document still has parent elements?

[Steve]

If I try and delete something in my packet and it says:

"Document still has parent elements"

What does that mean, and how can I fix it?

Steve

[ChrisE]

Means that the document is still related to other elements in the database, like other documents (if it is a SolidDesigner component), or to part descriptions.

It is also likely that this document is either a 3D component or a 2D document that are linked together by a 2D-3D link element.

Try to delete the document from within the document EDITOR.

If that still doesn't help,
open the structure browser on this element, and navigate upwards (make sure to include all type of elements in your navigation: Parts, Documents, Folders, Others)

There you will find the parents of the document.

If it is a 3D component, and has a 2D drawing associated with it, you will have to get rid of the 2D document first.

If the parent is a part, then unrelate the document from the part.

[Wolfgang]

"Document still has parent elements"

It's a mess! I know that stupid message and I hate it! Why can't this software show me the message with the information needed???? :(

Why isn't there displayed

'Document has the following parent elements
a.......
b.......
c......
'

This information is available internally (because it's the base to make the decision to display that kind of message) but the information itself is not really displayed.

[Steve]

I was able to delete the guys out of the editor. Thanks!

Steve

[MikeBoswell]

An assembly save into workmanager from SD w/ 'create new doc and masterdata' saves a masterdata for every item in the 3d assy.

I can successfully recursively delete from top down all the documents, but how do I do the same w/ the masterdata?

Should I even worry about it??

They don't take up disk space but they do clutter the database.

Suggestions?

Mikeb

[Steve]

Is this in Work Manager or Model Manager?

I've never seen anything about "masterdata" when saving out of OSD or within Work Manager.

My options in Work Manager are:

Overwrite current document
Create new version
Create new version/replace
Create new document
Create new part and new document

But I don't know if mine has been customized or not.

Steve

[dszostak]

"It's a mess! I know that stupid message and I hate it! Why can't this software show me the message with the information needed???? "
We have improved the software and it's with our latest release of Model Manager 2004 (v12).

Check out the thread in which I explained how the delete wizard works. http://www.cocreateusers.org/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=4573

BTW - Masterdata is a concept that is in both Design Data Management and Model Manager. With Model Manager, database information like Masterdata is displayed in a more intuitive manner. When DDM says, Create new part and document, you are actually creating masterdata (the part) and a model file (the document). Masterdata allows you to have 3D, 2D, FEA, even PPT's files connected to the same part (masterdata) information.

Check out the attached image which shows how the delete wizard informs the user that the model will be deleted and it's currently linked objects (masterdata and user packet) will be unlinked and left in the database. After the model is deleted, you can stay in the delete wizard and then remove the masterdata, as long as there are no other objects link to that masterdata (which of course the delete wizard will tell you ;) ).

[MikeBoswell]

Steve,
We use design data management(ddm).

If model is in the 'work' state and reserved, osdm 12.01 options are:

overwrite
new version replace
new version parallel

If model is in the 'released' state and/or not reserved, osdm options are:

new version parallel

If model has never been saved w/ ddm, osdm options are;

new document
new masterdata and document


What method do you save w/ when first submitting the model to the db?
Are you saving assembles or single parts or both?

[Steve]

Hi Mike!

I save both assemblies and single parts into the database.

When I first save any model (assembly or single) into WM, I use "Create new Part and Document". I give the part a revision of "0", because I can't figure out what the revision on the part does.

Any subsequent related documented (like a drawing) that I create for the first time in WM I then just use "create new document", while the target part is displayed in the editor, so that when it goes in it will prompt me to relate the new document to the target part.

When re-saving a document that is already in WM, my options are overwrite or create new version, unless the target part has been released or is in someone else's packet, in which case it is read-only and my only option is create new version.

Steve

[MikeBoswell]

How do you save an assembly?

Top down or bottom up?

Top down w/ new part and document, will create a part for each model in the assy, correct? Then you file each document under its target part.

