I've been working on a project that involves fasteners. For the sake of discussion, imagine a very special Nut and Washer combination where all their "specialness" is in the mating components of the two parts, and each washer is specific to each nut. Because there are so many dependent dimensions between the two pieces and so many variations (every metric and SAE standard fasteners size plus many special ones) an iParrt has proven a robust want to model this pair - I only have about 60 rows at present but will very likely end up with something like 400 rows.
The struggle comes every time I have to produce shop drawings. Each piece can be sufficiently detailed on one sheet, and everything works fine for the first part I set up. I use Solid Body Visibility to only show the part I need and away I go. Trouble is, If I make a new drawing as a copy of an existing one and then change to another iPart, the Visibility checkboxes no longer produce any effect. They act like they are going to, but they do nothing.
I have tried View Representations that isolate each part which would be a perfect solution, but of course it does not work in the Drawing environment for some unknown-to-me reason.
It is a big waste of my time to have to keep redrawing these things every time - I am seeking other workflows that might be more reliable. Because there are so many special cases, dimension tables are not a good option. Any other suggestions?
Alternative suggestion: Use iLogic.
iParts are OK when you have 40 variations and a limited number of permutations of the design, but 400, or 4000, (or 135,000 as we had on one job) then you are going to get into a mess.
When you use "Place iLogic" in an assembly, it actually creates a copy of your source part. This can present its own problems, but a single iLogic driven part can hide/show bodies, change dimensions, suppress/unsuppress features, even "build" part numbers (or other iProperties) based on the selections made during its configuration. What you can end up with is a single part with as many configurations as you could possibly need, without a table, and each instance is unique - therefore editable in isolation from all others.
Sorry - I misunderstood. When you said "I am seeking other workflows that might be more reliable. Because there are so many special cases, dimension tables are not a good option." I presumed you meant that the whole workflow needed a rethink.
Hi! iPart is not yet capable of configuring Design View ot part level. For these invisible solid bodies, do they serve any purpose in the iPart member? Or, do they need to be present in certain members? You can use Delete Face -> Lump option to remove unwanted body and the feature can be controlled on a per member basis. Would it work for you?
Thanks, Johnson but yes, both solid bodies are required. I just need to show one at a time when making drawings.
There seems to be drawings functionality that attempts to address this (being able to Select Solid Body Visibility per View) but it's broken and only works intermittently.
I have considered making two iParts for each assembly - one showing each body - but then I'm duplicating data in two rows which seems like a fantastic way to cause problems as well as doubling the number of rows.
Access a broad range of knowledge to help get the most out of your products and services.