topic Re: Model State - Inventor 2022 in Inventor Forum

Model State - Inventor 2022

admaiora — Thu, 08 Apr 2021 14:49:38 GMT

No question this time... Just wow!

So many things unlocked with Model States!

Thanks @ChrisMitchell01 and to the dev team.

Great stuff!

Re: Model State - Inventor 2022

ChrisMitchell01 — Thu, 08 Apr 2021 15:21:52 GMT

Hi Adrian,

The real credit here goes to PM/XD/Dev/QA teams who have worked on this diligently, with a real customer focus, for the last couple of years. I'll pass on your Thanks accordingly 🙂

We're looking forward to seeing the ingenious ways that Model States are leveraged going forward.

Cheers,
Chris

Re: Model State - Inventor 2022

Paul.Normand — Thu, 08 Apr 2021 15:51:13 GMT

Thanks for the kind words!

To help you get started using Model States, there are 2 new guided tutorials in the gallery; one for parts, and one for assemblies. Set the filter in All Available GT gallery to Recently Added to float them to the top.

Feedback welcome!

Cheers,

Paul

Re: Model State - Inventor 2022

creggo — Mon, 12 Apr 2021 10:11:15 GMT

This looks great, cant wait to get 2022 installed and give it try.

We had to give up with iParts as the derived children don't maintain feature patterns which are essential for our assembly building.

Is it fair to say this is a complete replacement for the iParts workflow?

Also, how does the model state instances interact with representations? eg are the LoD/View settings applied across all instances, or can you define for each instance?

Craig

Re: Model State - Inventor 2022

PaulMunford — Mon, 12 Apr 2021 11:02:40 GMT

Hi @creggo We released a blog post today that might help answer some of your questions:

https://blogs.autodesk.com/inventor/2021/03/24/whats-new-2022-model-states/

Model states don't replace iParts (iParts aren't going away) but they can be used to create component families in the same way. The difference is that Model states only have one file to manage (no separate Factory and Member files).

View representations remain global, not per-model state, but there is some overlap. For example - Model States could be used to save different Appearance options (Like View representations) or they could be used to override/supress assembly constraints to show components in different positions (Like Positional representations).

Does that help?

Re: Model State - Inventor 2022

robertast — Mon, 12 Apr 2021 11:16:18 GMT

I join in thanking the Autodesk team. The ModelState is a great tool that opens up many new possibilities. But what I missed first is the ability to change the solidbody name to respond to the ModelState state.

idea

Re: Model State - Inventor 2022

creggo — Mon, 12 Apr 2021 12:38:18 GMT

Hi @PaulMunford , thanks for that. Excellent blog post - cleared up a lot!

Will it be possible to take existing iParts and convert, or copy the row data into there own instance?

Either way, it will serve us greatly to finally have single file configurable parts. Our Vault has a staggering amount of duplicate parts for the smallest of variations.

Cheers,

Craig

Re: Model State - Inventor 2022

swalton — Mon, 12 Apr 2021 13:08:43 GMT

As I understand it, Vault is only aware of Model States if you use Items. Otherwise Vault just treats a file with Model States as the master and does not display any information about any of the other model states in the file.

Re: Model State - Inventor 2022

brandon.rodriguezN68U2 — Mon, 12 Apr 2021 17:51:02 GMT

What's the difference between model states and representations for assemblies?

Re: Model State - Inventor 2022

Paul.Normand — Mon, 12 Apr 2021 20:17:46 GMT

View and PosReps are unchanged. The chart on this page may help:

https://help.autodesk.com/view/INVNTOR/2022/ENU/?guid=GUID-B4BF053A-265D-45A3-9563-DEBCF1D6631B

Level of Detail Representations did not impact the BOM/parts list and were strictly a memory management tool. They have been retired. Unlike LOD's, each model state can have unique iProperties and DOES impact the BOM.

If you need separate files that can be managed and released, use iParts/iAssemblies.

If you want a single file, then use Model States.

Cheers,

-Paul

Re: Model State - Inventor 2022

johnsonshiue — Mon, 12 Apr 2021 21:27:39 GMT

Hi Brandon,

On top of what Paul mentioned here, the main difference between Model States and other Reps is in geometry, parameters, and properties. Each Model State can have different geometry (feature suppression or parameter values), different parameter values, and different Properties (mass and most of the iProperties). Instance-level BOM property override (Default vs Reference) is captured. Suppressed component is deducted from the BOM table.

You may document a design in different states without having to create multiple files. Also, the annotations (MBD, 3DA, and Drawing) all react to Model State appropriately.

Many thnaks!

Re: Model State - Inventor 2022

robertast — Tue, 13 Apr 2021 02:25:47 GMT

@johnsonshiue написал (-а):
Instance-level BOM property override (Default vs Reference) is captured. Suppressed component is deducted from the BOM table.
Are you really responding properly? Will this happen in the future? 😉
Here

Re: Model State - Inventor 2022

PaulMunford — Tue, 13 Apr 2021 08:07:54 GMT

@creggo I am not aware of any migration tool for iParts to Model states. You can open the iPart table in excel, so it wouldn't be difficult to copy the row data out, and then copy it back into a model state Excel table.

