Multi user enviroment wihout Vault

[marcoton]

We are making the switch from Solidworks to Autodesk Inventor on the moment. In the middle of the switch I will starting up a project without Vault and I was wondering if you can make a multi user environment in Inventor without Vault. Back in the days we did use the multi user enviroment in Solidworks.

This function basically means that the R/RW modes will handled by Solidworks instead of the windows file system. In your tree you can mark to individually parts/sub-assemblies which should have write rights. With this enabled you can work in a sub-assembly (on other parts) at the same time.

Is there something similair in Inventor ?

[mcgyvr · Accepted solution]

No.. Vault is the only real solution to multi-users in Inventor when those users may need to access the same files. 

Vault basic is included with Inventor and fairly easy to setup on a server/computer.

[marcoton]

Ok thanks for you answer. That is a pity. Vault basic is not really an option since we are already planning integration in vault professionnal but that takes a while (staff shortage)

By the way I found already on these forums and internet semi-isolated proejct but I have the impression I shouldn't go there. Anyone experience with that function?

[Frederick_Law]

First, files on network will be slow and cause lots of problems and crash.

Simply because IV (and all Windows program) expect file access is instant.  Any network delay will cause file access failure.

How IV save file is part of the problem.

When a file is save, it first save as .newver or something like that.

Old file get renamed and new file rename.

So there is 3 operations for the network server to cause delay.

Users already have enough trouble with local server, offsite server and cloud increase the problem exponentially.

Imagine saving a 1000 parts assembly and cloud try to sync at the same time.

So all files should be local hence everyone recommend Vault.

Unless you can separate files and assemblies and let different users work on different part of the project.

Each user update their part to network and download other updated.

[marcoton]

Got it!

[mluterman]

We've been using IV in a non-Vault environment for 13 years (since IV 2009); 5 engineers. Although starting with Vault was not thought through back then (different times), we have no regrets. We all share files from one network location and it's FAST! (even at 1Gbit/s). It's a matter of how you set up the project file(s) and everyone being savvy on how it works. If we started from scratch today, yes, we would set up Vault but it's really not an issue. Vault is no faster since you have to check the files in and out anyway where it copies the files temporarily to each local computer and sends them back when you're done (it does this over the network every time, so there's no appreciable time savings); I tried it just for "fun" to test it.

[cadman777]

I agree with @mluterman.

You need one person to manage the project files.

And everyone who works on that project must obey the rules.

This is how we did it 'in the olden days' before EDDMS systems were readily available or desirable for use.

[marcoton]

How was your workflow? I am working on complex assembleie where we work on separate parts but they are all in a sub assembly which has interfaces with other subassemblies which we all need. In Solidworks we did control that the sub assemblies above the parts where we working on had read only status. Did you organize that in the same way?

[mluterman]

Our Project File Workspace is set at the root of all subfolders, so it "always" finds/resolves all links below it. So our directory structure is set up as:
\DWG (root and workspace for Project file)
\DWG\Customers
\DWG\Customers\Customer1
\DWG\Stock Product
\DWG\Stock Product\Air Vise
:
etc.
Regarding workflow: we don't have a way to set read-only status, but IV gives you a "clue" when you try to save a file already opened on the network by another user and you get the dialogue box asking you to save it as a new file. That being said, communicaiton is also key here (amongst users), and it's not as "foolproof" as Vault in that way. Maybe our setup is "primitive" in that we each work on our own projects independently, but we still share/link to our main product in each design.

[cadman777]

That's pretty much how I do it.

In the past I advised a company to create their own engineering server with an 'air gap' to the company server (i.e., not connected in any way). That way the head of engineering has total control of all the engineering data, and no other person can get near it. It's totally disconnected from all outside communications. It's a very powerful server that manages only the engineering data. There are no CAD bottlenecks at all. That's the best way to make this work whether using an EDMS or doing it manually. You get the most security and thru-put in either case.

[mluterman]

I like that. The "air gap" method is also an excellent tool to isolate yourself from ransomware in today's world.

[cadman777]

Glad you like...

Back in the 90's when I worked in corporate whoredom, I decided to 'snip' the network cable and use an 'air gap' instead.

The IT criminals didn't like it, so I told them to 'f-off' (my upline took a lotta flack for that little ditty!).

Anyway, the VP agreed w/me (he didn't like the arrogant IT wannabe cops), so there it stayed, year after year.

Didn't use any security software, shut down all networking stuff on the computer, and made my first 'lean and mean' machine.

It was so successful that when I launched out on my own, I have used the 'air gap' method ever since.

I never got a virus, have never been hacked, and don't use any 'security' (aka: surveillance) software.

Performance is excellent, even on an old machine.

Like my old man used to say, 'make due, do without, use it up, and wear it out'...

[johan.degreef]

@marcoton I would start with Vault pro from the beginning, as getting everything into Vault afterwards is not always straigth forward. it is better to start creating things directly into a Vault.

[swalton]

The main challenge with using Vault Pro from the start is configuring the Categories, States, Revisions, and Part Numbering/Filename Sequences.

If OP uses a single Project File scoped to a network drive and unique filenames, then the import into Vault won't be too bad.   In addition, the OP will want to make sure all files use proprieties the same way.  The longer between setting up the Networked Project file and moving to a Vault system, the more iProp data inconsistencies, file name issues and other coordination challenges will be in the imported data.

The hard part will be making sure that the imported files are mapped to the correct Categories, States and Revisions.

We used a "Historical" Category for the old files and then created new Categories, States, and Revision Schemes as we started using more Vault Pro features.  It was a bit painful because we have about 12 years of historical data in our Vault.

[marcoton]

Thanks to you all for the answers.

@mlutermanThanks, communication is indeed the key but theat is always everywhere, it is healthy to talk each other :). This was also pretty mucht the way we did it within Solidworks so somehow it should work.

@johan.degreefWhat I already said in the OP, we are going to move to Vault pro but there is some staff shortage on our and reseller side (and the project is an ad hoc project). It is not clear to me what exactly the diffrence is between vault en vault pro regarding the implementation. Is the basic version more easy en less time consuming?

[cnewmanVIK]

We have 18 users here and we are using semi-isolated.  It seems to meet our needs.  

[mslosar]

We ran off a network for a while before going to Vault Professional.

Off the network things were just fine speed wise. The basic problem is, there is nothing to prevent user A from opening a file user B has open.  Nothing. So, user A opens it, hits save (even though they changed nothing) and then user B hits save after making hours of changes and poof, user B can't save his file any longer because it's out of step with what was opened.  You save elsewhere and replace, etc, but it becomes a massive pain.  Especially if it hits multiple files at once and you hit save from an assembly.

Our rule became, no multiple designer projects. One designer per project.