Im guessing that you do a bottom up save for assy, because the automatic naming is nasty w/ top down. Do you have large assy(part count)? Bottom up saves are a lot of work w/ large part count.

Do you release models? Do you release assy?

We have adopted DDM for 2d at this point, but having trouble coming up w/ a some what user freindly approach to add the 3d stuff.

I am basically dredging for processes that others have adopted for 3d in WM.

Thanks,

[Steve]

Hi Mike!

Lotsa questions here. You've kinda hit a sore spot with me, so I hope you don't mind my venting you are going to find sprinkled in this post. This is not directed at you! :)

You'll also have to take my comments on WM with a grain of salt, because I only started working with Solid Designer a year ago, and when I got SD/Annotation training even by then there was no official training scheduled for Work Manager anymore. Consequently I have had to puzzle out how to do it based on my past experience with other CAD PDM systems, reading the online help, talking with CoCreate Tech Support, and with folks here in the forums.

I believe the best practice is to save from the bottom up. As you note, saving an assembly from the top down causes all the sub-components and sub-assemblies to be saved with essentially random names, and of course does not fill in the descriptions. This creates a mess that just has to be cleaned up later anyway, so I find it better to file each part into Work Manager just as soon as I create it - even when I'm working with large assemblies.

Even if I don't know a "real" part number, I file it in with "bogus" but easily-identifiable names, using my initials (ses_screw1), etc. This lets me clean them up later when I get a real part number for them. I can also easily spot the yet-to-be numbered parts easily in my structure browser, so I know which ones need to be cleaned up.

By saving parts into WM as I go, my assembly stays "right" as the design evolves, and I do not face a huge crunch trying to file everything into WM at the end of the design.

It does not take that much more time to properly file a part document into WM the first time than it does to save it to a local disk, and, once saved into WM, it doesn't take any longer than saving to disk at all.

I release EVERYTHING into Work Manager as 3D data (I can find no practical use for packages, which create isolated islands of data). It boggles my mind that people are not doing this - I thought we were the only ones! :) If you don't put your 3D data into some kind of PDM system, you can't easily version control it, you can't easily find it, you may or may not preseve associativity to your drawings, and, most importantly, it becomes extremely difficult to re-use common components across assemblies. However, until I came to work with my present employer a year ago, they were saving files just like it sounds like you are - only a step even further removed. Here, they were using Solid Designer to design the product, using Annotation to generate 3D orthographic projections, saving that as a .mi file, and then opening it in ME10 to dimension and detail and make a real drawing. Then, all that was being put into WM was the 2D ME10 drawing. Thus all relationship to the original geometry was lost, and every time a change was done to the geometry it first had to be located (who's hard drive /directory did we save that on?), then it had to be updated, and then the drawing had to be manually updated.

Of course, this invites disaster, because you can never be certain that your model and your drawing match. Sure enough, we had a vendor who requested 3D data to do their machining, and someone poked around until they found the model they thought matched the drawing, and sent it off. The model in fact did not match the drawing, and consequently was improperly machined by the vendor.

This is contrary to the way all modern CAD software packages work (Unigraphics, Pro/Engineer, etc.) - even Solid Designer, after a fashion.

How do you save your 3D data? Do you save it as packages to a local/network hard drive, outside of Work Manager?

I agree - maintaining 3D/2D relationships between SD and Annotation is agonizing compared to other CAD packages I have used. In no other CAD package have I had to save a drawing, and then remember to go save the model, too, or else the drawing is not really "saved" (because Annotation puts the viewset information in the geometry file, not in the drawing file). If you the user don't remember to go save the model, your drawing is toast the next time you open it. That, my friends, is ridiculous.

