Skeletal Modeling and Vault Revisions

[calincanahai]

I am trying to figure out best practices when using skeletal modeling in Inventor alongside Vault revisions.

I have been designing my assemblies/parts using one master skeleton from where I derive/link all the parameters I need. This way any revision or change to the design is easily implemented from the skeleton and it updates all the related parts and assemblies.

However, this means the skeleton is a dependant for all the parts and assemblies that derive it. Once I have released and locked my design if I decide to make a minor change on one part, and I drive that change from the skeleton, every other part has to be checked out and updated as well. I get the "not the expected revision" warning since the version of the skeleton changed; even though no parameters for the other parts changed. Is there a better way to go about skeletal modeling so that I don't have to rev every single part in the design? 

Hopefully, I explained that clearly enough. Thanks!

[Cadmanto]

Just curious, Why are you not copy designing the skeleton so each design has it's own skeleton to work from?

Seems to me this method would alleviate this problem.

Windows 10 x64 -16GB Ram
Intel i7-6700 @ 3.41ghz
nVidia GTS 250 - 1 GB
Inventor Pro 2018

[swalton]

@Cadmanto, I think the issue is that the master sketch/skeleton part drives 30 different parts.  When one part needs a revision, the skeleton part gets changed.  Once that happens, Inventor dirties the other 29 parts.  Inventor then wants to check-out all 30 parts to save the updates.

@calincanahai, you might try suppressing the link between the driven parts and the master skeleton part as a step in the release process.  When you need to make a revision to a part, unsuppress the link, change the skeleton part, and re-suppress at release.  The other driven parts won't see any change to the skeleton part and should not update.

This will be a manual process, so there is room for error.  iLogic or Vault Data Standard might help.

[calincanahai]

If it's a new design I would copy design it. I'm running into the issue when it comes to small changes. For example, assume an assembly has 100 parts and it has been "released". Then my client comes back to me and tells me to move a connection plate 0.5in. Now I need to rev the design. I would unlock the skeleton and the assembly, change a dimension in the skeleton which would move the connection plate. Update the assembly and check it back into Vault. The assembly and skeleton have been rev'd. But now, because the skeleton also drives those 100 parts, all those parts are complaining because they're locked and pointing to an old version of the skeleton. These small revisions happen decently often and it wouldn't make sense to copy design the assembly over and over. It also wouldn't make sense to rev parts that don't change because it becomes difficult to track the change.

Hope that makes a bit more sense

[calincanahai]

@swalton  Thanks! I'll try that out. But won't inventor still get upset? Suppression doesn't break the link, Inventor would still see it pointing to the wrong version, wouldn't it?

[Cadmanto]

Yes, that makes sense.

Take a look at this thread.

https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/vault-forum/not-the-expected-revision/td-p/2970632

Windows 10 x64 -16GB Ram
Intel i7-6700 @ 3.41ghz
nVidia GTS 250 - 1 GB
Inventor Pro 2018

[swalton]

I'm not sure because I haven't tried it;)

I expect that a suspended link is not evaluated at all when the part is opened by Inventor.  If the link is not evaluated, then Inventor should not try to update the part.  This seems to be the behavior I see when I suppress the link to an AnyCAD import.  I know the Creo file has been updated/saved, but Inventor does not see a change until I unsuppress the link.

[calincanahai]

Unfortunately, even with a suppressed link, inventor still know's the version is wrong. Right now I don't think it's possible to have one skeleton drive the entire model and have functional revisions. Going forward I plan on dividing the model up into smaller skeletons. I'm quite surprised other people haven't had issues with this in the past. I only recently started using lifecycles on files so I never knew it was a problem until now.

[bradeneuropeArthur]

Hi,

@calincanahai @swalton @Cadmanto 

I am curious about your findings regarding this, since we are having the same problems/issues you have for many years now.

I believe that many users don't have these problems because they have:

• A different Vault setup which is more flexible then ours
• Don't use Vault at all with lifecycles or only use Vault basic.
• Or they have a project environment that will be released only when the files are really ready and need no change anymore ever.

If we talk about inventor without a vault release process, everything looks cool and easy. But with the come of Vault and a release process everything looks more or less different and difficult.

Like to discuss this issue further if you prefer this too.

Regards,

[BDCollett]

Opening this discussion again. What are people doing to manage these workflows?

It seems that the suppressed link and releasing of files does not dirty any more when the master is changed. Possibly people are using a different workflow. It does add in the extra levels of management however when you do have parts no longer updating that perhaps should be.

[bradeneuropeArthur]

Put the files in a category with a lifecycle that has no real release status and without revision bump.

Take a look in Vault how many files are really dirtied and change them with a revision, only these files need an update others not.

Keep it much as possible simple.

[abeelerTBCC7]

"Put the files in a category with a lifecycle that has no real release status and without revision bump."

This sounds intriguing.  However, how can the child assembly be truly released if the parent skeletal part cannot?

We're experiencing the same issue.  Just spit-balling here... what if a script existed, whose function was to release skeletal parts and then immediately change them to WIP (or another un-released/un-locked status) only after the assembly/drawings were released?  The released assembly would be locked until you unlock it.  Just a thought.

[hollypapp65]

Each file has it's own version and revision.

Skeleton can be Rev 0 and all other parts, assemblies can be Rev whatever.

Use Quick change instead of Work in progress to open files so their Rev won't change in Vault.

Use Work in progress or Revise when you need to Rev up.

I use Quick Change all the time so I don't accidentally Rev file up.

It's easy to Revise up.  Major pain or impossible to Revise down.

As long as Skeleton got released once, Vault don't care if Skeleton stay in Quick change forever.

[bradeneuropeArthur]

As long the user does NOT check out latest there will indeed no problem. But how to avoid different.

You cannot avoid this completely unfortunately.

[hollypapp65]

Have someone Check out the Skeleton after Release.

Everyone else will get Released version and can't Check it out it.

Since they're building on top of the Skeleton, they don't need to modify Skeleton.