small management problems.

[Brethil]

Bye to all,
I write because I am affiliated with a problem that I can districate; more practical-organizational than technical.
basically, I'm a single user; I do not use vault and until today I have created multiple structured projects in order to contain folders like: assemblies, parts, drawings; projects which then copied all *.ipt files from a generic folder "free parts" which served as a supplier of parts for each project folder.
and so far I have never had problems; apart from the fact that over time I began to have a bang of projects full of zeppi parts.

then came doubt; The atrocious doubt. .

one of the needs to change to a part *.ipt that is fixed present in all projects...and immediately I realized that to do so, now as it is now my task to open every project and make the changes every time to the same part, or cmq change that of the "free parts" and then replace it in the projects in such a way that in its set you will see the appropriately modified part. . .

I wondered what I asked myself....but if instead of organizing the work in the state I had created every project always using the parts directly from "free parts" I would have just changed that piece once and then find the change in its " instance" in every project; I would have had project folders without *.ipt files and then read more. . .

Could I be wrong? Is there something that escapes me and I can't grasp?
Is there someone expert or who has already banged the horns that could direct me?
My projects range from 200 to about 1000 parts.

But I don't know what fish to take. _

thanks in advance to all.

:smile:

 

[stefanobruno]

then came doubt; The atrocious doubt. .

:smile:

it was better to have only one copy of each file.
Now you can recover it by deleting all the doubles you have in the various folders (do very rich backup ).
Make a folder where you put the common files, define it as a library, insert it into the path of the projects.
make a copy of the assemblies of each project, open it and, in my opinion, you should be in place without further interventions.
fa tensiun:biggrin:

Bye.

 

[Catafratto]

I also do more or less as stefanobruno indicates, only (by reason or wrong) I prefer to define the folder "calderone common parts" as a working group so that you can edit the parts more easily in case of need (the libraries are not editable).
Sometimes I get stuck with the versions, I still have to decide (after 4 years :-( ) if it is better to create a new file (e.g. 10205 ->10205_a) and change manually where it is necessary to update or hold the same file, make a copy to have the previous versions and use the internal property revision number so that it gets upgraded everything... In theory I think the second solution is better, in practice I often find reasons to use the first solution. What are you doing?

Hello, everyone!

p.s.
remember the keywords indicated by stefanobruno: "backup" and "fa tensiun"!

 

[stefanobruno]

Working group so you can edit the parts more easily in case of need (the libraries are not editable)

In fact, I don't even treat her as a library, but, canonically, that's the right way.
I cannot recommend it if the user is not aware of what you are doing.
If you're in a library the change is inhibited, there's an explicit notice that tells you.
However, just make a copy with the new features and save it equal name and the block is circumvented, consciously.
It's about banging his nose sometimes and learning how not to do it anymore.

Bye.

 

[Brethil]

thanks for the advice boys,
Basically if I have well understood, I should, in line with max, create a folder that funnels me from library (not in the inventor library) for all *.ipt and use it as a "supplier" of *.ipt instances for my upstream projects.
if then I need to do revisions or add new pieces, I will manage and maybe some particular piece I admit it in the "freedom" with something that identifies it as different piece from the rest, and then instigate it equally as from practice. Have I guessed? or am I stoned?

Thanks again

ps: xstefanobruno
- Did you know I didn't understand how to recover the files? to avoid remake everything I have to somehow point old *.iam files to the new library? Or not?

 

[stefanobruno]

- Did you know I didn't understand how to recover the files? to avoid remake everything I have to somehow point old *.iam files to the new library? Or not?

I think if you change your project files (.ipj) with pointing to the new part folder. standard you have created, iam is automatically reformed, without constantly indicating where to take references.
As already mentioned, the original iam keeps it aside.
attention to programs that automatically delete the basket, type ccleaner set by default.

Bye.

 

[pompeo79]

just what stefanobruno explained.

the nodal point in fact is not only to create a folder and rename it as "free parts" but to set it as a library in the project settings of inventor.

 

[Tarkus]

I have two folders, one to which all my projects aim as a library and therefore unmistakable, where there are files that will never change;p.es. the parts of other manufacturers (pules, motors, pneumatic cylinders and those who have more to put them), another call models where there are those parts or assemblies that I need as "almost equal" parts to change.this, I cover them in the various projects and there I modify them.. .

 

[Brethil]

I think if you change your project files (.ipj) with pointing to the new part folder. standard you have created, iam is automatically reformed, without constantly indicating where to take references.
As already mentioned, the original iam keeps it aside.
attention to programs that automatically delete the basket, type ccleaner set by default.