Another whopper that I can't get over is the fact that when you open a drawing, you the user have to "know" which model to open up that goes with it. Obviously Annotation knows when you open the right model, because the text in the drawing browser turns from red to blue, so why is it when you open the drawing it doesn't automatically load the necessary geometry, or at least give you the option, or even a hint? Other CAD software packages handle this sort of thing for you. Unless you are smart with your naming conventions and/or utilize Parts inside of WM, the only way to identify the geometry that goes with any particular drawing is to go into "Workmanager Classic" and run cryptic queries to identify the children of the drawing.

So I do agree that managing your 3D and related 2D data into Work Manager is not terribly user-friendly. Supposedly Model Manager makes some of this easier, but I don't how much better it will really be. Right now, based on my experience with other CAD packages, Solid Designer, Annotation, and Work Manager "feel" like they were written as separate applications, and not very tightly integrated. WM in particular "feels" like a poor Unix-to-Windows port, what with the icons with no fly-out mouse-over help, and the windows that you can resize with no effect on the contents within the windows. MM, from the little I saw of it in my SD/Annotation training, appears to be a true native windows app., so hopefully it has been a more tightly integrated as they claim. Likewise with version 12 of the OSD/Annotation software, I hope (we are still on 11.60C). Our company right now is considering whether or not they want to spend the money to upgrade from WM/Allbase to WM or MM on Oracle. But frankly, for the amount of money they are talking about to do it, you could replace the whole shebang with a much more modern CAD suite, in my opinion.

Anyway, the only way I have found you can make Solid Designer work, after a fashion, like other modern CAD packages, giving you full associativity between components, assemblies, and all the related drawings, is by putting everything into Work Manager. If you aren't managing your 3D data, and making use of full associativity, you are, in my opinion, totally missing the point of what modern CAD packages are supposed to do.

Steve

[MikeBoswell]

Steve, Im still not clear on what you are using for an interface to WM? I know that you are not using MM, and it also sounds like your not using DDM. So what are you using?

If I was still designing Im sure that I would have made full use of our DDM installation by now. It appears to me that it adds a powerfull organizational tool to the suite.

Currently and for the past ~15 years we have used a central network share to store and manage our 2d/3d data. Users have a home directory that all other users have read access to. All models remain in the originators home dir and all 2d is moved to a share that the entire company has access to. The 2d is the master once it is created. BOGUS.

My push is for the 3d to be the master and any changes to be made on the model and pushed to the 2d. Trouble w/ our current system is that if the ECO does not end up on the model originators desk, only the 2d is changed. The model only adds to the confusion at this point.

I think that w/ DDM we can allow the originator retain control of the original version of the model and allow the ECO desk to make new versions of any of the parts effected by the ECO. Then save the modified part as new version and also save the assy as a new version. The ECO guy would open the latest version of the assy, set modify on the part(s) to be worked on, set modify on the assy to be worked on, make changes to model , update 2d drawing(s), save 2d, save new version of modified part(s), save new version of assy.

How do you handle a change to a part in an assy?

It would be great to hear from anyone else that may want to share their process.

[Steve]

Steve, Im still not clear on what you are using for an interface to WM? I know that you are not using MM, and it also sounds like your not using DDM. So what are you using?

Hi Mike!

I'm a little weak on the terminology here, so bear with me. We are using, I believe, what is called Work Manager Desktop. When you launch it, you get a toolbar across the top of your screen with icons from left to right for the Editor, Lister, Packet Editor, WorkManager, ME10, SolidDesigner, Structure Browser, and Exit. From here, users primarily work with the Part/Document Editor, the Lister, and the Packet Editor.

Currently and for the past ~15 years we have used a central network share to store and manage our 2d/3d data. Users have a home directory that all other users have read access to. All models remain in the originators home dir and all 2d is moved to a share that the entire company has access to. The 2d is the master once it is created. BOGUS.

I agree.

Question: Are your users saving 3D data (geometry) to the hard drive as packages, bundles, or 3D Data?

