Representing same part with different shape in 3Dx/CATIA V5

[Azzazil]

I have same part in two different assemblies with different shape. Since when I create any 3DPart by our PML system I get to him attached unique ID Part Name, and any additional creation of 3DPart will create new ID Part Name so in this case I can't store geometry of other shape configuration under different 3DPart since when I create BoM it will generate 2 different ERP codes that will be in system for same part.

To explain more in details here is sketch.

In sketch you can see red line which represents my part with developed length, other part is marked with blue line and it represents my part in first configuration and green line represents my part in second configuration.

Does anybody have idea how to solve this since I design in 3Dx which allows creation of 3DShape object, I place in 3DShape surfaces of two configurations and instantiate my part in both sub-assemblies with original ID Part Name, but I am not sure if this approach is best.

 

[MarkAF]

Here is one possibility to investigate.

The Physical Product can be linked to multiple different 3DShapes. To say it differently, you can have multiple 3DShapes aggregated to one Physical Product. The Product is what gets represtented on the BOM, the 3DShape is just a representation. So, ideally, you would have only one Physical Product to correlate with one BOM item that you will either manufacture or purchase.

So it may be quite possible to represent your multiple shapes in the Product, and just hide / show depending on which context is used.
When I was testing this a while back, it seemed like an OK method, which might be acceptable for something like different states of a spring.

Bulk items like wires and tubes are a different matter. There you have many different 3D representations that are just strung out runs of materials that are ordered by length. We've had to go through a lot of other mental gymnastics to rationalize the assignment of so many different products to a single, common BOM item that our ERP system can recognize.

 

[MarkAF]

I should add, if anyone has some good advice and best practices, I'm eager to hear about it. Coordinating BOMs and CAD is a real trick.

 

[Azzazil]

Thanks MarkAF for you comment I agree maybe is best like that to create additional 3DShapes which will represent different variation of part in assembly as you stated something similar with spring under different load, and crating of BoM won't count for 3DShape representations.