Replace Part Command and BOM Relationship

[tom_vierling]

When starting an assembly I'm often mindful of the order I select to bring my parts in so they display the correct BOM number with relation to how I'm going to order them in the drawing's BOM. For example, I will bring in the main part first, knowing I want it to be Part #1 on the BOM (which is hand done and not linked to the actual BOM, due to some parts being able to represent more than one possible part). Often times however, I find I need to replace a part in an assembly, and my BOM number for the replaced part goes to the next available number, and everything else shifts up one. Is there any way to keep the BOM number the same in the part structure when using the "Replace Component" command (ctrl+H)? 

(Ignore the fact that the part bubble leaders are blue and the bubbles and text are black, this is an old template I'm using for demonstrative purposes)

[mcgyvr]

---

@tom_vierling wrote:

When starting an assembly I'm often mindful of the order I select to bring my parts in so they display the correct BOM number with relation to how I'm going to order them in the drawing's BOM. For example, I will bring in the main part first, knowing I want it to be Part #1 on the BOM (which is hand done and not linked to the actual BOM, due to some parts being able to represent more than one possible part). Often times however, I find I need to replace a part in an assembly, and my BOM number for the replaced part goes to the next available number, and everything else shifts up one. Is there any way to keep the BOM number the same in the part structure when using the "Replace Component" command (ctrl+H)? 

(Ignore the fact that the part bubble leaders are blue and the bubbles and text are black, this is an old template I'm using for demonstrative purposes)

---

I'm not aware of a way to change that functionality.. Its just how it works..

BUT...

That process has got to drive you crazy..

I'd suggest you change that mindset real quick..

There is no valid reason to be so umm.. meticulous about the item number..

No one should care whats #1 vs #2..  

Its just a number to allow to to match whats being visually represented to that specific line in a parts list..

You should not have to worry about the order in which you place parts into an assembly.. 

[Curtis_Waguespack]

---

@tom_vierling wrote:

Is there any way to keep the BOM number the same in the part structure when using the "Replace Component" command (ctrl+H)? 

---

Hi @tom_vierling,

I used to revise assemblies that were tied to existing assembly instruction publications and had to be concerned with item numbers in much the same way that you are.  I don't know I ever found a good solution to preventing the BOM from being completely renumbered (which was a major concern for me) , but as for just updating the replaced item's number, if you edit the BOM in the assembly, you can change the Item number.

This pushes through to the Parts List and Balloons assuming no overrides have been placed in those places. 

Note to that you can access the assembly BOM by right clicking on the Parts List in the drawing. 

And then finally, note that you can edit the item number in the Parts List and it will turn blue to denote an override. Then you can use the "Save Item Overrides to BOM" button along the top to push overrides to the BOM. This works only for item overrides only, not descriptions or other iproperties. For this reason, generally speaking changes to BOM information should be done in the BOM

I hope this helps.
Best of luck to you in all of your Inventor pursuits,
Curtis
http://inventortrenches.blogspot.com

[tom_vierling]

This has been what I've been doing for the last couple of years, I just wanted to know if there was a better solution to this that I wasnt aware of, such as changing BOM settings I didnt know existed. 

[tom_vierling]

It's not a mindset that I willingly chose, it's a mindset left behind by predecessors fueled by our customer's need to have consistency across all drawings. I.E, since it's been done like that in the past, it need to continue that trend moving forward. Placing them in the order that I'm going to bubble them helps, and I've just gotten used to that the last three years.

[mcgyvr]

---

@tom_vierling wrote:

 I.E, since it's been done like that in the past, it need to continue that trend moving forward. 

---

Of course... ... Sorry.. I forgot what world I was living in.. 

I've been spoiled working at a company that is open to improving processes at all times..

[tom_vierling]

My company is open (and encourages) optimizing processes. Our customer, however, prefers consistency, which is where the root of the anomaly comes from. In the end, it's not the world's biggest deal since placing the important parts in order helps me stay organized, and I'm only calling out an average of five key parts anyways. (I do not do this for fittings for example, those are imported as needed with no regard to order)

[Leon.VASSE]

Hello!

This issue was forwarded to Autodesk development:

https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/inventor-forum/replace-doesn-t-keep-item-number/m-p/3483704

After 10 years, any update?

Best regards

[johnsonshiue]

Hi Folks,

I don't think the behavior has been changed yet. The request is totally legitimate and it has been asked before indeed. However, there are technical limitations causing the seemingly simple behaviors to become fairly complicated.

Preserving the item number can be tricky. Think about this. A component instance can be at different levels (subassemblies). Each level has a BOM, aggregating it to the top-level BOM. Replace Component command in general operates on instances of a component at the current level (editing). Now the instances are replaced by a new component. There could be other occurrences at other levels. It means the row is not completely gone yet.

Let's say all the occurrences are replaced and the row is gone. But, what if there are components (different files) with the same Part Number and the row stays? The behavioral model becomes fairly complicated very quickly.

I have not even considered Structured vs PartOnly yet.

As a result, a new item number is assigned to the newly replaced component (row), which is the most straight forward and persistent behavior. Unfortunately, it is not convenient.

Many thanks!

[Leon.VASSE]

At least, it is confirmed there is still no setting to implement.

Not as seamless as it could be, but we can live with it.

Thx!

[tom_vierling]

Thank you for the explanation. I guess I'll just keep trucking along as I have been these past 7 years.