×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

PDM/Works & Configurations

PDM/Works & Configurations

PDM/Works & Configurations

(OP)
Does anybody know if there is a way to get PDM/Works to handle part configurations?  What I am trying to do is come up with a scheme for PDM/Works to handle SW2003 Toolbox components efficiently.  I don't like the idea of having a separate part file for every piece of hardware.  For instance, I would like to generate a screw, and then create a design table for the different lengths.  Unfortunately, PDM/Works does not seem capable of treating configurations as a unique part.  Any suggestions?  Thanks.

RE: PDM/Works & Configurations

We are in the process of purchasing a new PDM system.  The first thing we were warned about was that none of these systems did a decent job of handling configurations.

RE: PDM/Works & Configurations

We are also in the process of implementing PDMWorks, and have found that things are easier if the configurations for fastensers are spit out into seperate files. However, we are using 2001+.

RE: PDM/Works & Configurations

ClusterTruck,
I do not use Tool Box, but one of the associates here does.  He said go to Toolbox in the SolidWorks menu. Click Brower configuration, then Document Properties. Now set the radio button “No copy (always use maser part file)".  That should do it for you.  Now tool box will create configurations.

Bradley

RE: PDM/Works & Configurations

We are also looking for a PDM system and pdmworks looks like a good affordable choice.
Does anybody know if pdmworks also supports home made parts configurations(every config.is a part)
 

RE: PDM/Works & Configurations

My understanding and experience is that PDMWorks and configurations do not play well together with one another.  This was a stated limitation of the product the last time I attended a demo with my former company's VAR.  I was told that this was an enhancement that apparently is in the plans for a future release (if one chooses to believe that information).

The bottom line is that as of right now configurations aren't dealt with in PDMWorks.

Chris Gervais
Sr. Mechanical Designer
Lytron, Inc.

RE: PDM/Works & Configurations

We're in the process of implementing Smarteam PDM with Solidworks.  It can handle configurations as discrete parts or unique orientations of the same part, but it comes with some baggage.  If you absolutely need configurations they might be an option.

RE: PDM/Works & Configurations

In the same vein:
1. Is there a way to display Config. Name and Config. Description of a part in an Assembly when the part in question has only one configuration?

2.  How do you link a note to Config. Description in a drawing without using a custom property?

RE: PDM/Works & Configurations

OK, into the fray again!!  Some PDM system do indeed do a great job of handling configurations - at least SmarTeam does, so I assume Matrix probably does also (and maybe some other high end systems.

There are obviously some restrictions, but it works fine and seems to allow for most needs with ONE POSSIBLE EXCEPTION.

This is how it handles config.

You are allowed up to a fixed number of characters for config names.  (Used to be 10 when we designed our naming convention and is now more - don't know how many - we are done and not changing).

The first N characters are available to define configurations which are the same PART NUMBER or ASSEMBLY NUMBER.

A SPACE character then separates the remainder of the config name which is contained in paratheses.  This can be any alph-# characters fro, say special analysis/explode/developemnt/whatever configs.

We use the original 10 character form and our company part naming convention has the last four characters (starting with a -) defining part configuration (as opposed to SW configuration).  Drawings have the same numbers as parts/assemblies without the configuration "dash" number.

XXXX-YYYY-001  and  XXXX-YYYY-002  are different (but similar) parts or assemblies.  They are detailed on the same drawing XXXX-YYYY.  Examples might be same screw - different lengths, or same assembly but different powersupply/color/non-form/fit/function interchangeable/etc. The SW File Name contains the first number set (drawing number).

So for SW CONFIGs:

-001 (xall)
-001
-001 (fea)
-001 (dwg1)
-001 (stow)
-001 (oper)

would all be of the -001 part/assembly, but different SW configs.

-002
-002 (test)
-002 (fea)
-002 (stow)

would be of the -002 part/assembly, etc.

For development, non released versions, we could (but don't as it happens) also have

pdr1 (revw)
pdr1 (expl)
pdr2
cdr1
dsgn

Just as and example, we could also do this for screws (but don't because they really are different parts):

8330-1234-001 (blck)
8330-1234-001 (zinc)
8330-1234-001 (sstl)
8330-1234-002 (blck)
8330-1234-002 (zinc)
8330-1234-002 (sstl)
8330-1234-003.......etc.

This is a big logical problem for PDM systems and SmarTeam seems to have dealt with it quite well once you get the hang of it.

Here is the exception - and the reason for that strange looking config "-001 (xall)".

Since suppressed items in assemblies truely do not exist in that configuration, the PDM system has to treat them as such and not include them in the associated file list(ie. basically the vault version of the BOM).  So when you check the assembly in you can "loose" parts that are suppressed in the active configuration (say -001).  Trouble is that when you  try to check out -002 they are not there where they should be.  It is recoverable, but a real pain.  We use the "-001 (xall)" config to check in assemblies sometimes.  This has no suppressions at all.  We then use hiding to facilitate this function.  It is a compromise.  SmarTeam now has an option to fix this, but we have not yet tested and implemented it.  However it does mean that SmartTeam has to resolve EVERY configuration when you do a check-in (it has to know what every config has to keep the associated file list correct).  This could be a time issue, since we check most files in every night at least and everything at the end of the week.

BTW:  This does illustrate one big issue with PDM in general.  It does drive your file and part naming conventions - so be prepared for a change there.  And since these changes are painfull, once you make it work you may choose not to implement future enhancements in the PDM system to handle this.  Thus it pays to test first and get it right up front before globally implementing you new PDM system.

3/4 of all the Spam produced goes to Hawaii - shame that's not true of SPAM also.......

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources