Community
cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Add 'Phantom' as a BOM Status option within the Assembly Environment.

Add 'Phantom' as a BOM Status option within the Assembly Environment.

Currently, you can set BOM Status in two different locations; within the part (which applies in every assembly in which the part is used), and in an assembly itself (via the feature tree right click menu), which obviously applies to only that assy.

 

As it stands, the only options available for BOM Status within an Assy are Normal and Reference.  Whereas if you set the BOM Status at part level (or via the parent Assy BOM window), you have access to the full five options, Normal, Inseperable, Purchased, Reference and Phantom.  Why can't the full range of options be specified at both locations?

 

As an example, you'll frequently set parts as Reference within an assembly, for a number of reasons.  Perhaps they're called up somewhere else, are owned by a customer etc; there's any number of uses.  But what if you want to maintain the mass properties of that reference part, without it actually being called up in the BOM.  Well, unless you're happy to set the part to a Phantom in All assembiles, you're stuffed.  You can't.

 

If we added an assembly BOM option of phantom however, it would solve this problem.

16 Comments
mikeh4
Collaborator

If you set an IAM's BOM Occurrence to Phantom at the iam level, the parts that would normally be in that BOM get move to the next level up IAM BOM.  So if you can over ride the BOM Status of a sub component IAM to phantom, what does inventor do with the components that go into the  now phantom iam.  Does it take them to the next level up? That would be my assumption of what invenotor does with them if that feature was available to flip them to Phantom within a parent IAM.

 

MichaelFarrow
Contributor

Yeah, exactly so.  The components within the sub assy would be shown as being part of the parent assy, while still actually being structured within that sub assy set as phantom.  But it would do this only in the current parent assy, not everywhere the sub is called up.

mikeh4
Collaborator

I come from a manufacturing sector where a given part number (assembly) can only exist in 1 state, either phantom or normal.  We can't build a part phantom one day and not phantom the next, so I'm having a hard time understanding why Phantom from the example you gave.  I'm thinking it might not be the correct term.

 

I do see your need to pull a part into an assembly as REF and be able to include mass etc of a given object that your not manufacturing.  Say for example youdesign a trailer and you have the cargo modelled and want have the weight of the cargo included in the total weight, or gross weight.  So I see the need for maybe a REFERENCE with Mass option, rather than Phantom based off the example you gave.  Or give a check box option on a REF item to include MASS?

MichaelFarrow
Contributor

Yep, this would work, for one of the two problem scenarios.  Ref with mass would certainly get me half way there.

 

The reason for needing a phantom in just one location is slighly more obscure.  Let's say you have a common sub assy of several parts, which you use in several locations.  In most of these locations the sub can be installed as one lump, but in just one place, you need to install things in a slightly different order.  The first half of the sub assy, before some other component, and then the second half of the sub assy.

 

Now obviously, I could just break the sub, copy and paste its child parts into the parent assy.  This requires several operations and would probably include having to re-create some mates along the way.  Wouldn't it be much easier if you could simply right click on the sub, and set it as a phantom.  This would make it effectively transparent, and have exactly the same effect, but for much less effort.

 

Personally, I wouldn't consider the term phantom to relate specifically to a build state, and be rigidly fixed in that way.  I consider phantom to be more of a way of viewing an assembly.  It is after all just a list of parts, and where it appears.

Curtis_Waguespack
Consultant

A typical example of the intended purpose of the Phantom BOM structure, would be a fastener kit such as this:

 

QTY) Part Number - Description - BOM Structure

 

Assembly A

      |__ 0) 12-301 - Fasterner Kit - Phantom

             |__   😎 08-205 - Cap Screw - Purchased

             |__   😎 08-278 - Lock Nut - Purchased

             |__  16) 07-004 - Flat Washer - Purchased

 

 

When Part Number 12-301 is placed in Assembly A, the BOM will not show the Kit, but only the parts within it.

 

So this BOM structure allows us to have the parts predefined in a subassembly that ensures consitencey and accuracy, so that we don't have to worry about getting the wrong size nut for instance, or worry about getting the wrong quantity washers. This all works well.

 

If this IdeaStation idea were implemented, we would be able to show the fasteners as "loose" parts in the BOM of Assembly A, and show  them as a Kit in Assembly B.

