Single Parts List: Multiple Assembly Configruations

[ct27gt]

Hi All,
I am assuming the issue where you can't have a single parts list with multiple assembly configurations still has not been solved?

For example, configurations that share most of the same parts but may differ in the quantity of some parts or may have substitute parts. These are usually handled with -X numbers. In Solidworks you can have a single BOM listing all the parts with column numbers indicating the quantities for each -X configuration.

I am assuming this functionality still does not exist in SE? FYI, I am still on ST5.

What are the best workarounds for this? Display configurations?

 

[swertel]

No, Solid Edge still does not support matrix BOMs. I wish, right?

But, they have made advancements in the table tool so workarounds are quicker and easier. Alas, they are still (manual) workarounds to get it that way. I'm honestly thinking about changing our drafting standard to do away with matrix formatted BOMs. 1) Because they aren't autogenerated in Solid Edge and therefore more prone to error and 2) matrix BOMs don't fit into the typical PDM/PLM workflow so a change to enjoy the benefits of such systems is necessary.

--Scott
www.wertel.pro

 

[ct27gt]

That's unfortunate. We don't have PDM here and it would be quite awhile before we ever did. Heck, we don't even have standard templates or best practices. Unfortunately I just started here, so it will be awhile before I have enough influence to make productivity changes.

If you don't mind me asking, how are you handling BOMs if they are not SE generated? In my limited testing the BOMs seemed reasonably parametric with the exception of the configurations. I was under the impression that the model should be a complete representation of the drawing, where manual BOMs and overrides should be avoided as much as possible.

 

[swertel]

They should be avoided as much as possible. We create a "PL" version of the assembly and use that to populate every single part that exists in every single configuration. Siemens has started calling this 150% modeling (and it later ties into options and variants with Teamcenter and maybe Insight).

The Parts List is generated on the face of the drawing based on this family member (if using FoA), but the quantities for each configuration are input manually at the draft level.

Display configurations are used to show each dash number on the face of the drawing so the balloons are linked to the Parts List. The assembly file does have an FOA member for each configuration so it can be referenced in higher level assemblies.

--Scott
www.wertel.pro

 

[ct27gt]

So if I understand correctly, you are manually inputting quantity for every single part for every single configuration?

I understand the logic behind the main assembly so you can have all of the parts displayed, but manually inputting the quantity for every part in every configuration sounds tedious and error prone.

 

[swertel]

That's exactly right. And that is the source of most of our errors, often not being caught until after the hardware is at Receiving Inspection or on the Production Line. We've had an ER in for a long time to get SE to produce matrix BOMs (Solidworks does it).

In the meantime, we're looking at changing our drafting practices to move away from matrix BOMs. Doing so will 1) eliminate the errors you easily identified, 2) take advantage of time saving processes by better utilizing SE and avoiding manual workarounds, and 3) integrate better with a PDM/PLM system.

--Scott
www.wertel.pro

 

[ct27gt]

I see how it could quickly become a tangled mess with SE. I will add my name to that specific ER in hopes of that it will eventually be implemented.

Its unfortunate, because Solidworks does it very well and we had no errors with quantities at my previous job. The only error that was possible was the manual entry from the paper BOM to the production system.