How do you guys organize your files? 4

[fuzzybabybunny]

I'm new to CAD design and I'm wondering how you guys organize your files and what are the best practices?

Do you put assemblies, parts, drawings, in separate folders?

C:/Solidworks/Project1/parts
C:/Solidworks/Project1/drawings
C:/Solidworks/Project1/assemblies
C:/Solidworks/Project1/subassemblies

And how do you deal with the versioning?

 

[kellnerp]

We use ten characters (non-intelligent) for part models (drawings) beginning with "P-". We use ten characters (non-intelligent) for assembly models (drawings) beginning with "A-". Each folder holds a thousand of part numbers or assembly numbers.

I have to ask what the point is in doing this? The file extension determines the type of file. So adding the intelligence to the part number that one is an assembly and the other is a part is hard to fathom. What do you do when you have the same part modeled as an assembly and a part? What do you do with assembly documents that end up being parts such as would be the case with a weldment? What do you do when you have a purchased part that comes in as an assembly, like say a Bimba cylinder? What if you have an assembly that is used as a layout? Or a part that is really just a few reference planes and surfaces? Or even a part that behaves like an assembly such as a weldment with cut list? Part numbers are really cheap. What is wrong with putting the word ASSY at the beginning of the description of an assembly?

Just some food for thought.

TOP
CSWP
BSSE

http://www.engtran.com

http://www.niswug.org

"Node news is good news."

 

[Theophilus]

Just checking into this thread again.

What's the idea of duplicate files in my directory? I'm not sure what you're alluding to. I don't have any duplicates in any directory (cannot do this with Windows). Just wondering. Sometimes I'll bump a part I'm doing heavy modifications to up a serial number on the end, such as "Widget Chassis 11" and so on, but when I get ready for production release, I lose the serial numbers and return to "Widget Chassis". (This way, if something gets hosed, I can return to the last revision that worked great and add the tweaks from there under a new serial number.)

I only work from the latest date-specified (revision) project folder, too--but there is lots of duplication between revision folders that might look like this:
Stanley
Pull Saw
090617
090620
090621 Chassis Revision
090623 Prototype
090701 Tweaks
090713 Production

Lots of redundant files between the directories, but it's only hard drive space. The nice thing is that I can go back to a past revision for whatever reason (and sometimes this comes in handy).

I use back-up software and schedule back-ups to external drive(s) each night, but it's smart enough to update only what's changed since the previous back-up. So a given back-up takes very little time (but I also use fast hard drives). For solid models alone, it seems I can fit my entire career on a 320GB drive. So the cost of hard drives (in my case) is negligible.



Jeff Mowry

http://www.industrialdesignhaus.com

A people governed by fear cannot value freedom.

 

[kellnerp]

Stanley
Pull Saw
090617
090620
090621 Chassis Revision
090623 Prototype
090701 Tweaks
090713 Production

What I am reading here is that there may be a File1, File2, File3, etc in each of these revision folders. If that is so, do you have Search External References checked in Tools/System/External References? Do you have a search path checked?

Do you work these projects alone?

TOP
CSWP
BSSE

http://www.engtran.com

http://www.niswug.org

"Node news is good news."

 

[gwubs]

kelnerp - We don't only back up engineering files here. Acounting and Service dept. also need backing up. So disc space is cheap but sheer volume of data is an issue. Also, back ups are off site so that if the building burns down we're not out to lunch.

 

[Theophilus]

Oh, I see what you mean. Maybe I forgot to mention a key to using this system. When I bump up a revision of a project, I go to my top-level Drawing or Assembly document--the document which references all parts/assemblies. I go to File > Find References > Copy Files, which will copy all current bits and pieces to the new directory.

So all work is done within a project directory (such as "090713 Production") with no files being referenced anywhere outside of that directory (including Toolbox hardware). This keeps things very simple, as well as creates a reference history of development for every project. Very simple, very effective, never any lost parts/references/whatever.



Jeff Mowry

http://www.industrialdesignhaus.com

A people governed by fear cannot value freedom.

 

[rgrayclamps]

Hi, kellnerp:

Thanks for your comment! Here are my answers to your questions:

Que 1. I have to ask what the point is in doing this? The file extension determines the type of file. So adding the intelligence to the part number that one is an assembly and the other is a part is hard to fathom.

Ans 1. Prefix helps visualize type of documents. Window Explorer may not always display extensions unless setup that way.

Que 2. What do you do when you have the same part modeled as an assembly and a part?

Ans 2. Why would you have the same part modelled as both an assembly and a part?

Que 3. What do you do with assembly documents that end up being parts such as would be the case with a weldment?

Ans 3. A weldment should be better handled with part model approach (my understanding is SW is trying to stay away from using assembly approach).

Que 4. What do you do when you have a purchased part that comes in as an assembly, like say a Bimba cylinder?

Ans 4. I would model it as a part if I do not want to have physical simulation. Otherwise, I would model it as a flexible assembly.

Que 5. What if you have an assembly that is used as a layout? Or a part that is really just a few reference planes and surfaces?

Ans 5. Why would anyone use an assembly as a layout for a part? If you need a surface part, then you create a part model.

Que 6. Or even a part that behaves like an assembly such as a weldment with cut list?

Ans 6. A weldment is better handled with a part model with multi-bodies.

Best regards,

Alex

 

[kellnerp]

kellnerp - We don't only back up engineering files here. Acounting and Service dept. also need backing up. So disc space is cheap but sheer volume of data is an issue. Also, back ups are off site so that if the building burns down we're not out to lunch.

