AnsweredAssumed Answered

File Naming Impropriety?

Question asked by Edward Geiser on Jul 1, 2014
Latest reply on Jul 1, 2014 by Jamil Snead

It is widely known and accepted that all files in a project should have unique file names.  However would it not be acceptable to have a part, assembly, and drawing with the same name but kept unique due to their file extension?  Ex. 12345.sldprt, 12345.sldasm, 12345.slddrw.

I have been working on a weldment part that has parts inserted within it doc1292868036819.jpg.  All the links to these inserted parts have been broken and once the links to inserted parts are broken they cannot be restored.  This part is stored in a PDM vault, but the parts that were inserted into it were not.  I don't know if this is why the links were broken, but it creates a problem because changes to the inserted parts will no longer carry through.

I would like to work this in a different way.  Instead of inserting these different part files into one main part I will place them into an assembly.  This assembly would also include the part the inserted parts were originally inserted into except I would now remove the imbedded parts from the feature manager tree.  For example, the inserted parts are labeled a, b, c, and d.  The part that these parts were inserted into is labeled e.  Each of these parts has a drawing associated with it and each drawing shares the same name as the part file.  I go into part e and remove the imbedded parts making sure that it doesn't cause further problems and broken relations further in the feature manager tree.  I then take these five parts and insert them into an assembly, labeled e.  So the overall assembly labeled e, now has parts a, b, c, d in it as well as a fifth part also labeled e.  Then the assembly and parts labeled a thru d have drawings associated with them except for the part labeled e which does not have a drawing associated with it.

This sounds crazy and confusing, but I'm trying to preserve the naming convention that's already been established by the company and simultaneously satisfy design demands.  What I'm basically interested in is opinion.  From my point of view I think I can accomplish what I want with the procedure I just described and still obey the spirit of the law if not the letter of the law.