI  1000  comprises a text box  1002  for indicating whether the part composition is a metal or a nonmetal. Exemplary metals include, for example, titanium or aluminum. Exemplary nonmetals include, for example, rubber, plastic, or composite materials. As described hereinabove, different materials will have different algorithms associated with them. Thus, the GUI  1000  will change depending upon the type of part that is being analyzed. 
     In this regard, the text box  1002  may comprise a pull down menu  1001  that lists a plurality of options for the facilitator  101  and the PMS team when selecting data in response to this question. The menu may comprise the different available selections, e.g., metal or nonmetal. Note that the questions related to DPM may vary depending upon the particular application of the GUI  1000 . Furthermore, the PML  214  determines the algorithm that is employed in GUI  1100  based upon the selections made on GUI  1000  ( FIG. 17 ). In this regard, if it is a metal and that metal is further identified as “aluminum”, then an algorithm comprising marking options corresponding to techniques that are to be used for marking aluminum is displayed when the algorithm is run by selecting a “Run Algorithm” pushbutton  1012 , described further herein. 
     The GUI  1000  further comprises a text box  1004  for indicating whether the surface of the part is painted. In this regard, the text box  1004  may comprise a pull down menu (not shown) actuated by selecting the arrow  1003 . The menu may comprise the different available selections, e.g., painted/not painted or true/false. Further, the facilitator may enter an affirmative or negative response, for example, if the surface is painted, the facilitator  101  enters a “Yes” or a “Y” in the text box  1004  by entering text into the box  1004  or selecting an affirmative indication from a pull down menu displayed by selecting the arrow  1003 . Again, the algorithm employed to determine whether the part can be marked using DPM and the marking options available for marking the part may aid in defining the algorithm that is employed in GUI  1100 , described further herein. 
     The GUI  1000  further comprises a text box  1006  for indicating whether the surface can be prepared for DPM application. In this regard, the text box  1006  may comprise a pull down menu (not shown) actuated by selecting the arrow  1005 . The menu may comprise the different available selections, e.g., “yes” or “no.” Note that if the surface cannot be prepared for DPM, and the facilitator  101  answers “no” in box  1006  via the pull down menu  1005 , then the PML  214  indicates in text box  1016  that DPM is not possible. 
     The GUI  1000  further comprises a text box  1008  for indicating the type of metal that the part is made of. In this regard, the text box  1008  may comprise a pull down menu (not shown) actuated by selecting the arrow  1007 . The menu may comprise the different available selections, e.g., aluminum, steel, bronze, and/or brass. Note that the pull down selections, e.g., aluminum, steel, bronze, etc., can be populated depending upon the type of application for which the PMS  100  is being used for a specific implementing entity. Furthermore, the PML logic  214  determines the algorithm that is employed in GUI  1100  based upon the selection made in text box  1008 . In this regard, if the part is aluminum, then an algorithm comprises DPM marking options corresponding to techniques that are technically possible for marking aluminum and is displayed when the algorithm is run by selecting a “Run Algorithm” pushbutton  1012 , described further herein. Furthermore, the answers in text boxes  1002  and  1008  determine the “Metal Group”  1010  in which the part is a member. In this regard, there may be several metals, e.g., aluminum and steel, which belong to the same metal group in that the same algorithm can be used to determine the type of DPM that can be employed to mark the part. 
     When the facilitator  101  selects the button  1012 , the PML  214  displays a GUI  1100  described in more detail with reference to  FIG. 18 . The GUI  1100  aids the PMS team in deciding which type of DPM is recommended in regard to the part being analyzed. 
     Once the algorithm is run, the GUI  1000  comprises a “DPM Analysis Results” box  1015  that indicates whether DPM is possible and what types of DPM are possible and not possible for the part being analyzed. 
     In this regard, the box  1015  indicates in a text box  1016  an affirmative or a negative indication of whether it is possible to use DPM. If DPM is possible at all, the box  1015  further comprises boxes  1018 - 1021  that indicate which types of DPM are possible, and boxes  1022 - 1025  that indicate which types of DPM are not possible. 
     Further, the GUI  1000  comprises a text box  1088  or a pull down menu (not shown) that allows the facilitator  101  to choose which DPM technique is recommended by the PMS team. 
     As indicated hereinabove, when the facilitator  101  selects the button  1012 , the PML  214  displays GUI  1100  of  FIG. 18 . The PML  214  selects one of a plurality of algorithms that are coded into PML  214  prior to analysis and are based on the specific implementation strategies for a particular implementing entity for display in GUI  1100  based upon the answers to the queries in GUI  1000  ( FIG. 17 ). 