Myself, I'm absolutely bewildered at how OSD/Annotation saves data locally. Even in training I did not feel it was explained very well how to manage data locally (clearly ModelManager, a PDM system, was intended to be used). I got the distinct impression that a lot of other folks in the class were likewise bewildered at the local-file system management of data.

Most CAD software I have dealt with in the past has either a single type of file, or they have a type of file for assemblies, another for parts, and another for drawings.

OSD/Annotation has a variety of ways to save data locally, and I'm not sure I understand how to make use of them or all the pitfalls.

I know, for example, you can save your geometry as a "package". This is the primary way folks here seem to have saved assemblies to a "hard drive" (I will use "hard drive" to mean any drive, local, network, or whatever, outside of Work Manager). Packages to not include the drawing. The problem with packages, as I understand it, is that they create isolated islands of data. If I create a package of a box with a lid, and then create another package file with a different box but the same lid, I do not know any way to make them share the same lid - each lid is a separate, independant, non-associative copy. Clearly, then, packages are not the way to go if you want to have cross-associativity from the component level up to all assemblies where they are used.

You can also save your data as a "bundle", which, as far as I can tell, is just like a package but the drawing is included with it. It has the same problem of data associativity as outlined above.

You can also save your data to the hard drive as "3D Data", which seems to sprinkle not only geometry files but also assembly instance files, assembly contents files, part instance files, and part contents files, to name a few possibilities.

Saving items as 3D data is the only way I know of to allow individual use and reference of component geometry into multiple assemblies and/or drawings and preserve associativity.

Unfortunately, what I have not seen is how one would manage this pile of data types without using a PDM system. For example, if I have 5 directories, each with 3D data stored in them (say each directory is a component library), how to I build an assembly that pulls components out of each directory? With Unigraphics, which is designed to work both with a native file system and their (very expensive) PDM system, you can define "search directories" so that when you open an assembly it can either pull the necessary components from where they were last time the assembly was saved (as saved option), or it can go search for the necessary components (search directories option), or it can search directories and load the latest version of each component, based on a versioning scheme you define (load latest option).

I do not know how to do something similarly with OSD. But I do know that filing 3D data into Work Manager is much simpler than trying to manage it out on a hard drive, as all of these content and instance files, where they are stored, their versions, and links to them all, are all managed for you.

Admittedly, I have not worked very hard to figure out how to work "natively", as I file everything into Work Manager. We need to figure out how to work natively, as we have facilities across the country, and it is too slow for them to work directly off of our server here. Right now I /think/ the approach is to pull things out of Work Manager, file them locally as packages and .mi files locally, and then push them back into Work Manager as 3D data when finished.

My push is for the 3d to be the master and any changes to be made on the model and pushed to the 2d. Trouble w/ our current system is that if the ECO does not end up on the model originators desk, only the 2d is changed. The model only adds to the confusion at this point.

How are they creating the 2D drawings? Using Annotation? How do they subsequently edit them but not the model? Are they creating the drawings in Annotation, and then later changing them in ME10? I find it is difficult, using Annotation, to "edit" geometry in views in Annotation that have been generated from 3D geometry. You can "draw in" new lines and arcs in drafting, but I can't see any way to easily edit what is already there, which is what you would expect, as it is intended to be updated via the geometry.

In a way, it is sort of a bad thing that ME10 and Annotation work so closely together. It is too easy to open an Annotation drawing in ME10 and screw it up. Of course the benefit is you can easily cut-and-paste geometry out of ME10 into OSD/Annotation, too.


I think that w/ DDM we can allow the originator retain control of the original version of the model and allow the ECO desk to make new versions of any of the parts effected by the ECO. Then save the modified part as new version and also save the assy as a new version. The ECO guy would open the latest version of the assy, set modify on the part(s) to be worked on, set modify on the assy to be worked on, make changes to model , update 2d drawing(s), save 2d, save new version of modified part(s), save new version of assy.

This sounds like what I do. Our "ECO desk" releases all drawings and models. When I am finished with them, I put them in a packet and send them to the ECO desk, who then sets the work state on them to "released". This makes them uneditable by anyone.

