Replacing an .ipt file in all .iam files

[d.alghisi]

Hello everyone,
It often happens that we have to replace a single file "X".ipt with a new file "y".ipt, for example a spring which no longer has the same characteristics or which we receive from another supplier.
My question is: Is it possible to tell Vault to replace file "X" with file "Y" in all .iam?
Or do I have to open all the assemblies and regenerate a view?

Thank you in advance for your help

[CGBenner]

@d.alghisi 

Hi.  This cannot be done in Vault, as it is a function of Inventor.  If you post this in the Inventor forum, someone may have a programming solution that would speed this up for you.  Good luck!

[jorgen.bjornes · Accepted solution]

But, it IS possible to do this very effectively in vault!

Select your old component (x.ipt) in vault . Select command "Edit"-"Replace"

Now you get a wizard, showing which assemblies this is used in, and lets you choose which ones to replace in.

Finally you choose your new part "y.ipt".

Sit back and enjoy while vault saves you a days work in 1 minute 🙂

Of course, there might be constraint issues in your assemblies afterwards if geometry in x and y is not strictly identical.

[d.alghisi]

@jorgen.bjornes  thank you so much you really saved me a lot of work!!!

@CGBenner 

I certainly don't expect a person, even if they hold a certain position in Autodesk, to know all the answers, but it doesn't seem logical to me to give banal and hasty answers making me think that a solution was not possible.
Even in an 'amateur' forum such as cad.de, the correct answer came to me promptly and correctly.
So please refrain from answering next time, if you are not sure of an answer, thank you.

[jorgen.bjornes]

This is a peer to peer discussion forum after all, with extremely helpful autodesk employees helping as well. This is not not paid support. So if someone gives an incorrect reply, others can chime in and hopefully the correct answer will be destilled in the end. I would hope more users will do this in addition to asking questions. It is a great learning experience both to ask and to answer here.

If we must be 100% sure and verify every answer here, this will be a dead forum very soon.

@CGBenner is consistently helpul and knowledgeable and I urge him to continue just like he always does here in the forum. His contributions are highly valued.

[d.alghisi]

Of course, as I said, I don't expect either an immediate answer or an answer that is always 100% correct, but if an answer is given by the Autodesk Community Manager, I tend to take the answer as truthful... in my opinion it would have been better to ignore my question.
Anyway, it was not a direct attack on Chris and I hope I was not misunderstood as English is not my mother tongue and I wanted to take the opportunity to thank all the staff who have helped me so much over the last year.

[CGBenner]

I learn something new in these forums every day.  Thank you, @jorgen.bjornes, for so quickly giving the correct answer and for the nice comments.

[jimm_motyka_777]

Let me add one more thought to this, which might be worth pondering and testing.  Prior to replacing the part with the new part, if possible (depending on the amount of these that there are) rename the constraint in the current part and replacement part constraint with the same name (iMate mapping).  This is only hypothetical, yet could assist in having to remap the constraints in your assemblies.  Consequently, in future parts, where this might be occurring, you could implement iMates in the part design and part assemblies.  Again, a mere suggestion, yet sometimes the best ideas come after having a Culver's Butterburger for lunch. 😉