Tube and Pipe update failures

[Mid-State]

I am using IV 2012 Pro and modeling a plant that has misc. equipment all interconnected by piping runs. I created the equipment models and several specific pipe styles as well as authored a few custom valves, etc. The customer has redesigned the equipment layout three times in the last two months. Each time they do, some of the pipe runs follow their associated equipment correctly and some do not. It's been frustrating to say the least. Whenever the run has valves (be they custom or content center) it seems that the valves hold their position in space and pipe tries to follow the equipment. I end up with a mess of **** each time and end up deleting the entire tube and pipe runs to start over. 

I have constrained the equipment by groups to minimize the back and forth runs. Basically I can move a group of equipment by changing one of a set of master constraints. I have three groups. I was hoping that this would keep the pipe runs inside the group to remain unchanged as their inter-relation inside the group never changes. This is not what happens. The equipment moves, some of the pipes update correctly, some hold their position in space, and some leave valves or fittings behind and also try to maintain connections to the equipment.

What am I missing in regards to why most of the runs go haywire on me?

I may go back to assembling the lines without T&P just for peace of mind. I like the tool but unless I can figure what the programming shortcoming is I have no other solution.

I'll attach a screen shot of one of my groups post customer move. 

[-Aaron-]

I have this problem as well in 2010 from time to time.  I need to pay attention to the automatic constraints that the module puts on routes as I go.  I delete the auto constraints once they are placed and re-constrain my routes to planes. Also, the perpendicular constraints that the module puts on the starting part can have an effect if you move your components around. I have noticed that a Rebuild All in the parent assembly doesn't re-route the pipe for me.  I have to activate my T&P subassembly, then click the Rebuild All and maybe an Update before my routes go back to where they are.

I've also noticed that if you edit a parts connections through the RMB menu and reconnect to a different part, when updating the route, the connections don't follow.  I would need to go through the RMB menu again to get the part locations to update.  My workaround to this is to just delete the part and re-insert it into the assembly then it will follow once I play with my route.

I know not an answer to your dilemma, but maybe a few tips for the future.  The T&P module is definitely not perfect and does need some work.  I use this about 80% of the time.  Attached is one of our projects I did all the piping, tubing and conduit in the T&P module...

[NicolasXu]

From my point of review, whether the pipe runs follow the associated equipment group depends on how you create/constraint the route segment.

Here are a few points you may consider during creating pipe runs:

•  How and where was the valve positioned? Via "Insert Fittings" or assembly constraints? Sometimes, as Aaron mentioned, you may need activate the run sub-assembly and rebuild all to get it updated.
•  Are you using Auto Route solution or manual route? AutoRoute will reset to the default solution in most cases during update, so when the route is complex, we may convert AutoRoute to sketch for better control of piping direction.
•  If you are using manual route, is it the route Fully constrained? And how were the segment constrained, via dimension or constraints? The route lines are actually 3D sketch, we need make sure the 3D lines can update correctly along with the equipment move.

I have worked with a customer on their T&P design project (I cannot show their model due to NDA), and there are some tips from the project. Some items might be specific to that project, but others might be useful for you. Please refer to attached PDF.

Thanks,

Nicolas 

[-Aaron-]

Nicolas, good PDF.  Will definitely keep this one...

[Mid-State]

I used the insert fittings choice to place valves. Basically I accept the auto routing unless it fails to follow orthogonal routes or tries to pass through equipment. That means I manually route 75% of the time. Rather than dimensions, I use parallel and perpendicular constraints to define the route. It seems to allow for flexibility when there are slight mismatches between start and end points. What I've been considering is inserting my groups of equipment as a pre piped assembly into the master assembly. This buries the majority of the routings one level down and changes to the group's position will not affect internal runs. Only the group to group routes need to update. What are your thoughts on this? Btw, thanks for the PDF. Very useful!

[NicolasXu]

I think moving internal runs one level down could be a solution in the case. One thing I can think of is the change in BOM structure. Whether the new BOM structure (for Tube & Pipe components) is acceptable, comparing to the previous one?

Another thing could be: there might be some I/O between groups, saying flange, when creating the internal runs, the internal run need connect to the flange. Do we need refer to another group when positioning such flange? If yes, is it convenient to position?

Just my 2 cents,

Thanks,

Nicolas

[cbenner]

As someone who has been using T&P for several years now, my advice is simply do not use Autoroutes... period.  Convert all routes to sketches and then constrain these to geometry like any 3D sketch.  You can use "Include Geometry" to bring in work planes based off of you equipment, and then constrain or dimension to those.  I always leave at least on leg of my route un-dimensioned for growth or shrinkage... as needed.  If moving your equipment is going to require adding bends, I usually break the connection at one end, move the equipment, and then edit the route to re-attach it to the new position.  There are a lot of trial and error tricks to T&P, but it is ithe best piping program I've used so far... even though some days it has me pulling out what's left of my hair! 

[Mid-State]

I'm taking pieces from the last two posters and combining them to save me grief in the future. Thanks to you both. I also found another solution; tell the customer to make up his **** mind where the equipment goes! That seemed to work (along with billing them for an extra couple hundred hours of design time). No more equipment moves = no problems. The customer complained that IV is "too limited" and perhaps that his Microstation was easier for making changes. I agreed that fencing and stretching would be quicker but multiplies the errors exponetially. They can spend $ up front on good design work or spend it on install extras later. They stayed with IV...

[Strucc.c]

Just one additional idea:

I've been messing with non-updating P&T sub-assembles. Adding and empty P&T subassembly into the main assembly solved the problem.

P.Peter 

[Karl.Leduc-Berard]

This work well!