non-topology changes to released ProE models - how do you handle this?

[davehaigh]

Here's a problem that we have, and so far I've seen no elegant way to handle this need inside of PDMLink.

We have ProE models that are 15 - 20 years old. They are released in the system, however back then we were not using Pro/Report for the drawing BOM, had numbered layers, and a whole different set of parameters, etc.

Now when we want to use one of those files in a new assembly, it doesn't have the necessary parameters to fill out the assy BOM, funky layers, etc. In order to use those files I have several non-optimal choices.

The choices as I see them are:

1. Make a copy of the file and add the necessary information to that. I really don't like this solution because I end up with multiple parts.

2. Add the model to an assembly and add the appropriate data to the assembly. This gets around multiple copies of the part, but still leaves users confused as to which model they should use.

3. Set the state of the model back to WIP and make the changes necessary, then set the state back to Released.

4. Modify the system to allow additional iterations after the file is released. Not sure how to do this.

Of course this problem isn't limited to just really old files, people forget to change parameters, leave layers displayed that should be blanked, and forget to include datum features necessary for assembly.

There needs to be a way to allow controlled changes to models even after they have been released, without revising it to the next revision. I want to keep model and drawing revisions in sync.

I want to ensure that the topology of the part doesn't change, and existing datum features and parameters are not removed.
However I want to allow adding new datum features, parameters, relations, analysis features, etc.
There needs to be some gate keeper process to make sure the topology hasn't changed and only approved additions have been made to the model.

How do you handle this?

David Haigh
Phone: 925-424-3931
Fax: 925-423-7496
Lawrence Livermore National Lab
7000 East Ave, L-362
Livermore, CA 94550

[sdrzewiczewski]

We've talked about creating a special ecn type to allow these administrative type changes to clean in legacy issues or mistakes. This would allow us to have a record of the change but not a cumbersome process to make the change.

Related to the users just making mistakes, I would recommend using ModelCheck to ensure the users adhere to your design standards especially if your formats have required parameters and layers.

Steve D.

[avillanueva]

Its important that however its done, you limit what changes are allowed.
I do not do a formal ECN process but most requests are for layers. The
biggest issue is with COTS models. Crappy import models or Solidworks
hacks. Approximate models. Purchased assemblies missing included
fasteners. A lot of these are done by the first engineer who used them.
Later on, another engineer might want to see it differently. Above all,
you must ensure the any changes do not muck up other released assemblies
where that part is used. Layers and parameters are easy. Other changes
are not so. Its best if you find that Pro/E user (admin) who knows how
to work in Pro/E but is not doing day to day modeling work (this way
they do not abuse access).