Again, what shear volume? IT should be doing incremental backups. The only time there is volume is on that day when a full backup is scheduled.

This is getting into the reasons why engineering files should be on a separate server.

If you agree that disk space is cheap then so should backing up that disk space. If backup is the bottle neck to utilizing a disk, well.....


TOP
CSWP
BSSE

http://www.engtran.com

http://www.niswug.org

"Node news is good news."

 

[CorBlimeyLimey]

As Theo' pointed out, there is no one-size-fits-all solution. What works for one discipline/company/person may be useless or nonsensical for another.

 

[gwubs]

kelnerp, I agree with many of your points, especially about having a seperate Engineering server. We had that, then we got an IT department... now we are peasants serving the mighty virtual machine. We are not even allowed to defrag our discs anymore.

 

[rossao1]

I would only add one thought to all the disk space discussion. The original file takes only as much space as needed, but PDMWorks IIRC, stores a change file at a small percent age the originals size. W/O a pdm program every time you save a new revision they are all 100% in size. Correct me if I am wrong, because my information was based on a loosing effort to get PDMWorks installed at my new job 4 yrs ago. Still here and still flying w/o PDM. Thank God for back tapes!

BTW. I highly reccomend starting a lib directory for all your common-ish parts, templates and such. Then write protect it so that no one "accidentally" changes the files.

 

[EEnd]

Unless it has changed in the last version or two, PDMWorks stores a complete copy of the file rather than the difference from some reference file.

Eric

 

[EdDanzer]

I tried to get SolidWorks to provide a file structure with 10,000+ commonly used parts with each seat back in 1999 to save all users from having this debate. My experience with part numbering systems where many different people have to interact with them is to use a 6 character semi-significant system based on item categories. Part number will be used by your customers to order replacement parts, by shipping to pull and send parts to the customer and by service when a customer brings in a damaged part from a product that is unknown by model and serial number. These people will spend the most time with a part numbering scheme once it is in place. The less the number of characters the less chance for typographical or reading error. If the parts are stored by category finding parts to pull is quicker. We have a customer with a license plate system and they come to me to find many of their parts that I originally created for them with our 6 character semi-significant system and store the description in Excel.

Reusing parts, assemblies and drawings can be considered lean engineering and will save time and money. Having Excel spread sheets with the part numbers listed by category will allow different people to find out if you have created a part and what the actual complete part number is.

I currently use a 28,000+ library of parts, assemblies and drawings and can find most part numbers in less than a minute. Many of these are low usage items that are several years old.


Ed Danzer

http://www.danzcoinc.com

http://www.dehyds.com

 

[rgrayclamps]

Hi, EdDanzer:

What you described is a very old and inefficient flat filing technique. You may want to talk to your IT group about PDM and database.

Best regards,

Alex

 

[EdDanzer]

Early on we tried Access and looked at PDM to find part numbers with and found the Excel method the fastest and easiest to teach to production people. As I stated in the earlier post design the system for those who will use it the most and total cost of ownership will be the lowest.
We have several assemblies with 1500+ part counts. Several years ago when we last reviewed PDM software the check in time and checkout time was much too long to be cost effective. Last month I did ask about PDM and there are still check in and checkout time penalties.

To determine how fast your companies “find a part system” is, do a test and look up a part that has not been used for 5 years. If it takes more than a minute it may not be any better than the flat file system.

Ed Danzer

http://www.danzcoinc.com

http://www.dehyds.com

 

[rgrayclamps]

Hi, EdDanzer:

It is instantaneous if one knows what to look for. It does not matter how old a part or assembly document are. Believe or not, after I type key words, it takes less than a second to retrive document(s).

If you are familiar with database or commerial pdm, you will never go back the way you are doing right now.

 

[EdDanzer]

The reason I stated an old item is you may not remember much detail and a search could turn up thousands if hits like Google.

I have used search features in several software packages and continue to experiment with these systems. SolidWorks Explorer is an example of a system that can burn lots of time searching through thousands of files. We currently have over 28,000 SolidWorks files to search if you cannot refine where to search.

Our Excel system works better than the search function in Quick Books (a data base system) because a customer will ask me to find a part number for them after they have spent 15 minutes searching with Quick Books search function.

I’m aware our Excel system is not great but I’m not convinced there is a system so much better that we can spend much time and money replacing it. Our Excel system is used by the shop, purchasing and accounting. PDM is not something that other departments need to learn or have expensive licenses to access.

What I really want is a “Find” function not a “search” function.

Ed Danzer

http://www.danzcoinc.com

http://www.dehyds.com

 

[JMarv]

As Theo' pointed out, there is no one-size-fits-all solution. What works for one discipline/company/person may be useless or nonsensical for another.

That is such a good piece of advice, I think it's worth repeating.

Joe
SW Office 2008 SP5.0
P4 3.0Ghz 3GB
ATI FireGL X1

 

[Ray555]

project01-001-01
project01-002-01
project01-003-01
project01-003-02
project01-003-03

project number - part number - issue number

my master assembly would be project01-000-01

 

[kellnerp]

Ray555,

How do you deal with reusing components on new projects?In other words let's say Project99 uses a couple of parts from other projects so that you have a BOM like:

Project99-001-01
Project05-000-03
Project67-079-01
Project99-002-06
...
etc.

Where is the benefit in this situation?

TOP
CSWP, BSSE

http://www.engtran.com

http://www.niswug.org

"Node news is good news."

 

[Ray555]

Thats correct.

wouldnt want to duplicate parts on the system