Attn: Tube & Pipe Genius' - cbenner are you out there?

[jeanchile]

Hello Chris (or anyone else who has input really),

I've been recently tasked with investigating the use of Tube and Pipe for our skid designs and have come across many of your informative posts on the matter. Let me first thank you for being such a valuable asset to this community. You're answers are always complete and very helpful and, for someone digging around on the site, it makes using older posts like that very easy.

I am wondering if you have any more advice for someone looking to implement this tool into their workflow. The gems of wisdom I have come across (and copied into my research notebook) so far are:

1.) Always constrain your routes to the main assembly planes

2.) Avoid AutoRoutes at all costs (I'm not sure why yet)

3.) Fully constrain your 3D sketches but find a way to allow necessary degrees of freedom (revisions)

4.) Be prepared to rebuild routes on occasion

5.) Use the "Piping runs.iam" template to create every conceivable rule then you can delete the ones you don't need out of your current file

6.) Devise a system for placing CC components into a route that makes sure you get the right one

7.) Rough in the route with a 3D sketch and then lock it down with dim's and constraints

I am going to apologize for my ignorance in advance as this is a tool that I have just started seriously investigating. Questions that I have:

1.) Do you draw independent 3D sketches for your routes somehow or are you using the "route" command for your 3D sketches (I think you have to use the "route" command but I don't really know)?

2.) We hardly ever use 3D sketches so I'm curious how you use geometric constraints on your 3D sketches? When we have used 3D sketches in the past we always follow JD's suggestion of using a 2D sketch to control them. I'm not sure that works in the T&P environment.

3.) I've been through the T&P tutorials and I've read the chapter in Curtis' book but I'm still not sure how you are able to draw the route first with no dimensions, can you elaborate on that? It seemed from the tutorials that I was right-clicking and entering numbers a lot.

4.) What advice do you have on allowing the predictable degrees of freedom in a design? I'm not sure I completely understand how you do this (especially if I am entering dimensions as I go).

5.) I remember seeing somewhere that you named your styles off of an "in-house" specification and then end treatment and then size. Is the size you use the NPS or is it an ANSI pressure class or schedule?

Thanks (to you and anyone else who would like to chime in) for all of the good information!

[cbenner]

---

@jeanchile wrote:

1.) When I populate a route and IV creates all the part files, it says in Curtis' book that the files are saved to the standard CC part file location mapped in either the project or the application options. Does this mean that all the part files created by T&P are standard parts that are not editable afterwards? I need to be able to populate a route and then add project specific information to them that changes every time. If the flanges T&P creates cannot be edited after they are created this investigation is over.

The fittings that are being generated for the first time, which you placed from the CC, would be saved to the CC location.  As such they are not directly editable if placed "As Standard".  Generic information (non project specific) can be added to these parts via the CC Family Table, and then performing a Refresh Standard Components.  Pipe spools, and any CC components that were placed "As Custom", will go to whatever location you specify.  The pipe spools go into the folder you specify when you create the Pipe Run... As Custom CC parts prompt you for a save location.  These components are editable via the BOM or iProperties., and you can add any project specific info to them.

2.) We don't use pipe "schedules" around here. Everything we do is using the decimal wall thickness. E.G. pipe is called out in the parts list as PIPE 6"SCH. 80 / XH / 0.432" W.T. but when we select it from our custom CC parts the keys are just the Nominal Diameter and Wall Thickness, not schedule or class description because it's the only property that exists for every pipe. Is this going to be a problem when we create all of our new pipe and fittings (i.e. does Inventor need us to use the schedule number somehow)?

The Key columns in a CC Family Table can be changed to show whatever you want... and if the information you want to show is not in the family table already you can add columns to the family table very easily, then set them to key columns.   You can also then map these or any other columns in the family table to iProperties on the part, so that they get populated when the part is generated.  For CC parts that have already been generated, you would need (after editing the Family Table) to place these in an assembly, save and then do a component refresh. (Manage tab\Refresh)

3.) This is a weird question but... Has anyone ever considered just using frame generator to place all the pipes in there and then use the end treatment tools to adjust the lengths around the fittings? I know this is not going to be as efficient as using the T&P tools but depending upon the way this thing pans out, we may not be able to use T&P anyway.

