Frame Generator Rounding (Part Number and G_L)

[gcoombridge]

Hi All,

I have been playing with this blog post to round the G_L parameter using custom property format and incorporate it in the part number for frame generator components. http://blog.ads-sol.com/2014/04/frame-generator-and-content-center.html

This works very well - however as discussed by ADS it does not persevere when the frame member is replaced by another section (with the same edit). You can change the size but not the section... You must delete the member and insert again which is not ideal for parts with bolt holes etc...

The reason I am interested in this is I sometimes have members that are so close they round to the same length but still display as separate entities on the parts list (due to subtle platform falls, bracing etc...). These then need to be edited to be resolved into the same entry. Have any of you found work-arounds for this (that don't involve manual BOM manipulation)?

Cheers,

Glenn

[johnsonshiue]

Hi Glenn,

I thought in Frame Generator, you could edit the frame member and change the frame spec (type and size). Is it not working for you? Did you insert the frame from content center without using Frame Generator?

Many thanks!

[gcoombridge]

Hi Johnson,

Thanks for the reply! Changing the frame generator member works fine but my edit to the custom property format returns to default 3.123 precision when I change the frame member type/section (but not size). I have replaced the family template as discussed in the link above.

What I am looking to do is have frame generator round the G_L parameter to the nearest mm and add it to the part number. Then on my parts list instead of using the QTY column I will use a G_L column and name it QTY and have an ITEM QTY to give cut number. This means that all frame members within 1mm of each other will be listed by their length in the same row. This sounds fussy but I often design platforms with floor fall ~1:50 and as a result members can have very subtle length differences.

All of this works fine - as discussed in the blog post but there seems to be a bug when you change section (i.e. angle to channel) that reverts it back to the original rounding. If you delete the member and add another one of a different spec it respects the rounding instruction...

I'll make a small library and post it here for you to look at if I get the chance latter on today.

Thanks,

[jtylerbc]

This sounds like a version of a problem I've seen for several years.  It seems to either manifest slightly differently in different versions, or my memory of the details has faded since it first appeared.  The circumstances for when it happens is what seems to vary, but the consistent thing is that the Custom Property Format settings for Content Center structural steel are not reliable.

When I first noticed the problem, I discovered through testing that it only affects the Autodesk-supplied parameters.  If you add your own user parameter to the CC family, it will not have the same issue.  So my solution was to set up my own parameters, set them equal to the Autodesk parameter, and use mine instead of theirs.

[cbenner]

@johnsonshiue 

This is very similar to an issue I reported long ago, and recently provided a video for.  The CC family table dimensions are set to fractional units.  Placed members have fractional units.  But as soon as you modify a member, from the same CC family, the new member reverts to decimal, three place units.  I believe I sent this to @dan_szymanski or Steve Dennis.  I know I've mentioned it many times over the last few years.  Sounds like this may be related.

[jyager]

I spend way too much time editing parameters to go back to fractional units after a part update switching to decimal and screwing up the BOM. The kicker is...when you go into the fx parameters, the part that "switched" to decimal STILL says fractional in the custom property format. Seems the easiest way to send it back fractional (since it already says it is) is to click apply to existing comparable units.

[cadman777 · Accepted solution]

Yup, same problem here in 2010, just like Chris describes.

My work-around was quite a PITA, b/c it took days to accomplish.

It also really messed up my work-flow for a while till I got used to it.

Here's what I did:
REAUTHOR all the CC parts and add a new user parameter in the Parameters dialogue.

I called it G_LL.

Then Export and format that user parameter to whatever you want.

Then insert G_L into the value field of G_LL.

Then in your BOM you change the variable G_L to G_LL.

Then no mater how many times you change your CC parts in an assembly, they ALWAYS show up with the right units and desired format. No more SPLIT QTY BOMS of same parts!

When I did a lot of handrail and other wireframe driven assemblies, this problem was a real KILLER until I fixed it, b/c in order to fix the offending parts when the customer changed the dimensions of their platform or building, I had to INDIVIDUALLY OPEN EVERY PART THAT CHANGED and reformat the G_L parameter. How can you CHARGE a customer for your SOFTWARE problems??

So that's my work-around.

Conclusion: A week of reworking the CC saved untold hours of work over the course of time, esp. on BIG projects (like one project that had over 200 tons of steel!).

Incidentally, I believe I learned this trick from Salariu. Like my parents used to say: GIVE CREDIT WHERE CREDIT IS DUE.

Cheers ...

[Anonymous · Accepted solution]

Formatting the G_L parameter may give you unstable results when it comes to formatting (I learned this the hard way).  You need to create a user parameter that references the  G_L parameter and format that new user parameter.  This new parameter then can be referenced in your Description and Part Number (refer to the blog post).  This will make all parts that are different lengths, but round to the same length, show up as multiples of the same part in your parts list.  You should be able to change the size and end treatments and the part will keep it's dimensional formatting.

Now if you modify the FG part by adding holes and try to replace it with a different family, you will loose you holes.  If you keep in the same family, you will keep the holes, provided you dimensioned them appropriately.  I attached a pic of an example part that has 2" cut from end using FG.  Notice the difference between B_L and G_L.  Notice my user parameters, i use those instead of "G_x" parameters when creating my part number and description in my family table.

[jtylerbc · Accepted solution]

What @cadman777 described is essentially the same workaround I mentioned, just explained in more detail.  The user-created parameters don't exhibit the problem, so creating your own stand-ins for the Autodesk-supplied parameters will get you around it.

---

@cadman777 wrote:

REAUTHOR all the CC parts and add a new user parameter in the Parameters dialogue.

---

This may just be vague wording, but in case it's a literal explanation of what you did, I would point out that it's not actually necessary to completely reauthor the CC families.  All you actually have to do is replace the family template.  Going completely back through the authoring wizard would probably work, but is more than you really need to do.

[gcoombridge]

Thanks everyone! Using a secondary parameter is working and replacing the family template is not a burden as I was going to do that anyway to enact the G_L rounding (I was cautious enough to only try it with two families to start with).

[cadman777]

jt,

Yes, you're correct.

I Reauthored all the parts b/c I wanted to use them in a unified workflow that works for not just for the FG.

The down side of Reauthoring is you break the link with all your past assemblies that contain your previous CC parts.

Cheers ...

[cadman777]

jc,

I'm glad you didn't take my advice!

But with all things, you have to do your own research to make sure it's what you want.

Cheers ...