Individual part drawings to multi-model drawing, easily? 4

[fighterpilot]

I have an assembly with about 15 detail parts. Each part is an item in Teamcenter and each has it's own detail drawing in the file. The assembly also has it's own individual drawing.

Now, I'm being asked to take all those detail drawings which are standing alone and make them sheets under the assembly drawing. Essentially the assembly details would be on sheet 1, part 1 details on sheet 2, etc....

Since I've detailed everything already is there an easy way to take all that information and stick it as assembly drawing sheets? Or, do I need to start over and detail everything again? If so, how do I go about creating a multi-model drawing?

NX6

Thanks...

--
Fighter Pilot
Manufacturing Engineer

 

[JohnRBaker]

Whatever you do, try to resist doing this as it will have a big impact on the performance of this assembly in the future. This is a very poor practice, even WORSE than not using the Master Model approach.

If you can't avoid doing this, for whatever reason, make a clone of these parts and modify the cloned copies so that you've always got a clean set of files for future work.

John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Design Solutions
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Industry Sector
Cypress, CA

http://www.siemens.com/plm

http://www.plmworld.com/museum/

To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.

 

[fighterpilot]

John,

I have no way around it. I'm already being 'schooled' on how I should have been making each individual part as a tool solid in a upper level assembly. It's not a physically large or complex assembly however.

Old timers here want to see tool drawings a certain way and that's not the way I currently have it. What I was producing was logical to me and it's what I've done in the past w/ Pro/E.

I have no idea what you are talking about with 'clones'. Please advise.

Thanks...



--
Fighter Pilot
Manufacturing Engineer

 

[ewh]

Here we also detail components at the assembly level. They are still (usually) individual components brought into the assembly file which is then (usually) brought into the drawing file. I have not encountered any problems with this yet. The problems start snowballing when additional parts are created in the drawing file or in the assembly file (yes, those are "legitimate" and even proscribed workflows here). Heaven help me through to the end of this contract!

"Good to know you got shoes to wear when you find the floor." - [small]Robert Hunter[/small]

 

[ewh]

As to the original question, I don't know of any easy method to move the detailed views into the assembly drawing. Sorry.

"Good to know you got shoes to wear when you find the floor." - [small]Robert Hunter[/small]

 

[JohnRBaker]

While we may come to rue the day ;-) starting with the next version of NX, we are actually providing a scheme to perform a 'copy & paste' of entire drawing sheets from one file to another, so it will now be fairly easy, once all of your detail parts have been modeled and drawing created from them (even if you've faithfully followed Master Model techniques), to collect them all together into a single part file. This is being provided in support of a traditional workflow for an industry segment which we are starting to seriously go after and for which we have started to add new functionality and capability which supports some of their specific workflows.

As for my comment about 'cloning', I was simply suggesting that perhaps you first copy your original assembly so that whatever you ended up doing to it, you's always have a clean copy to fall back on for future work.

John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Design Solutions
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Industry Sector
Cypress, CA

http://www.siemens.com/plm

http://www.plmworld.com/museum/

To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.

 

[looslib]

The only shortcut maybe to save the individual views of the components as DXF files and import them into the additional sheets of the assembly.

John's clone would be to make a copy of your current files, at least the assembly one, and use that for this requirement. This will leave your original work alone, yet provide drawings the way you have been instructed to do them.

I tried to convince our tool designers to do the detailing of the components in individual files and they always protested saying tool design has "always been done this way". They obviously made some changes as they don't work with stone and chisel anymore!


"Wildfires are dangerous, hard to control, and economically catastrophic."

Ben Loosli

 

[fighterpilot]

I think Ben and I unknowingly work for the same company. Checking company directory.......No, we do not.

I can do the detail drawings, again, and then wipe out the detail drawing under the individual part so I don't have multiple drawings running around. Doesn't make much sense to me but I'm trying to get something made and these are the hoops I'll have to jump thru to get that accomplished. Personally, when I want to see a part drawing I want to pull up the part, not some big donkey assembly. I also got slammed for using parts lists and autoballoon on my assembly drawing. Apparently I'm just supposed to create this manually and keep it updated manually.

Now, I've added another sheet to my drawing and want to detail the first part. I added a base view and selected the part from the list. However, there is nothing in the view box after I place the view. I don't think it should do that so I must be doing something wrong. Assistance please?



--
Fighter Pilot
Manufacturing Engineer

 

[JohnRBaker]

If you've been using layers, make sure that all your files have the same layers visible.

John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Design Solutions
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Industry Sector
Cypress, CA

http://www.siemens.com/plm

http://www.plmworld.com/museum/

To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.

 

[fighterpilot]

John,

I'm attempting to use layers w/o really understanding them (more corporate rules). I just set all layers on in my assembly and tried to place the part view again. Same result...no part, just an outline.