 

Assembly A

      |__ 0) 12-301 - Fasterner Kit - Phantom

             |__   😎 08-205 - Cap Screw - Purchased

             |__   😎 08-278 - Lock Nut - Purchased

             |__  16) 07-004 - Flat Washer - Purchased

 

Assembly B

      |__ 1) 12-301 - Fasterner Kit - Normal

             |__   😎 08-205 - Cap Screw - Purchased

             |__   😎 08-278 - Lock Nut - Purchased

             |__  16) 07-004 - Flat Washer - Purchased

 

You could even set instances of the subassembly to have different BOM Structures in the same assembly:

 

Assembly C

      |__ 1) 12-301 - Fasterner Kit - Normal

             |__   😎 08-205 - Cap Screw - Purchased

             |__   😎 08-278 - Lock Nut - Purchased

             |__  16) 07-004 - Flat Washer - Purchased

      |__ 0) 12-301 - Fasterner Kit - Phantom

             |__   😎 08-205 - Cap Screw - Purchased

             |__   😎 08-278 - Lock Nut - Purchased

             |__  16) 07-004 - Flat Washer - Purchased

 

 

I can see this flexibiity being quite useful, so I'll give it a kudo in support of Autodesk as least investigating it.

 

I'm not sure I see the point about Mass, but I might just be missing something.

 

There would also have to be some thought given to how people would use this to create BOM configurations, as this would start to blur the lines with iAssemblies.

Mark_Wigan
Collaborator

yes it has been a pain to live with the present limitations. i aggree that it would be good to be able to set parts or assemblies as phantom within parent assemblies, without impacting those parts or assemblies themself as stand alone files, or in other locations or situations that they exist or reside would be a much welcomed enhancement.

TheDrizzle
Contributor

 The reason I want this ability is so that I can generate a parts list of the total number of subcomponents in a bunch of assemblies. I.e. have an assembly with a bunch of subassemblies (normally set to Normal) to tally up the total number of parts in these subassemblies and generate a parts list from this.

 

Unless there is already a way to do this?

pr33d
Contributor

Has there been any progress on this matter?

 

We usually create assemblies that that require an extra (top) assembly/drawing to exlain context and put item balloons in. This means that we would require the assembly to be phantom in the descriptive/installation drawing but when the assembly is inserted into another assembly it should act as a regular subassembly.

 

I guess it could be done by creating an extra empy assembly and make one phantom and one normal.

 

Bracket assembly 1(normal)                            This one would be inserted in other assemblies

     Bracket Assembly 2(phantom)

          Brackets

          Nut Washer

 

Descriptive assy with  drawing (this now has bracket assembly 2 BOM and item balloons of  bracket assey 2 can be placed in the drawing

      Wall (reference)

      Bracket assembly 2 (phantom)

 

 

frankstardelux
Enthusiast

 

This seems to be a long standing problem that really needs fixing! And it's not limited to the Phantom status either.

 

I've been playing around with taking a part in an Assembly and changing it's BOM structure. See the 2 circled items below. The female D9 connector has had it's BOM Structure status changed to "Reference". But I only want this change to be realised within this Assembly.

 

BOMStructure01.PNG

 

However, if I save and close this assembly, and then open up the part itself, the BOM Structure has changed and will therefore effect ANY Assembly that uses it. In another Assembly, I would like the BOM Structure for this part to be "Purchased" but it seems that I can't have both! This is a behaviour that needs fixing!

 

And I can't honestly believe that this behaviour has been talked about for such a length of time without being resolved. There needs to be a 6th option of "Default" within Assemblies which would use the setting stored within the part, and when this setting is changed within the assembly then it needs to be an override and store this setting within the assembly itself. This allows for different people working with files in different ways to either set a global change or a local change.

frankstardelux
Enthusiast

Two really frustrating discoveries that I've just made...

 

Firstly, using the R-Click menu within an Assembly tree and setting the BOM Structure to "Reference" doesn't change the properties of the part itself (see below). More frustratingly, if I'd set the Male D9 connector to "Reference" on the part itself and then in the assembly set the Female D9 to "Reference" using the method below, and then going into the Bill of Materials for the Assembly, it looks as though the two parts have the same BOM Structure even though 1 is globally set and the other is locally set. There is no discernible difference making this an easy difference to miss. [If you have a sub assembly within an assembly then the below option will be blanked out. You need to go into (edit) the sub assembly to get at these options].

 

BOMStructure03.png

 

Secondly, in my previous post I mentioned introducing a "Default" option to help get around these issues. Turns out that this already exists!!! (see below). I do a lot of VBA coding to run through big assemblies and pull out Part Numbers, Stock Numbers, Descriptions, etc from the iProperties of all the Sub Assemblies and Parts. What you'll see below is a snippet of VBA code showing you the available options for the BOMStructure and the Default option is there ready to go. Why oh why isn't this implemented and used within Inventor!?!

 

 

 

BOMStructure02.PNG

 

 

 

rhenstenburg
Advocate

This is an old thread by now but I would like to bring it to the forefront again. 

 

We make moving components where mass is important and must constantly be tracked.  There are many cases where a component is called out to be fabricated in one place but is included elsewhere, e.g. an installation assembly, where a components needs to have it's mass represented but not be fabricated.  The suggestion above of including a sub in an assembly and allowing a "REF with Mass" override would be most useful for me. A great suggestion by @mikeh.

