Subject:
|
Re: Sorting strategies [was: Re: Rebel Blockade Runner . . . Holy Moly ! !]
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.storage
|
Date:
|
Tue, 7 May 2002 22:59:48 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
5047 times
|
| |
|
|
Frank Filz <ffilz@mindspring.com> writes:
> William R Ward wrote:
> > > The key to efficient sorting is lots of compartments, and regularity
> > > is good. My "small plates" tray, a 24 compartment Advent Calendar
> > > tray, can be used almost without sight since I've trained my hands
> > > to know which bin is which - this tray has compartments for almost
> > > every small special plate and tile (though the ones which still go
> > > in 3700 Plano boxes all go into one compartment).
> >
> > I don't think this is necessary for efficient sorting. I just pick
> > out a handful of pieces of a given type, then put them in their bin,
> > and then a handful of pieces of either the same or a slightly
> > different type, and repeat.
> >
> > But then, I'm not as meticulous about sorting as some people. I do
> > not make any effort, as a general rule, to put only identical pieces
> > together. I sort all of my LEGO into only 21 drawers (plus four Plano
> > boxes for the Technic bits):
>
> Obviously you have a much smaller collection. Believe me, the sorting
> problem gets worse as you get more pieces. To get an idea, I'll try and
> relate how much of each of your 21 bins I have...
[snip inventory of huge collection]
If my collection was as big as you describe, I would probably still
have only 21 (or a similar number) categories. Each category might
correspond to a stack of bins, though (Probably each ziplock in my
current collection would correspond to a small-medium bin or large
bag). I'd have a collection in active use about the same size of my
current collection, or maybe up to double that. Everything else would
be stored or "warehoused" if you like, in a garage or storage locker
or something. When I run out of something, I'd restock; if I got too
many of something, I'd move some to storage. There's no need to have
everything at your fingertips with a collection that large.
I don't want to spend my life sorting. If you try to sort each of the
thousands of distinct elements into its own bin, bag, or whatever,
you'll spend way too much time sorting and not enough time building.
There's a trade-off in time spent raking (or otherwise searching for a
part among many others) and time spent sorting. I prefer to find a
middle ground.
The size of what you're sorting, however, could be problematic. If
you've just bought 50 Rebel Blockade Runners, then clearly that would
pose difficulties. But in most situations it's only a small- to
medium-sized MOC or at most a couple of LEGO sets to sort, which
could be done with the active portion of the collection.
What do you *do* with such vast quantities of LEGO?
> A couple problems:
>
> - I haven't found a good cabinet with larger drawers than the IRIS
> cabinets (which is why I use the large Rubbermaid tubs).
There's no need to have all of your dark grey BURPs together. Why not
keep a reasonable stock on hand and put the rest in a cool, dark place?
> - If you go much larger than the large IRIS drawer, you will find that
> shuffling through it for small parts takes too long.
IRIS makes bigger drawers, but the cabinets get expensive quickly.
And they wouldn't hold up well to the weight of lots of LEGO parts.
I know what you mean though - all through my childhood my entire LEGO
collection was stored in a dresser drawer, about 3 feet by 1 foot by 9
inches. Totally unsorted. I spent many hours raking to find that
special part. I didn't discover sorting until years later, when I
used Rubbermaid bins to sort by color (what a nightmare that was).
I'm quite happy with my present system, though.
The reason I recently sorted my Nx4 drawer (a separate baggie for each
size and color, plus one for all the odds and ends) is precisely this
- I was working on a model that used up all of my green and brown and
dark grey bricks, and finding the last few was a chore (turns out I
missed at least one brick, which turned up when I was sorting that
drawer).
> There's a fine balance between number of "bins" (where a "bin" is a
> single compartment) and enough separation to be able to find low
> quantity pieces. Also, the more sorted you parts are, the easier it is
> to tell how many of any given part you have. It does help to have a
> hierarchical storage system (where multiple "bins" are combined into one
> logical unit, like a Plano 3700 box, or a tub with a bunch of smaller
> boxes or bags inside).
That's why I have baggies. It's easier to find a baggie of low
quantity pieces than to find one piece loose among many other types.
Sorting all the low quantity pieces into Plano boxes however, would
drive me insane. I like having the freedom of having loose pieces in
the drawer alongside the baggies.
Using baggies also allows me to be lazy and have a few loose pieces in
the drawer; but since those loose pieces are smaller in number, it's
quick to find a particular one.
> > Sorting for me is a multi-stage process. Say I'm disassembling a
> > model or a new LEGO set I bought. I'll grab up pieces that go into
> > the same drawer and then drop them in that drawer. Later I'll go
> > through drawers and sort them on an as-needed basis. There are
> > usually some loose pieces mixed in with the bag, as a result.
>
> Multistage sorting is definitely necessary beyond a certain point. My
> primary storage takes to much space for efficient sorting, so my first
> stage sort goes into various trays, bins, and tubs. Some parts are so
> common that they get close to a final sort during stage one (the small
> plates for example).
I think I'm right about at the breaking point where multistage sorting
becomes necessary.
> > The categories that are bagged are generally by type, with pieces of
> > all colors, and perhaps pieces of similar function, mixed together.
> > Transparent pieces (mostly space canopies) and slopes are grouped by
> > color instead. I use small Ziplock bags from the local plastics shop.
>
> I use Hefty brand "Slidelock" bags in freezer weight, quart and gallon.
> Sort is first by shape then by color (though bags of bricks are sorted
> somewhat by color, but mostly "normal" colors and "special" colors).
I find that for some things sorting by color makes sense. For example
if I'm building a spaceship I need to find all the windows of a
particular color and that has some influence over the design, since I
may not have enough of X part in Y color. (I try not to just buy
whatever I need, because I don't have the budget for it, and to some
extent it takes away from the challenge of working with what you've got.)
> > If I need to dig through the contents of a bag to find a particular
> > part, I'll dump the bag out into a plastic bowl (one of the new
> > disposable bowls from Ziplock), find what I want, and then pour the
> > bowl's contents back into the bag.
>
> I find a lot of times with a clear bag it's easy to spot one of the
> parts you're looking for and migrate it to the top of the bag where you
> can easily fetch it out.
Yes, that works most of the time. But sometimes it is easier to dump
and pour. It depends on how big the bag is, how full it is, how big
the part is, etc. etc.
--Bill.
--
William R Ward bill@wards.net http://www.wards.net/~bill/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
AMAZING BUT TRUE: There is so much sand in northern Africa that if it were
spread out it would completely cover the Sahara Desert!
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
17 Messages in This Thread:
   
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