Personal opinion.... I would probably cut off both of my thumbs before I attempted to use FG for a piping system  .... as hard as T&P is to work with sometimes (ask my co workers about my stress levels right now), any other method pales in comparison.  We used to build these things using adaptive pipe spools and standard assembly constraints... NIGHTMARE scenario!  Here is a sample of my current project, in progress...

http://forums.autodesk.com/t5/inventor-general-discussion/friday-pictures-11-14-14/td-p/5403845

---

---

Hope I was helpful!

---

[jeanchile]

Thanks Chris!

On question one: I'm familiar with the difference between items placed "As Standard" vs. "As Custom" but thank you for the explanation. I guess what I am asking is... when I am creating a route and IV is populating the route with the pipes, flanges, and elbows, do I have a choice in forcing Inventor to place everything "As Custom"? We are certainly not going to create a custom CC library for every project (using Replace Family Template or otherwise), we just want everything to be created in the project folder structure somewhere as an editable part. Because we are documenting this process "soup-to-nuts" we need to be able to assign MTR #'s, project specific mark numbers, etc. (via iProperties) after the files are created.

And on question three: I figured as much but it wouldn't be that different than what we do now which is exactly what you guys used to do before T&P. It sounds like my company is in the exact same position yours was a while ago which is why you are such a valuable resource!

Thank you, and please let me know who to send the emails to lobbying for a cbenner raise (or paid day off or something), you deserve it!

[salariua]

Glad to have Chriss input. I have been thinking reading your post all mornig, thinking about frame generator for tube and pipe.. and can't see any benefits.

---

@jeanchile wrote:

I have a few more questions for you genius' when you have some more time:

1.) When I populate a route and IV creates all the part files, it says in Curtis' book that the files are saved to the standard CC part file location mapped in either the project or the application options. Does this mean that all the part files created by T&P are standard parts that are not editable afterwards? I need to be able to populate a route and then add project specific information to them that changes every time. If the flanges T&P creates cannot be edited after they are created this investigation is over.

You can view this as shortcome or workarounds but I've been working with several ipj, files (projet files) on the same Job. You can declare a project for your tube and pipe with local path to content center generated iems and another project one level above that has Central content center paths and that can edit everithing all levels down including the previous cc files generated with tube and pipe project.

Why would you do that? An elbow is an elbow no matter where you use it. Are you talking about having tags on valves, and instrumentation? Use the assembly browser name (occurrence name). This is a nickname that the assembly uses. 

Here's a recent video I posted about tube and pipe, it's rather long and boring and It was late in the night when I did it. I am alone in the office and the overtime took the best of me but nonetheless it's a good info.

http://blog.ads-sol.com/2014/11/tube-and-pipe.html

And here's how I do the valve tags:

http://blog.ads-sol.com/2014/10/part-tagging.html

http://blog.ads-sol.com/2014/08/component-tags-in-inventor.html

I know it's not standard procedure but we'll get it implemented, you'll see :). I've been thinking about this solution for years but didn't had the skils, knowledge, to do it.

2.) We don't use pipe "schedules" around here. Everything we do is using the decimal wall thickness. E.G. pipe is called out in the parts list as PIPE 6"SCH. 80 / XH / 0.432" W.T. but when we select it from our custom CC parts the keys are just the Nominal Diameter and Wall Thickness, not schedule or class description because it's the only property that exists for every pipe. Is this going to be a problem when we create all of our new pipe and fittings (i.e. does Inventor need us to use the schedule number somehow)?

I don't use schedule, I use ID/OD in my styles.

3.) This is a weird question but... Has anyone ever considered just using frame generator to place all the pipes in there and then use the end treatment tools to adjust the lengths around the fittings? I know this is not going to be as efficient as using the T&P tools but depending upon the way this thing pans out, we may not be able to use T&P anyway.