Anyone who subsequently opens a released model or drawing and wants to make a change must save it into Work Manager as a new version. When these new versions are finished, they get put into packets and sent to the ECO desk again, where they are again released. And so on.

How do you handle a change to a part in an assy?

Work Manager handles this for you.

Assuming you save everything into WM as 3D Data (again, packages are, as near as I can tell, useless), when you put a component into WM, say, a screw, then every assembly you subsequently make that references that screw will be referencing the same screw. If that screw ever changes, the next time the assemblies are opened the screw will show up in its new, changed state.

When you open assemblies, you have the option of loading them with the latest version of all the components (which is usually what a design guy wants to see), or you can make it load with the versions of the components that were used the last time the assembly was saved.

If the screw has been changed and saved as a new version, then when you open the assembly with "standard load" you will see the old version of the screw. If you open the assembly with "last stored" then you will see the new version of the screw.

Again, this is what I have been able to puzzle out with no WM training, so don't take this as gospel. For example, we also have an option to "Last stored: Document Owner" and I don't know what that does. Likewise there is an option to "Highest Version if assembly not released" and I don't know what that does, either.

Now this brings up an important issue: "Releasing" an assembly does not "lock it in time" if you have not released all of the components that go into it. This can be a difficult concept for some to grasp. They cannot understand how, if I have released an assembly, it can change the next time I open it. It is, of course, simple: The assembly itself actually contains no component geometry - it merely references component geometry out of the database. If you have not released (locked down) the components, and they change, then the next time the assembly is opened it will also have changed.

[continued]

[Steve]

[continued]

Some people balk at this concept of associativity. They say, "I don't want the system propagating changes all throughout my structures without my explicit concent". But this is a false sense of security. Because in real life, your assemblies ARE changing if you make a change to a component used in many assemblies. At least when they change in the virtual world you have a chance at catching the effects of the propagation before you get to manufacturing.

Of course, this makes the assembly module (I think this is the correct module) almost a must-have module. We do not presently have this module. What the assembly module does (I think), is allows you to define mating conditions between parts in an assembly. So if you put a bolt into a bolt hole, and the bolt hole moves, the bolt, at the assembly level, will follow. This is important. Because without it, component changes, while they will update the affected components in the assemblies where they are used, will not update the way the assembly goes together. Sometimes it is obvious. If an axle gets a foot longer and you open the car assembly and find the axle sticking a foot through the tire rim, you know you have a problem to fix in your assembly(ies). But the real "gotcha" comes when you make a change of say, .005", and when you open your assemblies you wouldn't even notice the misalignment unless you carefully went looking for it. This is why mating conditions are important. In systems like Pro/Engineer, you can't even position components in an assembly without defining mating conditions (there is a special case but I will not go into it).

Anyway, what I have found is that by saving component and assembly geometry into Work Manager as 3D data, and the drawings as 2D data (of course), you end up with full associativity between your components, the assemblies they are used in, and all component and assembly drawings.

As I expressed in my previous post - with Work Manager it is a bit tedious and not at all intuitive, but it does work, after a fashion.

Steve

[May Kung]

Originally posted by Steve
Another whopper that I can't get over is the fact that when you open a drawing, you the user have to "know" which model to open up that goes with it. Obviously Annotation knows when you open the right model, because the text in the drawing browser turns from red to blue, so why is it when you open the drawing it doesn't automatically load the necessary geometry, or at least give you the option, or even a hint?
From what I can tell, MM has a data field you can query to find the child drawings of a model (and vice versa). We're still testing things out before we fully migrate from WM 5.1, so I'm still quite new with this.

From what I've seen to date, run, don't walk, to migrate from WM to MM. It's much more user-friendly, you have a lot more power to search for files, Partial Load is a lot more efficient, and updating versions within an assembly is a snap (unlike in WM, where I usually loaded the new child version first, then loaded its parent).

