Routed Systems length parameter to Part Number/File Name

[cbenner]

In the Content Center, I can edit a Pipe Conduit part's family table and modify the length column so that it is a Custom Column.  I add a length range, similar to how it is done on stock Frame generator profiles.  So far so good.  I also set the column for my file name (which is mapped to project.description so it will show up as such in parts list), as a string like:  "PTFE Spool " {designation} " x " {length}.  Designation is set to show the size formatted to match our purchasing system.  (1" is shown as 100.  Weird, I know)  The entire string then for a 1" x 12" spool would be:  PTFE Spool 100 x 12.

In an assembly, if I Place from Content Center, As Custom, a member from this family, the File name and Description parameters show up as shown above.  Just like I would want them to.  But here's the rub, and (sorry so long winded) the IDEA:

In Routed Systems, once I am in a Pipe Run or populating a pipe route, if I follow the same process of Place From Content Center as Custom, the spool piece comes in with the Filename and Description as:  PTFE Spool 100 x .001.  This is also true of any spools being created by populating a pipe route.

I'd like to see consistensy of pushing these Family Table values out to the part, regardless of wether it is in an assembly or in a pipe environment. 

Did I make any sense? 

[brimal]

I can't seem to even get this far.  I still have the problem that Part Number in the spool piece doesn't populate at all (although the description does).  See older thread:

Authoring Tube and Pipe Conduit

I've tried formatting the Part Number in the Content Center two different ways:

="96"&{SCH}&{DC}&" - "&{PL}

96"&{SCH}&{DC}& - &{PL}

SCH = Pipe Schedule

DC = a diameter code

PL = Pipe Length

BrianM

[howardlee306]

What I've done is copied the family I want to use a s my routes. I create a custom column in the family table and make it my part number. I then link that column to the "Authority" iProperties. When I populate a BOM in an .idw I format the part number column to use a substituion of Authority. I works with no real issues, just took a little longer during set up.

[lesmfunk]

GREAT IDEA cbenner !!!

I also would like to see tube and pipe populate the part number, description, etc from the CC table such as {STOCKNUMBER}x{PL} for a part number.

raymondlee306's workaround does not solve the filename issue. But I think a unique filename might still be required; the difficulty is the possibility that two routings with the same length might end up with the same filename. Technically they are the same part number in the company inventory, but inventor creates them as completely different features.

I would also like to see the minimum bend radius in the styles to be populated from the CC family table based on diameter of hose/pipe. Right now, the minimum bend radius rule is the same for all diameters within a style. Do I have to create a style for each diameter? I already have to for each type (i.e. 100R1AT, 100R2AT, etc) due to physical differences. This might be a different request altogether...

[lesmfunk]

I just discovered how to get it to do what you want for description and part number but not filename.

After you create your route, right click on the hose/tube and "change size". Just don't change the size and click "OK".

You will have your partnumber and description populate with length exactly the way you want.

The filename is another issue.

WARNING!! DO NOT CHANGE LENGTH WHEN YOU CLICK CHANGE SIZE!! YOU WILL NOT GET THE ORIGINAL LENGTH BACK WITHOUT RE-ROUTING THE HOSE/TUBE!!

(I posted this in the original discussion as well)

http://forums.autodesk.com/t5/Inventor-General-Discussion/Length-in-Routed-Systems/m-p/5190373#M5172...

[jingyi.liu]

In Inventor 2016, there are some update on Tube & Pipe setting dialogue, you can enable Part Number setting and inherit its value from Content Center, so the Pipe length will be shown in the Part Number.

 

Thanks,

Jingyi Liu

[dan_szymanski]

Implimented in Inventor 2016 as stated below by @jingyi.liu.  Thanks!