10 Replies Latest reply on Jul 1, 2015 7:02 PM by Rolland Zhang

    Best Practice for 2-Step Part Fabrication

    Rolland Zhang

      Hello All,

       

      I am looking for the "best practice" for modelling and data management of certain parts that is processed through production:

       

      Current Situation in Production:

       

      1. We have a standardized part that is a flat (unbent) profile cut metal that is ordered from Fabrication Supplier. We call this a "part template".

      2. With this standardized part template, production will bend and trim the part to suit the particular job at hand.

       

      I am looking for the best way to "model" this part for production. To me, there are two models, one representing the part template, and another model representing the final part after bend and trim. Thus, TWO part numbers.

       

      eg: Part 2000 - Final part from Part 1000

       

      where 2000 is final part, and 1000 is part template.

       

      Is this the best approach to this? Or is there another way?

        • Re: Best Practice for 2-Step Part Fabrication
          Thomas Voetmann

          I have similar issues. I use extruded aluminum profiles that are later machined.

           

          I make all the features to create the profile first and the machining features last in the feature tree. Then make on configuration named "Profile" ("Part template" for you) with all machining features suppressed and one configuration "Default" for the finished part.

           

          You can of cause make more configurations for different trims or machining.

           

          Good luck.

          Thomas

            • Re: Best Practice for 2-Step Part Fabrication
              Rolland Zhang

              Thanks Thomas,

               

              Yes, I thought about the use of configurations, however it's a conflict to our known practices for a part number being unique to only one part model geometry. Here, you have one part file name representing two configurations of two model geometry (profile and "default").

               

              What happens when you have 200 variations of the final product that are based on the single one profile?

               

              If we had two parts, and made a note of the final product part referring to the profile part, would it be confusing to purchasing and production?

                • Re: Best Practice for 2-Step Part Fabrication
                  Thomas Voetmann

                  OK Rolland I see your issue. I have max 30 configurations which are easily managed using derived configurations.

                  My main concern in your case are the huge maintenance work in case of any small revision of the template part. Personally I don't enjoy notes as they often are overlooked.

                  Perhaps you would consider to start each of your final product parts by "Insert Part" and insert your template part. This way you would have traceability in the feature tree and the part will update in case of any geometrical changes. The downside is file structure / linking so you must be alert when handling changes.

                   

                  Thomas  

                    • Re: Best Practice for 2-Step Part Fabrication
                      Rolland Zhang

                      Hey Thomas,

                       

                      You make some very good points, thanks. The Insert Part feature does keep the link, but will always be dragged around with the final product (pros and cons). But I would say derived configurations of the same file would be too much to handle in my case.

                       

                      I would look further into the "Insert Part" method. However, production will not know which "part template" to grab from stock, if they don't have a note telling them to refer to "part template".

                       

                      Cheers!

                • Re: Best Practice for 2-Step Part Fabrication
                  Murali B,B.

                  why can't you use api programming for this product ? .

                  i think it can be done with solidworks api programming.

                  you shall try and then reply me.

                  • Re: Best Practice for 2-Step Part Fabrication
                    Asdfa Afsdaff

                    For machined components, we would give the template a unique part number and create a drawing for it.  Then create an assembly with the template as its only component and make the necessary modifications in the assembly, create a drawing to show only the modifications, and give it a unique part number.  When ordering the final part, we would call out the assembly number, which would list the template as a component in its BOM.

                     

                    I don't know how this method would work with sheetmetal, however, as I don't think you can add bends in an assembly.

                    • Re: Best Practice for 2-Step Part Fabrication
                      Adrian Velazquez

                      In your case seems two separate Part Numbers is the best approach. Since part 2000 is a modification of an existing Part (Blank) each would have it's drawing and Revision count

                        • Re: Best Practice for 2-Step Part Fabrication
                          Daen Hendrickson

                          I concur with Adrian.

                           

                          The blank is sourced from a different supplier and produced by a different process. I assume you order this in batches and stock the blank to be pulled for the next finished part order. From a business process / ERP / ordering / tracking / costing / you-name-it point of view your blank should be its own part.

                           

                          The finished part does consume the blank but it is a different part and needs its own part number (for all the reasons above). It sounds like you might have numerous part numbers for your finished part since they may be bent and trimmed differently per order.

                           

                          My mental test: You should be able to throw all parts of the same part number into a bag, blindly reach in and pull out a random unit and it should fit. Another way of looking at this: you should be able to instruct someone to pull a part number and there be no confusion as to what gets pulled. If your blank and the finished part have the same number, who knows what the new guy will put in the box and ship.

                           

                          My personal preference in your case would be to use the insert part in part technique followed with a convert to sheet metal and then add your needed bends with sketched bend.

                        • Re: Best Practice for 2-Step Part Fabrication
                          Mark Kaiser

                          Two part numbers as you describe, and a bill of materials on the finished part, calling for the as purchased part.  Don't worry about keeping a config in the finished part for the purchased part.  Seperate drawings for each.

                          • Re: Best Practice for 2-Step Part Fabrication
                            Rolland Zhang

                            Hello All,

                             

                            Thanks for your feedback on this topic.

                             

                            It looks like we are all on the same page, which means it looks like it is the best practice for this particular case. I appreciate your responses!

                             

                            1st part model = blank part template = unique part number

                            2nd part model = final formed part derived from template = unique part number = bom specified to refer to 1st part number

                             

                            Cheers!