Best way to manage identical parts with only Length variation?

[benedictsweet]

Hi all,

I’m using Autodesk Inventor with Content Center linked to Vault, and I’ve run into a workflow/storage issue.

We have a part called Channel that gets copy-designed throughout Vault for different projects. The only difference between these parts is a single parameter: Length. As a result, Vault ends up storing hundreds (eventually thousands) of nearly identical parts, which feels wasteful and difficult to manage.

What I’d like to achieve is:

• Use the same base Channel part in multiple assemblies
• Adjust only the Length parameter per instance
• Avoid creating and storing duplicate parts in Vault if possible

Is there a recommended workflow or feature in Inventor/Vault to handle this kind of situation (i.e. same geometry with just one varying parameter) without ballooning the part count?
I've looked into the content center, but as far as I'm aware with a custom content center part, when it's used, it creates a new part file.

Thanks in advance for any guidance!

[chris]

@benedictsweet Do you do any rounding concerning length for these channels? Example, all lengths are rounded to the nearest 1/16" or 1/8"? If so you could set up a preset number of "Model States". or you could create them as they come up, (although I'm not sire if there is a limit to the number of Model States a part can "potentially" have). 

Is the part number the same for each channel regardless the length? I mean ultimately it doesn't matter if there are multiple copies, as Inventor "technically" will treat different length parts as separate parts, which can have the same part number, (not file name), but if it's going to be an issue that there are multiple parts, Model States can help solve that challenge.

[jake_egley]

We use iParts to accomplish that. Example here is a part I needed for different size assemblies. It's a rectangular tube with 13 different lengths. And if I need a new length in the future I can add one. I can also adjust the length of the existing instances if I want to.

[chris]

@benedictsweet of course iParts is an option, but keep in mind, iparts generate individual parts, tied to a "master part" and the master part is where the changes are made and then the master needs to be saved and the updated and "hopefully" the children also update without having to individually generate new "updates".  If it were me, I'd try both methods as a test and see which you prefer, not just prefer creating, but which you prefer updating!