[Steve]

From what I've seen to date, run, don't walk, to migrate from WM to MM.

Just don't run off without your checkbook, as it looks like you'll need about $40,000 - $60,000 worth of consulting services to make the move.

:eek:

Steve

[May Kung]

Well, I didn't say it was cheap. :D The bulk seems for migrating the schema from WM to MM, hardware upgrades (our server was getting too old and slow), and going to Oracle 9i. This migration was a long time in coming for us; I've been dreaming of finally getting to use MM ever since I saw it in beta (what, two years ago?).

Now I just have to figure out how to train the users here... :(

[MikeBoswell]

May,
(unlike in WM, where I usually loaded the new child version first, then loaded its parent)

Can you explain further what you mean by this? Versioning has me a bit confused still.

Thanks,

[MikeBoswell]

Steve,

The group here mainly uses 3d data. Actually the main reason for that, is because CC said it was a 'safer' approach than packages. Never really understood, but we went with it. Packages actually seem more convenient to me but w/ WM in mind it seemed more important to get used to an assy being a directory full of files. It really is not in our culture to reference a pre-existing part in a new design. Generally a copy is made. When we get WM rolling into 3d we will evolve, hopefully. I don’t think that there is a way to do it w/ out the PDM.

After modeling design work is done, ~99% of the 2d drawings are generated and completed in annot. After that ~10% are kept associative w/ the model. If the original designer is not the guy holding the ECO, then chances are the model will fall behind. We also have 10’s of thousands of old 2d’s that have been generated over the last ~15 years. All editing of 2d’s, when no model is available, is done w/ ME10. Annotation is definitely note a stand alone drafting tool.

Do you pass a model around and make changes at the different design desks?. I.e. , viewsets, 3d modifications, adding parts to assy. An example would be a ‘designer’ passing on the finished model to the ‘drafter’ who finishes the 2d documentation. The assy and/or parts needs to be saved w/ all the new viewsets. Would your model get rev’ed a this point or does the ‘drafter’ have modify access to the assy and/or part?

How does the ‘designer’ continue to evolve the design while the ‘drafters’ are trying to make progress on the 2d stuff?

Our approach will most likely be to revision the assy and parts when a 2d viewset is created. Perhaps adopting you use of a rev 0 at the ‘designers’ desk. Then as the 2d’s are created we would start up w/ our standard rev schema (1, 2, 3, 4 ,5 ……)

[May Kung]

Originally posted by MikeBoswell
May,


Can you explain further what you mean by this? Versioning has me a bit confused still.

Thanks,
Sure. We're just taking advantage of a "feature" of Solid Designer. If two parts/assemblies share the same sys id, if you load one first, then load the second one, you'll get an error message saying: "The part XXXX has the same id as another; it will automatically be shared as p1" or something like that. You can actually set this to default to load as a share or load as copy. Out-of-the-box is to share.

I tell users it's "first one in has precedence." The second model loaded will look identical to the first one. This is useful when updating assemblies.

For example, let's say I have an assembly with two children, a bolt and a nut, each saved as version 1. Someone else has created version 2 of the bolt, perhaps 3 cm longer than version 1.

To update my assembly, I have two options:

************
A. Load assembly first:

1. Load the assembly.
2. Delete out version 1 of the bolt from my session.
3. Load in version 2 of the bolt.
4. Make sure version 2 is in the right location.
5. Save the updated assembly.

************
B. Load version 2 of the bolt first:

1. Load version 2 of the bolt.
2. Load the assembly.
3. I'll get the error saying the bolts will automatically be shared. This is fine. You'll notice the bolt in the assembly and the bolt at root will both have share icons.
4. Delete out version 2 of the bolt (the one at root, that I had loaded by itself).
5. Your assembly is now updated. Save it back into WM.

************
I much prefer Option B because I don't have to check if the bolt has moved, nor do I have to worry about the Instance Name (in the Structure Browser of SD) changing on me.

