Is there a way to add a drawing number to my drawing template sheet format that ascends each time I open a new drawing?
That would be a great idea to put on the top ten new idea list.
I am thinking you would need to run a macro for that, might be good to add it to the API discussion.
I use a macro to re-name the sheet page number which was written by Leon Wurr and I'm thinking that macro could be edited to get what you need, but every time you add a sheet you would need to run the macro.
Would you foresee any complications with something like 121415815A (12-Month, 14-Day, 15-Year, 815-time of creation, A-a.m. or P-p.m.). That seems like something that could be done with $PRP:"SW Default Sheet Number".
Never heard of the top ten new idea list. I'll try to post it there, I don't think it will help me though, by the time its figured out I will have run out of my subscription and the bossman can't renew... I don't know exactly what that means but I don't think I will be able to download updates anymore, and with full backdating coming its just going to get worse. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
EDIT: Could add seconds as well I suppose if you make more than one drawing in one miniute
I don't quite follow your workflow or your explanation. Are you running into the same issue I was in the past where manufacturing is using the wrong drawing, not the latest updated one??
I have added the last saved date/time and also the last print date, which the two will always be the same if the file is resaved, however they will be different if you just open the file and print, without saving. This has eliminated a bunch of issues for me and puts the responsibility on manufacturing.
Here I have the drawing number the same as the part number, which might not be the way industry standards are, but that's what they had for years.
Yes I have run into the same issue. What your doing with the last saved date is almost exactly the representation that my date and time based dwg number would give me. So I can, and probably will, utilize that method to put responsibility on manufacturing since I won't be able to download any updates in the foreseeable future.
My way would do that with a smaller footprint to minimize title block size, and it wouldn't necessarily have to be date and time based (though I feel that is the best way to keep track). Then I would conform with standards by having a dwg# because, like you, I currently use the part#. But, I do not display a dwg# at all.
But now that I really think about it, with the part number and revision tables it makes a drawing number seem like a waste of time... I can't think of a scenario where a dwg# would point to a separate location than the combination of the part#, sheet#, and revision letter. I'm kind of all over on this topic. I want to conform with standard but does it really make sense?
Heard ya -
This is what doesn't make sense at all For me I would eliminate the DWG, especially in our work flow, there is no need for it.....
I agree, at least for me it doesn't make any sense. I would be interested to know of a scenario where different part and drawing numbers are used, and why they could not gain the same info from the part, sheet, and revision numbers. This so I can relate the scenario to my work and see if there is a valid reason to use dwg #'s in the future.
The only scenario where it make perfect sense is where you use a "D" or "E" (or whatever size), drawing and have multiple parts showing in one drawing, the biggest issue going down that road is part revision tracking.
That was a great way to do it when we were still drawing on vellum, but with the software and technology that we have now, it is much easier to do individual parts with their own drawing and their own revision history....
Right, which like you said, is outdated. I suppose if you had assembly drawings and a single part in the assembly changed you would want a new dwg number. Or do you use a revision within the assembly?
Right now I just make a revision within the assembly drawing referring to the revised part (which has its own drawing and revision) and any new dimensions within the assembly. Is that an accepted way to revise an assembly?
If it isn't then I guess dwg numbers would be the only way to show an updated version.
If it is, are we now in a world where a drawing number is becoming obsolete, or at the very least, repetitive information?
In our process here (right or wrong) all revisions are tracked individually and are initiated with an Engineering Change Request (ECR Number) and finalized with an Engineering Change Notice (ECN Number), both documents note all the changes and parts affected by it, including revising the main assembly and every sub-assembly that's affected.
I personally like the ability to do the individual revision tracking and having the ECR and ECN numbers listed in the part custom properties as well, there is no question what, when or where......
Note: Revisions less than "A" are new products and are in the prototype process, once the prototype process is complete and all the manufacturing procedures are updated along with the final release drawings then we step all the parts and assemblies up to Rev "A"
That seems like a good system especially for tracking, and would not have any relation to the dwg number. Hmmm, I'm going to change the title of this discussion to try to get some more outside input.
Retrieving data ...