I can't see any benefits for using frame generator. You don't evern have triad, can't drop fittings, .... on an on... 

---

---

---

[cbenner]

Adrian,

I'm going to take a look at your tagging code... I like that!  Maybe after AU I'll have time to play with it.  nicely done.

[jeanchile]

Thanks gentlemen!

Adrian,

We have to add project specific information to all of the components in a pipe run. We have to track Material Test Reports from the mill who produced the fitting and pipes and depending upon the clients (sometimes it's our clients' client) we sometimes have mark numbers (or part numbers) that are specific to the project. Everything that my company has ever placed from Content Center (5 years now) has been placed "As Custom" and stored withing the folder structure for that job. The only CC families we use right now are the structural ones that we modified from the IV stock ones. We use Frame Generator a ton but that tool places all the part files as custom so it's never been an issue.

The tag number iLogic you developed is likely something we will need because even though we place the valves "as custom" we don't create a new valve file for each placed component. That means when it comes to valves and instrumentation we will need something like your code for that.

The two questions I need answered before I move on are below and if you'll continue your generosity and can help me with some answers I will continure to be grateful (I'm still grateful even if you choose not to help ):

1.) Can Inventor T&P be forced to place everything in the tube and pipe runs "As Custom" from Content Center?

2.) If not, can you explain this project file-nested-in-another-project file thing a little further? Are you saying by creating another project file (under the jobs main project file) that somehow you can edit these tube and pipe components that IV places "As Standard"?

[jeanchile]

Okay, so if T&P won't let us place "As Custom" fittings then it's possible we can do our MTR tracking someplace else and tell our clients we can't accomodate their custom part marking schemes. But, another issue we have is all the different grades of piping materials we need to use (ASTM A105, ASTM A694 Gr. 42, 52, 50, 70, ASME SA105, ASTM A350 Gr. LF2). If the fittings are placed "As Standard" we can't change this after the fact.

Sooooo.... I have one more question:

3.) Once I create a brand new flange iPart, author it to a Tube & Pipe Component, and publish it to Content Center. Can I copy that family and change the material grade with the Content Center editor (thus mainting all the T&P Authored Data)?

Because I just figured out that to develop the rules for our piping specifications I am going to need 350 families of just the flanges . And that's only if do the ASME B16.5 ones (we use B16.47 on occasion).

[salariua]

still thinking abut your posts,

coupe of question though.

- Do you trance EVERY elbow and tee or THE LOT OF ELBOWS used for a project ?

- Can you use an unique internal number that will hold all the info you need in a separate place, database, excel, pdf, ? Would assigning each component an unique number suffice?

[cbenner]

---

@jeanchile wrote:

Okay, so if T&P won't let us place "As Custom" fittings then it's possible we can do our MTR tracking someplace else and tell our clients we can't accomodate their custom part marking schemes. But, another issue we have is all the different grades of piping materials we need to use (ASTM A105, ASTM A694 Gr. 42, 52, 50, 70, ASME SA105, ASTM A350 Gr. LF2). If the fittings are placed "As Standard" we can't change this after the fact.

Sooooo.... I have one more question:

3.) Once I create a brand new flange iPart, author it to a Tube & Pipe Component, and publish it to Content Center. Can I copy that family and change the material grade with the Content Center editor (thus mainting all the T&P Authored Data)?

Because I just figured out that to develop the rules for our piping specifications I am going to need 350 families of just the flanges . And that's only if do the ASME B16.5 ones (we use B16.47 on occasion).

---

Ok... first, you CAN place fittings "As Custom", and specify a location for them such as a project folder.  Doing that would allow you to edit each one and put whatever info on it that you needed.  That is one option... though to me it sounds like a lot of extra work.

But to answer your question, yes.... once a part is modeled, authored and published to the CC... the entire family can be copied using "Save Copy As" (in CC Editor, right click on a family) ... and then the new Family Table edited to make whatever changes are needed.  Also a lot of work, but in my opinion (and this is our approach) it's better to do the extra work once, up front.  In our case each individual part only gets one part number, it doesn't vary by project (some exceptions of course for special stuff)... so this approach works well for us.  I don't know your exact circumstances, but between the "place as custom-edit" and "create a million families - place as standard" methods you should be able to find some nice middle ground.

