Deriving part 'dirties' files

[brendan.henderson]

Capture1 had no 'dirtied' files, until I created a sheetmetal part (capture2) and derived the now 'dirtied' part (capture1) into the sheet metal part. Now I can't checkin the sheetmetal part (capture3). And I could not save the sheetmetal/derived part until I chhecked out the dirty FG file, saved and checked in (capture3). Can anybody explain why this file gets dirtied? Using INV 2012 PDS and Vault basic 2012.

This is not the only 'dirty' file problems we have, but it is the lastest. My VAR has a copy of our database and is trying to sort out this and other problems.

[Senthil_Kumar]

Hello,

Can you please send this Dataset to me at senthilDOTkumarATautodeskDOTcom? Please let me know the steps that I need to do to reproduce the issue.

Thanks!

[brendan.henderson]

Hi Senthil.

I am willing to supply the data set, but the trouble is I can't replicate this problem today on this part. Seems the check out/check in I did on it fixed it and allowed me to save the Derived part also.

But if I do the same procedure on another part (on the same FG assy) it does dirty it! 

Dataset (dirtied), procedure and screen captures will be emailed to you shortly.

[Senthil_Kumar]

Thanks for sending the files. I have them now. I see that there are 2 parts (IPT) in the ZIP files.

But I do not see any document explaining the steps that I need to. Can you please send the steps to me?

Thanks!

[Senthil_Kumar]

OK. I got something and want to verify if that is right way or not.

I derived 34974-01200_BK 90998-00026 00000005.ipt into a new sheet metal part. After deriving 34974-01200_BK 90998-00026 00000005.ipt is dirtied.

Is that the issue?

[brendan.henderson]

Yes, that is the issue. I did send the instructions and more screen captures to you by email. But it bounced back. Instructions and screen captures below :-

See 5 screen captures attached. Zipped dataset is 43 meg so I have added it to a 360 and sent you the share.

Capture1 is the FG assy before the derive. Capture2 is the FG part after the derived operation has been done. Capture3 is the derived part. Captures 4 & 5 explained below.

Procedure:-

1. Start new sheetmetal part from template,

2. Finish blank sketch,

3. Switch to Model tab, Derive,

4. Browse for and select file (34974-01200_bk 90998-00026 00000005.ipt),

5. Select 'Body As Work Surface'

6. I then thicken, create workplane tangent to OD, make sketch, add point, exit sketch, then RIP but the file gets dirtied before this step,

7. Save the part file. This is also interesting because the FG part file is set to YES and the status reads 'Write enable (not checked out from Vault)' which is both right and wrong. It is able to be written but should not be. See Capture4. So I changed the YES for the FG part file to NO. But Pack-N-Go would not let me complete the process because the dirtied file had not been saved. So I was forced to save the FG part file. Then I get an 'Error during save' window'. See Capture5. But pressing OK allows the Pack-N-Go to proceed

[Senthil_Kumar]

Thanks for the steps. I am trying to reproduce the issue with the steps. I will come back to you soon.

[Senthil_Kumar]

Able to reproduce the issue after following the steps. I am forwarding this to the development team to take a further look on why the file is getting dirtied. I will get back to you as soon as I hear from them.

Thanks again!

[Senthil_Kumar]

I talked to the concern people and they confirmed that this is as designed. When you use the Part for Deriving, by default nothing (like Body, Parameters, Sketches etc) gets exported. This is to avoid the performance. So they get activated only when you use them during the Derive operation. That is the reason that part is getting dirtied.

Being said that you can avoid this behavior by manually exporting the objects. Open 34974-01200_BK 90998-00026 00000005.ipt, use Manage->Author->Export Objects command to export the required objects, save and check-in that part. Now when you derive this part and use those exported objects the part will not be dirtied.

Hope that helps.

[brendan.henderson]

Thanks Senthil.

So to stop the part being dirtied I have to change the workflow from using 2 files (the master and the sheetmetal derived part) to using 3 files (the master, the Exported part and the sheetmetal derived part). Okay, I can do that although it seems to not be efficient. I now have 3 files to manage instead of 2. 

Update :- just tried the Manage>Author>Export Objects method and it also dirties the part. See screen captures below.

First is before method.

Second is command window with Solid1 selected (not dirtied yet).

Third is after OK is clicked in Export Objects window (see vault tree) and edit popup window.

Now if I click NO to the edit window (capture3) nothing happens and if I close and open the file the dirtied is gone. If I click YES to the edit window nothing happens. There is no file create window or anything (I think I'm missing something here). I just go back to the part screen with a dirtied file and if I try to close this file I get a 'Save Changes' window because this file has been touched (dirtied).

Am I mising a step in the Export Objects command? How do I create this' middle file' to then use for deriving the sheetmetal part?

[Senthil_Kumar]

Thanks for your reply. One initial step is missing. That is to Check out the Part before doing the export.

So,

1. Open the Part

2. Check out the Part

3. Export the Objects

4. Save the Part

5. Check-in the Part

Now if you try to Derive this part, it will not be dirtied.

Hope that helps.

[brendan.henderson]

Yep, figured that out but it still seems wrong. Why does the master part have to be checked out/in just to use it's shape as a reference for another part. We are using Vault basic so bumping versions should not cause problems but it often does. next year we are planning on upgrading to Vault Workgroup, so what will happen then with new versions just because I wanted to use derive.

Thanks for your help Senthil but I don't accept this as a viable or proper solution to the problem. I think the developers should look at this futher with the intent to NOT dirty the master part file and NOT have to check out/check in the master part file.

[Senthil_Kumar]

I understand your concern on this issue. I will forward your concerns to the development team. 

Thanks again for reporting this issue.