     The GUI  1100  enables the PMS team to determine which types of DPM are technically appropriate, if any. In this regard, the GUI  1100  comprises a text box  1102  for displaying the metal identified in box  1010  ( FIG. 17 ) and a text box  1104  for displaying the part number associated with the part currently being analyzed. Furthermore, the GUI  1100  provides a box  1106  for indicating which step the PMS team is currently on as it goes through each step in the algorithm depicted in GUI  1100 . 
     As noted herein, the algorithm displayed in GUI  1100  depends upon answers to questions in GUI  1000 . In this regard, the algorithm in GUI  1100  comprises four decision areas  1196 - 1200 . As the facilitator  101  enters data indicative to options related to each of the part marking techniques, the PML logic  214  determines, based upon the data entered, whether the marking technique related to the data being entered is possible or not possible. The PML  214  then automatically moves the facilitator  101  on the GUI from one marking technique area  1196 - 1200  to another. 
     In decision area  1200 , the PMS team analyzes whether the part generally can be marked using a DPM method by displaying questions (not shown) related to general technical DPM limitations. For example, if the part has a surface on which a DPM can be placed or if the surface thickness is adequate for placing a DPM. Note that these questions are configurable based upon the implementing entity for which the particular PMS  100  is designed. For example, aerospace research may disallow DPM for surfaces of a particular thickness or made of a particular type of metal. If the facilitator  101  enters data, based upon input from the PMS team, that indicates that DPM is possible, then the PML  214  automatically controls the analysis flow by highlighting and/or disabling selected decision areas based upon the options selected by the facilitator  101  corresponding to the technical limitations of each DPM technique as described further herein. In this regard, as described herein, the algorithm displayed comprises the decision areas  1196 - 1199  corresponding to DPM techniques determined to be technically appropriate for the material displayed in text box  1102 . 
     Note that, based upon the answers to the questions in decision area  1200 , none or all of the decision areas  1196 - 1199  may be made editable by the PML  214 . Likewise, based upon the answers to the questions in decision areas  1196 - 1199 , one or more of the decision areas  1196 - 1199  may be made editable by the PML  214 . 
     In one embodiment, if each general technical DPM limitation in decision area  1200  is answered affirmatively, then the PML  214  enables each of the decision areas  1196 - 1199 . However, in other embodiments of the algorithm, other combinations of enabled/disabled decision areas  1196 - 1199  are possible and are dependent upon the affirmative/negative selected options in decision areas  1196 - 1199 . 
     If each decision area  1196 - 1199  is technically appropriate, the PML  214  enables all decision areas  1196 - 1199  and automatically moves an indicator (not shown) to the dot peen technical limitations  1161 . Thus, the facilitator  101  and the PMS team may then provide affirmative/negative responses corresponding to the dot peen technical limitations  1161  of the decision area  1196 . If during analysis of the dot peen technical limitations  1161  the facilitator  101  enters a negative response, then the PML  214  automatically moves the indicator to the ink jet technical limitations  1162  of the decision area  1197 . If the answers to such technical limitations indicate that dot peen can not be performed, then the PML  214  ( FIG. 4 ) places a “No” in text box  1144 . If the answers to such technical limitations indicate that dot peen can be performed, then the PML  214  ( FIG. 4 ) places a “Yes” in text box  1130 ., 
     Thus, as indicated herein above, after it is determined whether or not dot peen is possible, the PML  214  automatically moves the indicator to the ink jet technical limitations  1162  of the decision area  1197 . If during analysis of the ink jet technical limitations  1162  the facilitator  101  enters a negative response, then the PML  214  automatically moves the indicator to the laser bond technical limitations  1163  of the decision area  1198 . If the answers to such technical limitations indicate that ink jet can not be performed, then the PML  214  ( FIG. 4 ) places a “No” in text box  1145 . If the answers to such technical limitations indicate that ink jet can be performed, then the PML  214  ( FIG. 4 ) places a “Yes” in text box  1140 ., 
     Thus, as indicated herein above, after it is determined whether or not ink jet is possible, the PML  214  automatically moves the indicator to the laser bond technical limitations  1163  of the decision area  1198 . If during analysis of the laser bond technical limitations  1163  the facilitator  101  enters a negative response, then the PML  214  automatically moves the indicator to the chemical etching limitations  1164  of the decision area  1199 . If the answers to such technical limitations indicate that laser bond can not be performed, then the PML  214  ( FIG. 4 ) places a “No” in text box  1160 . If the answers to such technical limitations indicate that laser bond can be performed, then the PML  214  ( FIG. 4 ) places a “Yes” in text box  1162 . 