Bottom line though, committing to anything as major as this is going to take a lot of setup time.  I spent probably 6 months just geting our base libraries set up for T&P.  And it is an ongoing thing as we add new materials, new fittings and valves, methods of construction etc.  My content center is getting huge.  

[jeanchile]

---

@salariua wrote:

- Do you trance EVERY elbow and tee or THE LOT OF ELBOWS used for a project ?

---

Yes, we would like to trace every elbow with it's own unique MTR. We may order 27 elbows and get 3 from this part of the country, three more over here, etc. They are all produced at different mills and all have different material test reports thus different heat numbers. The "best-case-scenario" working for us would be the ability to use T&P but still use iParts within the route but there are certainly work-arounds I think we can develop for this provided the items are all placed "as custom". I realize this means we will still only have one elbow part file for the 27 placed in the route but at least that one elbow would be editable. Then I just need to figure out the best way to store 27 different heat numbers for the same part file (but I believe there is an answer in your Tag Number example, I just need to figure it out).

---

@salariua wrote:

still thinking abut your posts,

- Can you use an unique internal number that will hold all the info you need in a separate place, database, excel, pdf, ? Would assigning each component an unique number suffice?

---

Yes, we can do that (and already do to some extent). Right now we have a parts list column on the drawings that is blank when it's issued to the shop. When the shop fabricates the spool piece, they hand-write the heat number in the blank parts list column. Then the drawing is given back to us and we manually edit the parts list and type the heat number into the column. This means that it is not associated to the part file in any way and that is what we are hoping to fix.

There are essentially two problems here and one and a half of them can be solved if T&P will create all the parts "as custom" and save them to the job folder somewhere.

Thank you so much for the help!

[jeanchile]

---

@cbenner wrote:

---

Ok... first, you CAN place fittings "As Custom", and specify a location for them such as a project folder.  Doing that would allow you to edit each one and put whatever info on it that you needed.

---

YES!! Can you enlighten me as to how you set it up to do that? Once we're done modeling a project we open up the BOM editor and run through the stuff there to assign the mark numbers. It's really not that time consuming because all the other information is there, we just need to add the mark numbers to the components.

I'm prepared to invest the time needed to set this up but it is a huge task like you said. That's the whole point of my company's Software Implementation Study is to make sure it will do everything we need it to before we spend the time to set it all up and have it fail.

You guys have been so helpful and if it wasn't for the two of you (and your respective blogs) I would be floundering still!

[cbenner]

---

@jeanchile wrote:

---

@cbenner wrote:

---

Ok... first, you CAN place fittings "As Custom", and specify a location for them such as a project folder.  Doing that would allow you to edit each one and put whatever info on it that you needed.

---

YES!! Can you enlighten me as to how you set it up to do that? Once we're done modeling a project we open up the BOM editor and run through the stuff there to assign the mark numbers. It's really not that time consuming because all the other information is there, we just need to add the mark numbers to the components.

If you want to set it up so that ALL content center parts go custom, you can set that in the Applications Options under Content Center tab.

Otherwise, when you place a fitting there is a button there to specify an override to whatever you set here.

If you choose custom in either way, you will be promted for a location to save the files.  Be aware that doing this will create multiple copies of essentially the same model on your project space, so you will probably want to make sure file names are unique as you save them... also this will increase the disk space needed to store your projects.  Not that you don't know this already,... I just love to play Cptn. Obvious!  

I'm sure I speak for Adrian when I say that we're more than happy to help where we can.

[jeanchile]

Thanks Chris! And, thanks again for your blog. I re-read all of your tube and pipe posts again last night (it's been a few weeks since the first time I read them) and they are a huge help. I wish I was headed to AU this year as I would absolutely be enrolled in your class. Both my kids' birthdays are that week so it's always too hard to get down there. One year we're have birthday parties in Vegas though (they're 2 and 6 so they gamble my riches away)!

