Non Traditional Revisioning Method

[DonovanJr]

I am posting this to the communitiy to solicit comments on the issues we have with our Revisioning method.

We design equipment for our own use on projets we execute for our customers. The equipment we design is custom to our application. We reuse the equipment designed for one project on multiple future projects, each time modifying the design as needed to fit the project.

So unlike a manufacturing model for revisions where we want a living history of the revisions of our design, our revisions consists of a series of modifications made to an existing assembly and we generate a drawing specifically to represent the last modifications to that piece of equipment.

This was easily done in Autocad as we would just create the modificatotions in model space as we needed and make a new layout to show the new details. with inventor we have been trying to duplicate that senario by placing the previous version as an instance in a new assembly file and use the 3D modeling to add any new machining features as well as then add any new parts. The dificulty comes when we have to actually remove components from the original assembly. We cannot change the original assembly as that would change any point of use drawings for our projects. I.E. I need each POU assembly to retain it's original equipment revision detail.

This is easer to see in the attached PDF, and as you can see we are accomplishing the revisioning by continually making copys of the latest versions as well a assembly reference file. This forces us to make assembly and machining details in both models, essentially doing the work twice. This is done to break the reference to the POU project files.

We then add the new models to the already existing Items and make them the primary references to update the BOM utilized in downstream purchasing activities.

Question is using multiple models and Component replacements can we develop of sequence that succesfully ensures we break the link and not have to duplicate the changes in the two reference files for a revision

Hope this makes sense

Bob Donovan

[cbenner]

Question:

When you change these things for a new project, do you retain the model or drawing or project number on all the new documents, or does the new project get a new number or name or whatever.

Vault will keep track of older revisions and versions of a drawing as long as you don't purge them.  So if you keep the same drawing numbers, and make changes to the models or parts etc and revise everything in Vault, your old revisions should still be accessible.

Am I understanding what you want to do?

[DonovanJr]

Cbenner,



Your close,



The identifier for the piece of equipment remains the same (I.E.
Equipment Number).



The key is that we want to show the revision to the assembly as a
modification to an as built assembly



We do this by inserting (placing) the current version assembly file into
a new assembly file (I.E. equipment ID Rev 1) and then add parts and
machining details, then create a new drawing with the same drawing
number (Equipment ID) as a Rev 1 from that assembly model.



So we are not revising but always creating new files and calling them
our revision. Because in some instances we need to remove parts we need
a way to do that without affecting the original assembly file and that
is where after the second revision we need to start building a new file
as our baseline and incorporate the changes from the previous version so
we do not have to change the assembly file from revision 1. See the
attached workflow map



Because we know we will eventually have to duplicate the changes in two
models and to create a process with less decision making for the
designers we have adopted a workflow where we start off by making copies
of current version and incorporate the changes in both from the start.



Hope that makes sense.



Bob Donovan Jr.

QA & Process Improvement Mgr

Bigge Crane and Rigging Co.

Email: rdonovan@bigge.com

Direct: 804-325-8390

Mobil: 804-543-0347

[swalton]

I have a client that sometimes modifies an existing weldment several years after it was first built.   My workflow is as follows:

1. Create a new ipt file.

2. Save it as a new filename/part number.  (our rule is that file name=part number)

3. Derive the existing weldment (a normal iam, we don't model welds) into this part.

4. Use the derive operation to remove any components that will be cut off the weldment.

5. Use part features to add cuts, threaded holes, etc to the modified weldment.

6. Place the ipt in a new iam file and add the new components.

7. Make a new idw.

This works for me because I don't have to issue revisions/re-model any old ipt files and it reflects the "shop-floor" practice.  I can suppress or delete the link between the derive feature and the source iam file if I want to ensure that upstream changes do not flow into my new revision.  I think this workflow limits you to one material for the derived part. That works for me because my weldments are all steel.

[mikel_martin]

I think there are two ways to handle this scenario using Vault.

The revisioning functionality for files in Vault Workgroup and Pro was built to handle this exact scenario.

When you create a revision in Vault it spans multiple versions. This means that you can keep making new changes to the current revision.

When something is referencing a given revision of a file, we maintain a revision to revision relationship. If a part is given a new revision the assembly does not automatically consume that new revision (optionally).

So in your scenario if you create Assembly1 Rev A using Part2 Rev B, and then created Assembly1 Rev B using  Part10 Rev A. You can open Assembly1 Rev A at any time and it will be using Part2 Rev B. Even if Part2 is currently at Rev C.

The other way is to use Copy Design to easily create new Copies of the entire structure. This works but you often end up duplicating more files than you probably need to.

Hope this helps.