     Thus, as indicated herein above, after it is determined whether or not laser bond is possible, the PML  214  automatically moves the indicator to the chemical etch technical limitations  1164  of the decision area  1199 . If during analysis of the chemical etch technical limitations  1164  the facilitator  101  enters a negative response, then the PML  214  places a “No” in the text box  1146  and the algorithm terminates. If the answers to such technical limitations indicate that chemical etching can be performed, then the PML  214  ( FIG. 4 ) places a “Yes” in text box  1148  and the algorithm terminates 
     Note that, the decision areas  1196 - 1199  are arranged in succession within the algorithm so that each decision area  1196 - 1199  is enabled/disabled as a result of the affirmative/negative answers to the general technical limitations or preceding technical limitations  1161 - 1163 . In this regard, the PML  214  automatically moves the indicator from the preceding decision area  1200  or  1196 - 1198  to the next decision area  1196 - 1199 . However, in other embodiments, the decision areas may be enabled/disabled and the indicator may be automatically moved independent of the affirmative/negative answers to the preceding technical limitations  1161 - 1163 . 
     In yet another embodiment, if in decision area  1200 , based upon options selected in the general technical DPM limitations  1200 , the PML  214  determines that chemical etching, for example, is the only technically appropriate DPM technique, the PML  214  may only enable chemical etching decision area  1199 . Thereafter, chemical etch decision area  1199  behaves as described herein above. 
     As noted herein above, if the questions answered in the general technical DPM limitations in decision area  1200  indicate that more than just chemical etching decision area  1198  is technically appropriate, those applicable decision areas  1196 ,  1197 , and  1199  are enabled by the PML  214 . 
     Note that, the DPM techniques illustrated in GUI  1100  are for exemplary purposes and varying combinations of those identified DPM techniques or different DPM techniques may be used in other embodiments. Further note that, four DPM techniques are shown in the algorithm in GUI  1100  for exemplary purposes. However, other quantities of DPM techniques in other embodiments are possible. 
     GUI  1100  further comprises a “Facilitator Use” menu  1121 . The menu  1121  provides text boxes  1167  and  1169  for entering additional information related to the part being analyzed. In this regard, if there is additional information needed in order to make a determination as to the label algorithm, the facilitator  101  selects the “Parking Lot” pushbutton  1167 , and the PML  214  displays an editable text box (not shown) for entering information corresponding to the additional information needed for the analysis. The PML  214  then enters an indication in the “Parking Lot” box  1166 , e.g. a check mark, indicating that additional information is needed. Further, the GUI  1100  provides the “DPM Remarks” check boxes  1168 , and the PML  214  enters an indication in the check box  1168  that there are DPM remarks associated with the part being analyzed if the facilitator  101  enters data by selecting the “DPM Remarks” pushbutton  1169 . Thus, when the facilitator  101  selects the “DPM Remarks” pushbutton  1169 , the logic  214  displays an editable text box (not shown) for entering information corresponding to the remarks related to the analysis. 
     Further, the “Facilitator Use” menu  1121  comprises a “Start Over” button  1170 . Thus, if the facilitator  101  and/or the PMS team determine that the algorithm being performed needs to be started over, the logic  214  resets the GUI  1100  when the facilitator selects button  1170 . The menu  1121  also comprises a “Return to DPM” button  1172 , and if the facilitator  101  determines that the GUI  1000  ( FIG. 17 ) is needed during the analysis, the PML  214  displays the GUI  1000  when the facilitator  101  selects the button  1172 . 
     With respect to  FIG. 17 , once the PMS team has completed running the algorithm in  FIG. 18 , the facilitator  101  may select the “Enter Decision” button  1014 . When button  1014  is selected, the logic  214  displays the “Enter Decision for PN” GUI  1200  depicted in  FIG. 19 . 
     GUI  1200  illustrated in  FIG. 19  comprises a text box  1202  for displaying the suggested order of the parts marking as a result of the DPM algorithm. Such suggested order is predetermined during the implementation information and strategies development, therefore, the text field  1202  is pre-populated. As an example, text field  1202  might exhibit “ink jet, dot peen, chemical etch,” and this order may have been determined based upon cost or other factors. 