MM is much nicer because I can pick the specific versions of parts before I even load the assembly. With WM, this is not as intuitive, but it *does* work.

BTW, for about half of the engineers here, we do our own 2D prints in addition to our 3D models. For the other half, they do the 3D model and then pass on the 2D duties to a drafter.

When we first started using WM, we had problems with an engineer still wanting to modify the model as the drafter was using it to create viewsets and the like. Neither side wanted to wait to reserve the part, so they used Set Modify (!) all the time. It caused a huge mess.

Now, we have the engineer wait until the drafter has finished creating the viewset and no longer needs the model before continuing to modify the 3D model. Communication between engineer and drafter is very important and problems still arise on occasion. There really isn't a way around this, AFAIK.

[MikeBoswell]

Thanks for the explaination May. I get it now.

===========================

We have about the same cross section of eng's here, some do their own drafting, some pass it on.

When we first started using WM, we had problems with an engineer still wanting to modify the model as the drafter was using it to create viewsets and the like. Neither side wanted to wait to reserve the part, so they used Set Modify (!) all the time. It caused a huge mess.

'huge mess' being all kind of revisions that didn't make sense?

So, your folks will reserve the model now, not 'set modify' it? ('Set modify' would allow a revision when the model is still reserved.) Once reserved, they have full write access to the model, correct? Do they overwrite the model to add view sets or do they rev it? If they overwrite, dont the designers worry about the possibility of the model being changed w/o their OK?

Will the 'designer' unreserve all of an assy or just the part that is having the
2d done?

Thanks,

[May Kung]

Originally posted by MikeBoswell
'huge mess' being all kind of revisions that didn't make sense?

We had corrupted models and people unable to save things back into WM. I need to mention we had a highly-optimized implementation of WM that exacerbated problems (we've stripped much of that out now).

We also had versions with the correct, updated geometry, but no viewsets, or models with the right viewset and incorrect geometry.

So, your folks will reserve the model now, not 'set modify' it? ('Set modify' would allow a revision when the model is still reserved.) Once reserved, they have full write access to the model, correct? Do they overwrite the model to add view sets or do they rev it? If they overwrite, dont the designers worry about the possibility of the model being changed w/o their OK?

Actually, most folks never unreserve stuff from their packets, though they should; Doc Control does so as part of the release process.

Yes, once the file is reserved, the owner has full write access. Since most users here do not unreserve files, it's easier just to save a new version first (thus, granting write access to the owner of this new version), then go about making any necessary changes.

This way, the drafter does not actually overwrite the original model and has something to go back to, should something happen to his version (bad save, messed up the viewset/model, etc., etc.).

The nice thing about doing things this way is the multiple versions serve as "snapshots" of the model through various stages. While our database is backed-up, we cannot go back and individually bring back a file that was accidentally overwritten/corrupted. We would have to roll back the entire database to a previous state (thus undoing changes and saves for many people).

Will the 'designer' unreserve all of an assy or just the part that is having the
2d done?

See above. Once we change to MM, we will likely implement the Reserve/Unreserve process, unlike the hodgepodge we have now. The designer will only need to unreserve the part that is having the 2D done.

[Steve]

The group here mainly uses 3d data. Actually the main reason for that, is because CC said it was a 'safer' approach than packages. Never really understood, but we went with it. Packages actually seem more convenient to me but w/ WM in mind it seemed more important to get used to an assy being a directory full of files.

I would guess that CC feels that saving as 3D data is "safer" than saving an assembly as a single package because when you save as a package you are "putting all your eggs in one basket". If the package file becomes corrupt or gets deleted, you've lost everything - the assembly and all the components in it.

By saving an assembly as 3D data, all the individual components get saved out to the hard drive. If the assembly file(s) gets corrupted, at least the components are still there to be re-used.