Now, on to the business at hand. Our application options have always been set that way (we don't place a CC component unless it's custom) but from my testing it appears that T&P still puts the fittings in a common "as standard", un-editable, location. The pipes are something we can edit, and are stored within the project folder as dictated by the dialog box when the run is created. The fittings, however, are stored either where the project file points them or, in absence of a project specific setting, where the applicaiton options point them.

It seems that T&P ignores the "as custom" application option settings .

Thanks again for the help! I know you're busy with your work project and AU coming up. Feel free to set this thread aside until you have more time. We're just studying the implementation of this right now, not actually using it for any work yet.

[jeanchile]

---

@cbenner wrote:

---

 Not that you don't know this already,... I just love to play Cptn. Obvious!  

---

And, you're not being Captain Obvious for my benefit! I stated at the beginning of this thread (3 pages ago) that my intent was to summarize all of the vast knowledge of guys like you and Adrian here for others as well. I thank you!

[salariua]

cbenner wrote:

If you want to set it up so that ALL content center parts go custom, you can set that in the Applications Options under Content Center tab.

Sorry to be a bad sport and ruin this again but my Inventor Options are always set to AS CUSTOM and yet there is no setting to populate routes with fittings in my folder. They go straight to Content Center default location.

You can pace fittings as custom but elbows and tees created with populate route go straight to default CC folder, and I bet it’s the same for flanges, adaptors and everything you setup via styles.

Im sure I speak for Adrian when I say that we're more than happy to help where we can.

You are correct again.

jeanchile wrote:

We have to add project specific information to all of the components in a pipe run.

I used to do that too, drag-drop or copy-paste a project number in BOM Project info.

The tag number iLogic you developed is likely something we will need because even though we place the valves "as custom" we don't create a new valve file for each placed component.

The good thing about occurrence name (browser name) is that if you change size, or replace component the tag stays the same. If I change the valve to a different size (or even file) the tag is still the same. This might be a bad thing for you, or just a thing you need to keep in mind and consider.

I think you should not use nested projects at this point (I can explain it if you want) but consider this new functionality:

Complete you project by whatever means, don’t think about tags, names, identifications, just finish the project as best you can. Use my code or develop similar to rename the browser nodes. Find ( I can help you with the code) a code that will process all files and do a “save replace for all components” (maybe just tube and pipe components) with the Browser Name as the Filename. This way you lock it in place and each item becomes unique in the assembly and on disk.

The reason for this drastic measure is because one of your engineers might use the “rename browser nodes” and revert all your tags to default, or part number or description, depending on what he selects in the “rename browser nodes” window.

If you have created the drawing as I’ve shown you with tags in it then it’s not so bad because you can send the values from the drawing back to the model browser name but I doubt that you will tag each and every component.

can you explain this project file-nested-in-another-project file thing a little further? Are you saying by creating another project file (under the jobs main project file) that somehow you can edit these tube and pipe components that IV places "As Standard"?

Let me see if I can structure it for you.

Project folder

1 Project ipj file (will have CC as 2 and Workspace as 3)

2 Project Content Center Folder (all the standard items you don’t need to track and change, this is read only in Project 1)

3 Project Workspace (where all the files will be)

   3.1 Tube and Pipe ipj file (another project file, will have CC as 3.2 and Workspace as 3.3)

   3.2 Tube and Pipe Content Center (editable from Project 1 but not from 3.1, this is so you force your generated T&P CC items locally, and be able to edit them from Project1)

   3.3 Main assembly folder

      3.3.1 Tube an pipe (Inventor created folder, where all the T&P spools, routes, rouns files will be)

      3.3.2 Main Assembly.iam (containing the tube and pipe subassemblY

You generate the Tube and Pipe assembly with project 3.1 but when you need edit it's components and CC items you switch to Poject 1 that can edit everything in 2, all levels underneath

“ Once I create a brand new flange iPart, author it to a Tube & Pipe Component, and publish it to Content Center. Can I copy that family and change the material grade with the Content Center editor (thus mainting all the T&P Authored Data)?”