     Further, the GUI  1200  comprises text box  1204  for displaying the current part number and a text box  1205  for displaying the current part common name. Further, the GUI  1200  comprises a “DPM Techniques Advantages and Limitations” menu  1208  that shows each of the DPM techniques included in PML  214 . The menu comprises pushbuttons  1210 - 1213  that, when selected, displays the advantages and limitations associated with each DPM technique. Menu  1208  provides a laser bonding button  1210 , ink jet button  1211 , chemical etching button  1212 , and dot peen button  1213 , and if the facilitator  101  selects, for example, the laser bond button  1210 , the PML  214  displays GUI  1300  of  FIG. 20  for PMS team reference purposes. The GUI  1200  further comprises a text box  1288  for entering data indicative of a technically appropriate DPM method chosen by the PMS team for marking the part as a result of the algorithm. 
     GUI  1300  provides a summary of the advantages and limitations corresponding to laser bond DPM. In this regard, the GUI  1300  may comprise a box  1302  enumerating the advantages of laser bond DPM, which may include that laser bond parts marking is resistant to high heat, is unaffected by salt, fog, and/or spray, exhibits the best resolution, is consistent, and is a non-contact application. On the other hand, the GUI  1300  may comprise a box  1304  enumerating the limitations of laser bond parts marking, which may include that the laser bond parts marking is limited to the work enclosure, it cannot be used to mark on a painted surface, and it is time intensive. GUI  1300  in  FIG. 13  displays advantages and limitations specific to laser bonding, however, other techniques will be correlated with other Advantages/Limitations for display in GUI  1300  in other embodiments. 
       FIG. 21  is a flowchart illustrating an exemplary parts marking process of the present disclosure. 
     The facilitator  101  and/or the PMS team identify a part for analysis in step  1402 . Preferably, information relating to the part identified is gathered prior to any parts marking analysis. For example, the facilitator  101  may collect information including a drawing and/or a photograph or a specification sheet corresponding to the part. Furthermore, as described herein, data relating to a part may be pre-populated prior to the analysis in the “General” GUI  600  depicted in  FIG. 13 . 
     The PMS team then determines whether a label analysis is desired in step  1404 . If a label analysis is not desired in step  1404 , then the PMS team determines in step  1414  whether a DPM analysis is desired. 
     If a label analysis is desired, then the PMS team performs a label algorithm in step  1406 . In this regard, the PMS team determines whether a one-part or two-part label, for example, can be used on the part. Further, the PMS team determines a location for the label, adverse conditions that may affect the label, and other installation instructions. Note that such technical limitations corresponding to a label algorithm are configurable and may change depending upon the implementation strategy and the implementing entity. 
     The PMS team then performs a function, functional failure, failure mode and failure effect analysis related to the application of the label on the identified part in step  1408 . The PMS team then determines consequences related to the label falling off in step  1410 . 
     Based upon the information obtained in steps  1406 ,  1408 , and  1410 , the PMS team provides a recommendation on the type of label to use in step  1412 . 
     If a label is not desired in step  1404  or in addition to recommending a label in step  1412 , the PMS team then determines whether direct parts marking (DPM) is desirable for the part under analysis in step  1414 . If DPM is not desirable, then the analysis ends. However, if DPM is desired, the PMS team analyzes each DPM technique that is pre-populated in the PMS  100  and whether one of the pre-populated DPM techniques can be used on the part in step  1416 . 
     After the PMS team determines the types of DPM that are technically appropriate for use on the part, the PMS team then determines a recommendation of a DPM technique based upon the PMS team analysis and a prioritized list pre-populated of DPM techniques that may be used to mark the part in step  1418 . 
       FIG. 22  is a flowchart depicting architecture and functionality of exemplary PML  214  ( FIG. 2 ) of the present disclosure. 
     The PML  214  configures parts marking options based upon implementation strategies in step  1504 . For example, an implementing entity may identify that it is technically appropriate to use labels and specific DPM techniques to mark parts. Such information is used to configure the PMS  100  such that options are made available to the PMS team during analysis to reflect the implementation strategies. 
     The PML  214  then stores data indicative of a plurality of parts for marking in step  1506 . The PML  214  then receives data indicative of parts marking options corresponding to at least one of the parts in step  1508 . 
     The PML  214  then stores data indicative of the determined best parts marking alternative and receives data indicative of a marking procedure corresponding to the selected alternative in step  1510 . The PML  214  generates at least one report associated with the best parts marking alternative and marking procedure corresponding to the alternative in step  1512 .