It really is not in our culture to reference a pre-existing part in a new design. Generally a copy is made. When we get WM rolling into 3d we will evolve, hopefully. I don’t think that there is a way to do it w/ out the PDM.

I think you are right. I asked how one would go about doing it on a filesystem based system (as opposed to a PDM based system) during training, and the instructor said he thought he knew of a customer that was doing it but couldn't provide any details off the top of his head.

Obviously you see the inefficiency and danger inherent in making copies of common components used across assemblies. The odds of keeping all components, assemblies, and drawings up-to-date becomes virtually nil.

Do you pass a model around and make changes at the different design desks?. I.e. , viewsets, 3d modifications, adding parts to assy. An example would be a ‘designer’ passing on the finished model to the ‘drafter’ who finishes the 2d documentation. The assy and/or parts needs to be saved w/ all the new viewsets. Would your model get rev’ed a this point or does the ‘drafter’ have modify access to the assy and/or part?

I don't have a lot of insight here, because prior to my coming here a year ago and starting to use OSD in conjunction with Annotation all that was managed "officially" were the ME10 drawing files.

Generally, I make all my own geometry and drawings, and have done very little concurrent work with other folks here at the company (there has been no mandate to require using Annotation to make drawings so I am still somewhat of a "rogue" here, though I do think it is catching on). Still, though, I believe most of the mechanical designers here are their own drafters, too. I don't think we have many mechanical engineers who are fluent OSD users, at least at this location.

However, just yesterday I had occassion to pass off two sub-assemblies used in my new design to a person to generate drawings. What I did was create a packet in WM and put those two assemblies (but not the components for them) into it. I then used WM to send the packet to that drafting person. Because he now has the packet, he now has write-access to the assemblies, and thus can create view-sets in them as needed. I am still referencing the sub-assemblies in my assembly, but of course they are now read-only. Should I have reason to change them I would either have him send the packet back to me, or I would create a new version.

How does the ‘designer’ continue to evolve the design while the ‘drafters’ are trying to make progress on the 2d stuff?

As above, either the drafter would have to send the packet back to me, so I could edit the file directly, or I would file it as a "new version". If I filed it as a new version, that new version would contain all the view sets that he had created in the previous version, assuming I had opened my assembly and/or his sub-assembly after he last saved it. I don't know of any way to "refresh" an already-open assembly short of closing it and re-opening it. In systems like Pro/Engineer, if sub-components or sub-assemblies change while a higher level assembly is open and being worked on, the system flags them and alerts the user that the components have changed, and gives the user the opportunity to update his alread-open assembly. I don't know if something similar is available with OSD.

I think I remember hearing something about MM allowing the creation of packets with group access permissions. I'm not sure how this works, though, if say 2 users have read/write access to the same folder. If the designer is saving to a component as he is changing its geometry, and the drafter is saving the same component as he is changing it by adding viewsets, I don't know how the system will reconcile that.

It's still really silly in my mind that a drafter has to have write access to a model to make a drawing of it! :mad: I have not seen this behavior in any other CAD package. In fact, most of the time you don't WANT a drafter to have the ability to fiddle with the geometry - it's not his job to alter the design. A drafter should only need to reference the geometry read-only to generate and save a drawing of it. I don't understand CoCreate's logic here at all.

Steve

[May Kung]

Originally posted by Steve
I don't know of any way to "refresh" an already-open assembly short of closing it and re-opening it. In systems like Pro/Engineer, if sub-components or sub-assemblies change while a higher level assembly is open and being worked on, the system flags them and alerts the user that the components have changed, and gives the user the opportunity to update his alread-open assembly. I don't know if something similar is available with OSD.
MM allows this. You need to occasionally hit the Refresh button so it queries the database to check the status of all components (i.e. Up-to-Date, Newer version, Locally Modified, etc., etc.). You can also have the system send you an email to subscribed parts if they get changed.

You can reload components to any other version without having to unload the others in your session. It's really quite slick.