As Chris has mentioned, you can use the material wizard that will copy the library (keeping the link) into a new family where you will have different materials. You only need to add items to the very first family and all will update (should, used it long time ago and need to check again).

If possible I would push as many together as possible in same family (will be very slow on large families) because if you reference it in the route and pipe you might lose the reference when changing with a different part. You should be ok because the geometry is all the same, only material change. Face 1 on SS flange will still be Face 1 on ABS flange because it’s sharing same geometry and family table.

If you change the filename and browser name for all flanges then don’t bother, add the material at BOM level. You only do this to keep it unique which you do by placing it as custom and specifying a name every time (or so I get from your post).

We may order 27 elbows and get 3 from this part of the country, three more over here

Then use my code again but add an increment to each component part of the same lot like this:

8023458:1

8023458:2

And then have the ilogic rule that will do the save and replace look for the first part of the code, ignoring everything after : making one file on disk but replace all with same LOT Code.

Sorry for taking this long but I am alone in the office, still running a blog each week, still helping this forum and try and keep a personal life as well.

[cbenner]

Not even goint to attempt to "quote" all that.  Thanks Adrian for correcting me, I was not thinking about the fittings plces automatically by route population.  Too busy working on my "still".  

[salariua]

Send me a bottle of that booze you're making on your still.

http://forums.autodesk.com/t5/inventor-general-discussion/friday-pictures-11-14-14/m-p/5404011#M5283...

[cbenner]

I can pretty much guarentee you wouldn't want to drink any of this "shine".  

[jeanchile]

Okay Adrian, thank you for the extended information. Please do not feel as though you need to keep crafting your responses in such a quick manner. As I've stated earlier, still just planning, not working on a project or anything.

I've spoken to some of our clients about not being able to accommodate their custom part numbering sequences anymore and we appear to have a couple of solutions on that front. We are still required to submit final documentation on a project that shows the MTR's for each piece used and where it was welded into the assemblies. I haven't fully vetted it out but Adrian's code looks to be the perfect solution to that (we are also pursuing another option by using Acrobat to add "fields" to our parts list where anyone in the company can add the heat numbers directly to the final PDF).

My next question for you fine gentlemen (and anyone else) is related to the ISOGEN data and ".pcf" file output from the T&P module.

Our usual pipe spool drawings look like this because IV won't produce a traditional "line" spool drawing easily.

I don't mind the drawings being formatted like this, and some of our clients actually prefer it now that I forced them to switch, but there are still a few holdouts that would prefer the old version. I am invenstigating the use of T&P to generate this data for us and that would involve setting it up correctly. I saw a post recently about the weld gaps in the T&P styles possibly impacting the correct export of the ".pcf" files.

My questions are:

1.) Is anyone here using T&P to export .pcf files to use in another program and is it a flawless workflow or is it plagued with work-arounds and comprimises?

2.) Is anyone aware of limitations in the T&P module when it comes to ISOGEN output that would put a damper on this whole process?

3.) I've been through all of the documentation and feel good about the procedures I've written for the ISOGEN data but the one specific issue I am trying to resolve is if I show the weld gaps on the "new type" drawings (thus making all our pipe cut lengths accurate) is this going to cause a problem with the ".pcf" file output where T&P is going to export all of the files disjointed where every pipe and fitting is it's own spool?

Thanks for the help. Maybe by the time this thread is complete I'll be able to teach a class on Inventor Tube and Pipe at AU !

[salariua]

This will be a long post... NOT!

I don't use ISOGEN  Out pcf's.

The more I look at your post the mode I think you should have unique PartNumber (FileName) for each fitting / set of fittings (heating group). You can have "Comments" or any other iproperties if you want holding the extra info you need to be called on the drawing.

You could embed a spreadsheet, pdf on each file, if you want but I would do it on the assembly (maybe tube and pipe assembly).