 

Another suggestion made in the above thread by @frankstardelux would also find useful ... allowing a Phantom override in an assembly.

1) For a sub which is a part, this would include the mass of the part.  The question now becomes, how to present that part in a drawing:  use "reference", similar to a REF part (which can be changes) or regular lines (indistinguishable from Normal parts).  Careful thought required here.

2) For a sub which is an assembly, this was illustrated best by @frankstardelux when discussing kitted and un-kitted fasteners within the same assembly.  This capability would be useful in multiple scenarios.

rhenstenburg
Advocate

Good thoughts from @MichaelFarrow@frankstardelux@pr33d@TheDrizzle and @Mark_Wigan 

 

Came across another use for this feature:

We purchase items from a vendor that can be purchased individually or with two to three items combined into a single P/N.  When we purchase the combined item, we only want to see the combined P/N on the BOM but when we buy the individual item we need those to show up in the BOM (so I don't want to change the individual parts to Phantom or have two versions: one Purchased and one Phantom).

 

Current solution: create a purchased ass'y, bring in the individual components and make them REF in the assembly. 

PRO: The individual parts are unaffected (which is necessary).

CON: Weights of the individual components are lost (workaround:  set a mass override in the ass'y).

CON: Can't balloon the assembly because all the contained parts are REF (workaround: create a Phantom part overlaying the purchased part in the purchased ass'y, a balloon can point to this - can also assign mass to this).

 

These workarounds are OK but not optimal.  It would be great to be able to 1) REF a part but include its mass in the ass'y  and 2) balloon to this assembly in a superior ass'y (the ass'y itself is not REF and the REF with mass parts would have to allow attachment of balloons).

cstilesMQLJM
Explorer

This gets a vote from me, and I'd vote again if I could! For me, it'd mainly be for a "reference + mass" usage, though I could see why others may want to use phantom assemblies on a by-occurrence basis.

 

I have had many situations over the years where I've needed to represent components (including mass) within a model or drawing, but didn't want them to show up in the BOM. Most often is with a modification or retrofit job, when I need to represent components where some already exist and will be re-used (hide from BOM), and further occurrences will be added (include in BOM) - for example, a pipe flange. It would be amazing to be able to use the same model to represent both new and re-used occurrences of the same component (flagging the latter as "phantom" or "reference + mass").

 

This is one of those things that seems, to me at least, to be such an obvious feature people might need, that not having it is akin to MS Word not allowing you to make text bold, italic, and underlined all at the same time. Sure, most people may not use it most of the time, but it's really helpful when someone needs it!

MichaelFarrow
Contributor

So, some seven years since I first raised this, and there's still no way of including the mass of a reference item within an assembly.  Barking mad!

 

Let me provide a more recent example.  We have been developing a specialist vehicle for a customer, who has a lot of their own kit in designated stowages around the vehicle.  Throughout the development of this vehicle, we have been tracking the mass and CofG accurately, to ensure we don't exceed axle loads or CofG limits.

 

Now we're into the final stages of design, and drawings are being created.  In order to prevent the customer's kit from being called up in our BOM/on our drawings, it has all been turned to reference.   And hey-presto, the vehicle is suddenly a ton lighter than expected, and we are unable to accurately track the CofG.   The only way of ensuring that last minute changes to the design, or positioning of the customer's kit don't push the vehicle outside limits is to find each and every item of their kit within the BOM and turn them all back to Default.   Every time.

 

The fact that this capability still doesn't exist, when it would be so simple to implement completely baffles me. 

llorden4
Collaborator

I too have made similar requests on this issue, but also a wish to have a flag for an "Option #".  My conditions:

A static submittal drawing for repeating customers who desire a design that show all possible options, who plan to repeatedly request an order with different options with each order.  A filtered BOM display (like you can do in Mechanical Desktop for decades now) to display specific data in a table/BOM display on paper.

 

And

 

I have automation & routines that generate parts & shapes based upon the features & placement of other items of the same assembly within a single assembly file.  The assembly must then be broken down into three different sub assemblies... some parts are Demoted to part attached to a mating assembly, some parts are Promoted (once or twice) to be in a top level assembly to be part of a shipped separately group (fasteners, packing materials, etc), and the remaining components remain to create the the essential features of the assembly part.  Being able to individually flag parts within an assembly would make this process a lot less sloppy.

dpeters2
Enthusiast

Hello Autodesk???

 

This is simple, basic functionality that has to be implemented.  Just add all the possible BOM structures as options for local override in the assembly.

 

OR, allow different BOM structures for different Model States?  That way in a model I can have Master with the Normal BOM structure, and "Phantom" model state with the Phantom BOM structure.

 

Stop messing around with UI "enhancements" and fix these functionality issues!

Can't find what you're looking for? Ask the community or share your knowledge.

Submit Idea  

Autodesk Design & Make Report