Revising Common Assemblies.

[chrisbarriedesigns]

Hi all.

I have a question regarding the use of common parts/assemblies, revising assembly’s and how this all fits together in the model tree and project structures.

I appreciate I have already asked for some help on this topic, but answering one question seems to open up a lot more with this stuff!!

As an example, We are in the process of making 2 off machines made up of 3 weldments - An upper chassis, a lower chassis and a turntable.

Each machine is for a different customer, and is considered a different project, but they are identical in manufacture.

The structure of the machine looks like this.

82000.iam - Chassis Assembly

   - 61000.iam - Upper Chassis

   - 62000.iam - Lower Chassis

   - 63000.iam - Turntable Weldment

The turntable weldment in turn is made up of 3 parts. Like this.

63000.iam - Turntable Weldment

   - 3100.ipt - Slew Ring Plate

   - 3101.ipt - Gusset Plate

   - 3102.ipt - Spacer

During a design review, one of the customers wants to change the turntable weldment to alter the positions of the gusset plates.

The welded positions of gusset plates changes in the assembly, and the weldment gets revised. All the parts within it stay the same.

63000.iam (R1) - Turntable Weldment

   - 3100.ipt - Slew Ring Plate

   - 3101.ipt - Gusset Plate

   - 3102.ipt - Spacer

As we are making 2 machines, one now needs to use the revised weldment for the customer that has changed his mind, the other needs to use the original weldment for the customer who is happy with the original design. So I’ve got this.

Machine 1 - Original

82000.iam - Chassis Assembly

   - 61000.iam - Upper Chassis

   - 62000.iam - Lower Chassis

   - 63000.iam - Turntable Weldment

            - 3100.ipt - Slew Ring Plate

            - 3101.ipt - Gusset Plate

            - 3102.ipt - Spacer

Machine 2 - New positions

82000.iam - Chassis Assembly

   - 61000.iam - Upper Chassis

   - 62000.iam - Lower Chassis

   - 63000.iam (R1) - Turntable Weldment

            - 3100.ipt - Slew Ring Plate

            - 3101.ipt - Gusset Plate

            - 3102.ipt - Spacer

This now means that the top level of the assembly, the 82000.iam isn’t identical for both machines, because it calls for different revision of the turntable depending on which project/customer is using it.

We are setting up our structure so that any parts, weldments or assembly’s that are used across multiple projects are considered common, they reside in a folder level above our customer specific project folders, as shown below.

C:\\My Projects

My Projects.ipj

• Bolts and Fixings
• Common Parts

           01) Assemblies

           02) Weldments

           03) Parts

• Project 1

           01) GA

           02) Assemblies

           03) Weldments

           04) Parts

• Project 2

           01) GA

           02) Assemblies

           03) Weldments

           04) Parts

In order for a part, weldment or assembly to “live” in the common parts folder, it needs to be identical in any projects that use it.

However, my 82000.iam assembly and 63000.iam assemblies now aren’t an identical assembly in both projects?

I don’t want to duplicate them in the project specific folders, but don’t know what to do with them to distinguish the difference? Or where they should reside in order to meet the criteria I’m trying to setup.

If they’re different assemblies that are unique to a project, then according to my (self established!) rules, they should reside in the project specific folder. But in this example, just making a small change to the position of the gusset plates potentially means moving all of the parents above it into their project specific folder? Which feels too much?

Any help greatly received as to how others manage this?

Many thanks.

[chrisbarriedesigns]

Hi all.

I have a question regarding the use of common parts/assemblies, revising assembly’s and how this all fits together in the model tree and project structures.

I appreciate I have already asked for some help on this topic, but answering one question seems to open up a lot more with this stuff!!

As an example, We are in the process of making 2 off machines made up of 3 weldments - An upper chassis, a lower chassis and a turntable.

Each machine is for a different customer, and is considered a different project, but they are identical in manufacture.

The structure of the machine looks like this.

82000.iam - Chassis Assembly

   - 61000.iam - Upper Chassis

   - 62000.iam - Lower Chassis

   - 63000.iam - Turntable Weldment

The turntable weldment in turn is made up of 3 parts. Like this.

63000.iam - Turntable Weldment

   - 3100.ipt - Slew Ring Plate

   - 3101.ipt - Gusset Plate

   - 3102.ipt - Spacer

During a design review, one of the customers wants to change the turntable weldment to alter the positions of the gusset plates.

The welded positions of gusset plates changes in the assembly, and the weldment gets revised. All the parts within it stay the same.

63000.iam (R1) - Turntable Weldment

   - 3100.ipt - Slew Ring Plate

   - 3101.ipt - Gusset Plate

   - 3102.ipt - Spacer

As we are making 2 machines, one now needs to use the revised weldment for the customer that has changed his mind, the other needs to use the original weldment for the customer who is happy with the original design. So I’ve got this.

