I would like to continue the discussion about iParts and Family tables. Some have said that iParts can replace family tables well enough. I am limited in my knowledge of iParts, because we do not use them. I understand them to be part generators. I see them as a way to create parts quickly without having to reinvent the wheel each time you build a similar part. Please correct me if I'm completely out of bounds, I do not pretend to know everything about them.
My company started to use them for our fasteners and the like, but decided it would be just as easy to "save copy as" and modifiy. The drawback to iParts as we saw it was that you had to keep track of the parent file and keep its location relative to the children consistant. The other drawback was folder creation / naming. Although these are small problems, we have a very well organized file system, and in my opinion, more simple is always better. (just a quick background on why we don't use iParts).
As for iParts acting as a "good enough for now" version of family tables, I don't agree, unless I'm way off base on their uses. It may be true that iParts perform a similar function for parts. Family tables as part of the assembly is the real power feature. Imagine if you will, a product line of forklifts. Sometimes you may want to sell them with 42" forks, 48" forks, an optional buzzer that sounds when it is in motion, an optional red flashing light, etc. Right now, we have to have seperate models just to have the optional flashing light on one assembly, no light on another. Two bills of material are then needed(I know we could and it by hand and not show it or vice versa, but our rule is keep it parametric).
The real problem is revision. If we change the standard battery to a different part number, we have to go out and open every assembly and do the revision instead of just opening the "family" model. Changing one model to revise an entire line of products is what it is all about. The second most benefit is to have a family print set with a family bill of material. A charted bill of material with columns for each instance of the assembly is a wonderful thing. Just think, one ipn showing all options, one idw. It would cut out a lot of work.
Ok, feel free to set me straight on iParts, and make sure you think of all the uses you could find for family tables at the assembly and part levels.
![Autodesk Design & Make Report](https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/1350519iCB55845EBFC43016/image-size/large?v=v2&px=999" "Autodesk Design & Make Report")