Community Tip - You can subscribe to a forum, label or individual post and receive email notifications when someone posts a new topic or reply. Learn more! X
I avoid family tables if at all possible. The one good use i have seen for family tables are simple family/library parts like screws and fasteners at various sizes/lengths.
Perhaps considers using simplified reps to toggle "parts" and components on and off in an assembly. I personally find this way more robust for handling assembly configurations...
My $0.01
Avoid Simplified reps to control configuration because there is no PDM view of simplified reps.
Family tables do generate a useable PDM view. The main problem family tables pose is that they seem easy, but users can be careless in creating or managing them. It doesn't help that there is no good place to document what how a model is built, and particularly how a family table is intended to function.
Using Simplified Reps to avoid family tables can result in an unmanageable product structure.
Of late, many things that used to require an explicit family table to manage have been better handled using assembly flexibility** (such as drawer slides being opened or closed) which generates on-the-fly table entries, just as Assembly Cuts do, but flexibility is relatively recent to PTC.
**Not to be confused with the Flexible Modeling Extension, which is really a Direct Manipulation Extension.