Managing Family of Parts

Family of Parts gives you control that SW’s Configurations don’t provide.

Last time we created a FoP table, and you get the idea of how you would go about creating a larger family.

One of the things you can do with an FoP is use the table to create a set of independent parts. Then you can control the parts using the table, or you can unlink the parts by deleting them from the table. A big benefit of the Edge system is that you can remove the part from the FoP but keep the part in the assembly, without losing any links to it.

If you decide to put a removed part back into the family again later, you can do that again without any penalty, because the file name remains the same. If you swap between a configured part and just a regular part in Works, you stand to lose a good bit of info.

You can also change the file name of any family member. Flexibility and stability are two of the great traits of this system.

In the comments, someone asked about part number info. Between the family member name, the file name (which don’t have to be the same) and the family member description, you have plenty of places to put your part number information for the BOM (part list in Edge speak).

SNAG-0010

How many times have you SolidWorks users been stung by the differences between Custom Properties, and Configuration Driven Custom Properties? Chances are if you know the difference, you’ve paid for that knowledge with at least one major data loss.

That kind of confusion isn’t going to happen when using Edge. The data that you can drive with FoP is right there in front of you. The dimensions you can drive are pre-populated in the FoP table.

Again, remember that Edge and Works functionality does not line up 100%. What Works uses Configurations for is covered by a combination of FoP, FoA, Solid Edge Configurations (more like Works Display States), Simplified parts, and a couple other functions that escape me just now. Works is more concerned with convenience, and Edge is more concerned with flexibility and stability. This is why you see people trying to do things like revision control using Works Configurations, even though it is entirely unsuited for it. It’s also why you see Works Toolbox designed to defy the laws of file management. With Edge, the areas of the software are more purpose-built, and don’t lend themselves to misuse like that.

4 Replies to “Managing Family of Parts”

  1. The extensive direction of a table should be vertical. I have configurations of parts for the ms standard hardware. There are so many different dash numbers that I am often increasing the number of entries in the table. The number of parameters mostly remains the same, but the number or rows has gotten to be over 100 for many parts. It is most useful to have formulas so that the lengths change in 1/16 increments. It would be nice to have a column for price, vendor and notes.

  2. It is interesting that the table family of parts data is swapped rows for columns compared to SW. This will get awkward when there are a hundred members. I have never seen a mil spec table or a catalog with the entries in that orientation.

  3. Using SW configuration as revision control/tool…ok…I was guilty of that, too.

    It really is a nightmare using configuration to keep track of all the revisions. I remember changing one value and thinking “What the…?! How come it is screwed up?!” Never did find out why and just rebuilt the whole thing, much more sane this way.

    I jumped to SE around the time ST5 came out but only used it for 1.5 years before going to a new job, where they use NX.

    I really enjoy your SE blog, Matt, when I was still on SE but I still enjoy reading On The Edge even though I am using NX exclusively, now.

    If you know a blog almost as good as yours for NX, pls do share! I will continue to read On The Edge, no matter what!

    Thanks!

  4. Matt-“This is why you see people trying to do things like revision control using Works Configurations, even though it is entirely unsuited for it.”

    I had a client that had 40,000 SolidWorks files from 10 years of work that used this exact method. A friggin’ nightmare is an understatement.

    Devon

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.