Bye.

ok, basically I have to point the copy of my .ipj project to the new *.ipt library folder (conserving the old *.iam for security) and see if then reopening them with the project pointing it is all ok.

I should be on the road!! !

thanks stefanobruno and to all of you guys for celerity and availability.

I hope I grabbed everything and I don't have to stress you anymore.

thank you all!!! :finger:

always great on cad3d!!

 

[Catafratto]

not only *.ipt; Also *iam if they are always those, type cylinders, hinges, frame pieces already mounted.. .

 

[francescodue]

I use pro/e and for convenience I always divided in this way: folders of common parts (also with specific assemblies); Project folders (with all derivatives: boards, pictures, etc.) including the specific parts for that project.
Usually if I create a set with the copied parts in folder (but not modified), I just need to delete the copies and the assieme search the parts in the various specific folders. (I set up search paths in pro/e configuration).
the problem is that when we are more than one to work you tend to create chaos:
or the colleague creates a copy of the part in the project folder, and maybe makes changes without warning (so I no longer know what the right part is), or makes changes in the part and I find changes in other assemblies where maybe there should not be.
I have tried to impose a common working criterion, but unfortunately I have not managed to maintain it, even a quick replacement of colleagues. (but this may be my problem.)
My question is: what criterion is the most convenient (what you follow) to manage parts and changes?
I explain: I have common parts and in some projects I have to change them.
I make a copy and it's all right. but sometimes I must indicate that it is a progressive copy made for a certain customer/supplier: Do I have to indicate it in the new name or is there a simpler criterion?
Thank you.

 

[Brethil]

Hey, guys.
I'm doing some evidence, but here's some creepy new doubts. .
for example; while before I had each project folder containing everything; iam, ipt and idw files; if by chance my boss asked me to take a project "pippo" and adapt it for the customer x..I simply took the project folder, copied it and then changed everything to my liking and everything was ok, with huge waste of space.
Now if all ipt files and iams are dependent on a unlicensed "particle" folder, how should I behave if I am required to change a set for a customer? I just need to copy my axieme and make only modifications together and in case you create new a hoc parts for the customer and replace them with the standards?
Do I miss anything?

a last thing, how do I point a copy of a together with the new "partcalderone" if some parts are now being renamed into the new cauldron? Do I need to open it and replace it manually and save or do I need to remake it from 0 axioms?

what hostical things..argh!!!

 

[Catafratto]

as I always describe what I do (so not the best solution, probably ;-)
1) copy the aid to be modified in a new project
2) I identify standard parts and variable parts (critical point, then we see better)
3) I copy and replace the assemblies and parts that are to be modified, starting from the "top" and then going down of level: if I think they can be reused I try to give a name "from standard" (e.g. rollers > d50x300, plates with holes for supports > 030.ucf205, gearbox >ctr.mvf49_055...); if it is something specific for the machine check a name related to the project/committee (e.g. the clamping bracket for bottom washing machine will be dis.10205.0001, thickness for bracket dis.10205.0002.. . )

Obviously attention, the danger of cascading modification on already made machines multiplies enormously: if first changing the traverse "a" nothing happened to the other machines, now obviously you will change the measure in all machines that use the traverse "a", with its consequences in good and evil.
I often create models where in the name is clear if I have to replace it "local" or not, es.commessa.lunghezza.01
I hope I've been a little help and I'm curious to know what others do...
Bye!

 

[francescodue]

I repeat that I use pro/e, but I think logic is the same.
common parts, those that are used everywhere, are in separate folders by categories (so to find them quickly).
in the customer's folders only find the axieme file and the dedicated parts.
if I have to make a new project, except the most suitable axieme in a new folder and work on this.
I also cover the specific parts that I need and that I have to change.
if I have to operate on a common part, I know that I do not have to change it, otherwise I make it specific (or common but with a new name for future uses).

changing names is always a delicate problem.
If you have already used them in different assemblies, you should continue using them without changing them.
if you have to rename you have two possibilities: or cover the part with a new name and use this for all new projects, while the original you hold it for the old. In this case you have to make a reminder to recognize the pair.
or renounce them and then open the assemblies one at a time and operate the replacements.
if the piece is the same, without modification, should take it only by indicating the new name. therefore it is not necessary to remake from zero. but the only one is to try.
ps: if old projects are closed permanently you may think of creating an old archive with the assemblies and old-name parts. and create a new one with renamed parts and subdivided folders.

 

[Brethil]

thanks for your precious advice,
you have well understood what my "crusses" were; I hope I have grasped everything correctly and I will try to honor your posts by engaging me to understand how best to proceed before breaking your boxes again and maybe for nothing.

thank you all, you are very thick.

good job spider

:finger: