AnsweredAssumed Answered

BOM Missing items

Question asked by David Mandl on May 13, 2011
Latest reply on Mar 17, 2015 by Anand Dharwa

I'm having a weird issue relating to configurations in assembly drawings.

 

Some background:

 

My company uses a lot of anodized aluminum in our product.  The anodized finish comes in one of two standardized colors:  clear finish and dark bronze.  We use a color code (-01 and -02) as a suffix to our part numbers to differentiate between the two.

 

As an example:  12345-01 and 12345-02 would be two versions of a part where the only difference between the two is the color of the finish on the stock aluminum.  As such, our modeling practice is to create one .sldprt file (12345.sldprt) and use configurations to handle the rest.

 

Sample configuration tree (ignore the "Architectural" configuration):

sample_configuration_tree.bmp

 

This modeling strategy applies to finished assemblies as well:  all assemblies made with anodized aluminum components end up having -01 and  -02 configurations, so we can have accurate bills of material for both colors of anodized finishes (in addition to different aluminum part numbers:  there are often other parts, like fasteners, that are different to match the color of the extrusions).  Here's a sample BOM:

 

New Picture (3).bmp

 

It's a little more complicated than a normal assembly structure, but it serves us well.

 

Where everything goes wrong:

 

We use DriveWorks for design automation:  delete configurations that aren't needed (if the customer wants a clear finish, delete the -02 configuration and leave the -01 config), change cut lengths on extrusions, swap out components per customer specs, delete components that aren't needed, etc.  On the assembly level, this is working wonderfully for us, but we're having a problem with the bills of material in the .slddrw files.

 

I ran a specification of the assembly from the above BOM:  I wanted a -01 version (clear finish), and my DriveWorks model rules deleted about a half dozen more parts.  The resulting BOM should look like this (ignore the toolbox issue for the fasteners, that's seperate from this):

 

CorrectBOM.bmp

 

But instead I get this:

 

IncorrectBOM.bmp

 

Basically, any part that was swapped or otherwise altered in the assembly is no longer in the BOM, even though the actual assembly itself doesn't have any issues.  If I highlight the incorrect BOM and check the "keep missing item" box in the feature manager, the lines for the missing parts show up with blanks:

 

IncorrectBOMMissingParts.bmp

 

I can create a new BOM table and everything will work out fine, but that's not terribly helpful since the intent is to create the drawings automatically with minimal (hopefully zero) manual work by the Engineering department.  What DriveWorks spits out should be what we want to send to our shop.  I can't figure out what's going on here... can anyone help?

Outcomes