Machine 1 - Original

82000.iam - Chassis Assembly

   - 61000.iam - Upper Chassis

   - 62000.iam - Lower Chassis

   - 63000.iam - Turntable Weldment

            - 3100.ipt - Slew Ring Plate

            - 3101.ipt - Gusset Plate

            - 3102.ipt - Spacer

Machine 2 - New positions

82000.iam - Chassis Assembly

   - 61000.iam - Upper Chassis

   - 62000.iam - Lower Chassis

   - 63000.iam (R1) - Turntable Weldment

            - 3100.ipt - Slew Ring Plate

            - 3101.ipt - Gusset Plate

            - 3102.ipt - Spacer

This now means that the top level of the assembly, the 82000.iam isn’t identical for both machines, because it calls for different revision of the turntable depending on which project/customer is using it.

We are setting up our structure so that any parts, weldments or assembly’s that are used across multiple projects are considered common, they reside in a folder level above our customer specific project folders, as shown below.

C:\\My Projects

My Projects.ipj

• Bolts and Fixings
• Common Parts

           01) Assemblies

           02) Weldments

           03) Parts

• Project 1

           01) GA

           02) Assemblies

           03) Weldments

           04) Parts

• Project 2

           01) GA

           02) Assemblies

           03) Weldments

           04) Parts

In order for a part, weldment or assembly to “live” in the common parts folder, it needs to be identical in any projects that use it.

However, my 82000.iam assembly and 63000.iam assemblies now aren’t an identical assembly in both projects?

I don’t want to duplicate them in the project specific folders, but don’t know what to do with them to distinguish the difference? Or where they should reside in order to meet the criteria I’m trying to setup.

If they’re different assemblies that are unique to a project, then according to my (self established!) rules, they should reside in the project specific folder. But in this example, just making a small change to the position of the gusset plates potentially means moving all of the parents above it into their project specific folder? Which feels too much?

Any help greatly received as to how others manage this?

Many thanks.

[Gabriel_Watson]

Try using Model States to see if you can supplement the need for a different assembly. It usually works well if the only change as you mentioned is positioning. Anything more than that, affecting the shape or material, and I would definitely treat each assembly as a different one.

[Gabriel_Watson]

Try using Model States to see if you can supplement the need for a different assembly. It usually works well if the only change as you mentioned is positioning. Anything more than that, affecting the shape or material, and I would definitely treat each assembly as a different one.

[johnsonshiue]

Hi Chris,

Gabriel is right. I would try using Model States to manage the variations. Or, you will need different sets of the models (iam and ipt files). Some can be shared among the projects but some cannot be. You will nee to manage that.

Inventor is a distributed design system. Each component has a unique definition (geometry, properties, parameters, appearance, and so on). Whenever there is a need to have a different value (regardless of how many), you will need another file to keep it unique.

Model States sort of break the limitation. For a given set of attributes, each Model State can have different values. You can think of Model State as a mini file within a file. Although it is one ipt file or one iam file, the Model State can represent the model as if you would need to create another ipt or iam file.

Many thanks!

[johnsonshiue]

Hi Chris,

Gabriel is right. I would try using Model States to manage the variations. Or, you will need different sets of the models (iam and ipt files). Some can be shared among the projects but some cannot be. You will nee to manage that.

Inventor is a distributed design system. Each component has a unique definition (geometry, properties, parameters, appearance, and so on). Whenever there is a need to have a different value (regardless of how many), you will need another file to keep it unique.

Model States sort of break the limitation. For a given set of attributes, each Model State can have different values. You can think of Model State as a mini file within a file. Although it is one ipt file or one iam file, the Model State can represent the model as if you would need to create another ipt or iam file.

Many thanks!

[Lucas.dolinarVFXZU]

on top of model states, you can also use a flexible subassembly and determine the position in the top assembly.

but i would only do this "one level up" (dont create nested flexible subs)

you can very easily create a ilogic rule that links the constraint in your Turntable Weldment to a value in the top Assembly. This will act similar to a flexible sub (having the dimension in the top level) but will only affect load time when opening the Assembly. Also: it does NOT work if you open both top level assemblies at the same time, but it can be a nice tool for the Model state version ( because now you only need a model state in the top level not in every asm)

[Lucas.dolinarVFXZU]

on top of model states, you can also use a flexible subassembly and determine the position in the top assembly.

but i would only do this "one level up" (dont create nested flexible subs)

you can very easily create a ilogic rule that links the constraint in your Turntable Weldment to a value in the top Assembly. This will act similar to a flexible sub (having the dimension in the top level) but will only affect load time when opening the Assembly. Also: it does NOT work if you open both top level assemblies at the same time, but it can be a nice tool for the Model state version ( because now you only need a model state in the top level not in every asm)