--
Fighter Pilot
Manufacturing Engineer

 

[ewh]

The parts list/smart balloons practice is another thing not to be used here.
Let me guess... reference sets instead of arrangements?

"Good to know you got shoes to wear when you find the floor." - [small]Robert Hunter[/small]

 

[fighterpilot]

John,

I went back and verified all the parts had the same layer turned on in each. Still no model shows in the new view on the next sheet.

--
Fighter Pilot
Manufacturing Engineer

 

[JohnRBaker]

Try setting all the Reference Sets to 'Entire Part' and see if anything shows up. If it does, it sounds like you have a Reference Set problem.

John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Design Solutions
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Industry Sector
Cypress, CA

http://www.siemens.com/plm

http://www.plmworld.com/museum/

To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.

 

[DaSalo]

Curious if you guys who are complaining about the way tooling prints are formatted have ever worked for any length of time as a toolmaker? I do tooling design, drafting, and frequently walk out in the shop and build my own designs in the company of a half dozen aerospace toolmakers with more than 200 years cumulative experience between them.

There is a very definite style to the way tooling prints are formatted in the aerospace industry. It is very consistent across many major corporations. It is done that way for efficiency on the shop floor, not because it is traditional.

When you have a situation where one individual toolmaker is responsible for making every one of 100+ parts in a complex assembly it is highly inefficient to work on one part at a time. You group your work and process many of parts through in parallel. A good tooling designer will understand how the toolmaker will likely want to group their work and will lay the sheets out with that group of details all on the same sheet. That way the toolmaker can have a single c-size sheet on the bench and work on 6 or 8 parts at once in parallel without ever having to flip the page. This saves an incredible amount of time and also makes it very easy for the lead tool maker to delegate work to others.

One person might be put in charge of building the structure of the tool while another is given responsibility for all of the hardened details or some other logical division of labor. The tool designer will understand these dynamics and lay out the print with this in mind.

I would strongly encourage those of you who are being asked to design in this way to spend some time with the tooling team who will be using your prints. I think you will find their input to be incredibly valuable. They are the our customers, after all. These prints need to work for them. File management issues take a back seat.

Hope these comments are helpful.

 

[looslib]

I do understand the way toolmakers work. My contention where I used to work was that we would have 4 to 6 details on one E-size sheet and 10-15 sheets per tool. Put each detail on a C or even B size sheet with only the assembly on E-size. Each part is individually detailed. the toolmaker can layout the ones he is working on easier. When each piece is finished, the piece and drawing can go to QC for inspection, then on to assembly.

With the company I worked for replacing prints on the floor with LCD screens, having a single piece part on the screen would be easier. It would also fit in with the data management systems that corporate was dictating we all use.

While tradition is good, sometimes change is required for improvement. Not to get into issues of age, but traditionally the toolmakers where the older, more experienced machinists and the ones who would moan the loadest at any changes. To set the record straight, I am 59 and been in various manufacturing industries for almost 40 years. I have seen a lot of change over that time.


"Wildfires are dangerous, hard to control, and economically catastrophic."

Ben Loosli

 

[ewh]

OK, who is complaining about tooling drawing format?
I have no complaints about the use of multi-detail assembly drawings, and have created many such drawings. What I am complaining about are the poor, short-sighted methods often used to create such.

"Good to know you got shoes to wear when you find the floor." - [small]Robert Hunter[/small]

 

[DaSalo]

Ben,

I would like to continue this conversation but think it is off-topic for this forum. Is there another forum we could move this to if you have an interest?

-Jeff

 

[DaSalo]

Ewh,

My comments were directed at the idea that drafting for each detail should reside in individual drafting files, not in a single file that contains drafting for the assembly and all details. My intent was to express my feeling that the toolmaking process is often very different than other types of production and because of the way toolmakers work multi-detail drawings are very functional. I believe having each detail on a separate page, or in a separate file, would not work well for this application.

 

[DaSalo]

Ben,

I agree that E-size is too big. Even for the full assembly I have rarely found it necessary to go that big. All toolmakers have access to computers with NX installed so can open and interrogate the model if necessary. Generally I would say that this has not led to greater efficiency. The most efficient work happens when the toolmaker has a high quality print tacked up right at the machine and can work without referencing anything else. We do have LCD screens at our CNC mills and I think everyone has come to the conclusion that they work faster from the paper.

 

[fighterpilot]

JohnRBaker's view was this technique would slow down the performance of the assembly but others have chimed in saying the performance aspect is nothing to worry about.

Personally I don't see an issue using multi-detail drawings vs. many drawings, even from the viewpoint of the toolmaker. Parts are parts. Sometimes processes ("we've always done it this way") continue because there aren't enough people in the value chain who are willing to take a stand and show that the ENTIRE process is shorter by doing it a different way.



--
Fighter Pilot
Manufacturing Engineer