Re: Model State - Inventor 2022

mcgyvr — Tue, 13 Apr 2021 12:45:14 GMT

@PaulMunford wrote:

Model states don't replace iParts (iParts aren't going away) but they can be used to create component families in the same way. The difference is that Model states only have one file to manage (no separate Factory and Member files).

@PaulMunford or others..

iParts/iassy are just staying around to support legacy data right?
Is there any reason to use iparts/iassemblies on new designs other than thats just what a company has done in the past?

Any benefit to iparts/iassy that model states can't currently do?

I'd assume that model states will continue to get updates/improvements while iparts/iassemblies are essentially just frozen in time now.

Re: Model State - Inventor 2022

PaulMunford — Tue, 13 Apr 2021 12:54:06 GMT

@Anonymous iParts are still needed for adding libraries to content center, and because iParts generate individual member files, they can be tracked in Vault (basic) individually*. So there might be a couple of reasons to keep using iParts for your standard components.

I imagine that Model states might replace custom iPart members? I also think that Model states might be more useful for representing components that are adapted during assembly, but that don't have separate part numbers. For example - a plate that is designed to be bent to the required angle during assembly.

I expect that there will be uses for model states that we haven't thought of yet - I'll look forward to hearing what you do with them!

*Vault professional can track each model state which has a seperate part number using the Items master, so individual files aren't needed.

Re: Model State - Inventor 2022

admaiora — Tue, 13 Apr 2021 13:02:39 GMT

Just 2 points:

The first is important. When you display a Part List in a drawing (and there is a model state with suppressed comps) we see:

COMPONENT XX QTY 0

Componenets with zero qty should be set invisible as defaults

The second,

if you use a multibody approach and you have model states with different bodies just make not visible in the Bodies folder the non existent bodies in that Model State.

At the moment if will see all the bodies, visually, in the Bodies Folder.

If I have 10 Model States with 50 bodies teorically present in each model state I will see always 500 bodies in the Bodies Folder, even if they are empy/non-existent.

I see big pontential too in trhe multibody/model state approach

Re: Model State - Inventor 2022

admaiora — Tue, 13 Apr 2021 14:17:11 GMT

@PaulMunford wrote:

@Anonymous iParts are still needed for adding libraries to content center, and because iParts generate individual member files, they can be tracked in Vault (basic) individually*. So there might be a couple of reasons to keep using iParts for your standard components.

I imagine that Model states might replace custom iPart members? I also think that Model states might be more useful for representing components that are adapted during assembly, but that don't have separate part numbers. For example - a plate that is designed to be bent to the required angle during assembly.

I expect that there will be uses for model states that we haven't thought of yet - I'll look forward to hearing what you do with them!

*Vault professional can track each model state which has a seperate part number using the Items master, so individual files aren't needed.

Actually Model State are suggested for component (CC) families.

At least it seems from this picture:

Not sure that it cool be (at the moment) possible to pubblish CC as Model State

Re: Model State - Inventor 2022

johnsonshiue — Tue, 13 Apr 2021 17:07:42 GMT

Hi @robertast,

Yes, I think my statement is correct as of 2022. The BOM property I was talking about was the instance BOM Structure property (Default -Doc Setting vs Reference). This particular property can be configured for any instance in a given Model State. For example, you have Part1:1 and Part1:2. Both roll up in one row since they are the two instances of the same part. Now, for Model State1, Part1:1 can be set to Default BOM Structure, while in Model State2, it can be set to Reference. In this way, Part1:1 will be counted in MS1 but discounted in MS2.

Please note that this is limited to BOM Structure property, not Item Number or Instance Properties, which are not yet supported in Model State.

Many thanks!

Re: Model State - Inventor 2022

johnsonshiue — Tue, 13 Apr 2021 16:44:49 GMT

Hi Brian,

I personally think iPart/iAssembly and Model States are two different things for different purposes. There could be some overlapped. But, the problems they are trying to solve are different. Like I have said repeatedly, iPart/iAssembly were meant for creating library components. The members are individual components and they are clearly defined on the table. Once they are authored, they should be locked up in a library folder without changing frequently. As we have seen, due to lack of Model State-like workflows before, iPart/iAssembly have been leveraged for that purpose. Users can easily get into confusing behaviors: regular vs custom, sick drawing annotations, and incomplete update (out of sync member).

Model State on the other hand is more flexible. First, all the variances are stored within the same file. Second, it can be treated like one component in multiple states (stages) or several components wrapped in one. Updating process is much straight forward. Each state can be documented easily without much rework.

Many thanks!

Re: Model State - Inventor 2022

robertast — Tue, 13 Apr 2021 16:51:16 GMT

I totally agree with @johnsonshiue ModelState is a new but very great tool and I will have to learn how to use it to my full potential. Many of us will have to replace old thinking...