#1
|
||||
|
||||
Major rev vs. minor rev
We are preparing to migrate from WorkManager to ModelManager and one of the new features I'm trying to plan for is using minor revisions. What kind of guidelines do you follow regarding when to overwrite, when to minor revise, and when to major revise?
Just a couple of my concerns are:
I appreciate any thoughts and details you've got, if I'm a little unsure - my users are going to really be lost. Last edited by gmatelich; 10-05-2012 at 11:54 AM. |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Major rev vs. minor rev
Our files run with two change items.
Major part or product changes are called PI (Product Index). This is when a model(s) are changed for fit, form or function. The minor part or product changes are called DI (Drawing Index). This is when notes, tolerances or charts are added to the drawing and nothing affects the PI. The DI is also reved up when the PI is changed to state that the model change has taken place. We could have a part of 1234DI5PIC, where the DI = 5 and the PI = C The p/n is still 1234
__________________
Support Your Local Sheriff - At high noon Jason: "How much does it pay?" Citizen: "Well, none of our other sheriffs ever lived long enough to find out." Co-Create 2007 (15.50G) ANSYS Workbench 14 SolidWorks 2011 UGNX-7.5 / TeamCenter UA 8 PADS 2000 Applicon Bravo Autotrol CADAM Pro/E |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Major rev vs. minor rev
Greg,
Looking at it strictly from the process side of things, not taking into consideration any MM rules. First off, I would not allow any user to use overwrite. People are lazy and will take that route even when they KNOW they shouldn't. It should go without saying, but anything that changes fit, form or function of part/assy is a major rev. Model side: Any physical change to a model (shape) would require a major rev. Non-physical changes (part color, facet refinement) would be minor rev. Drawing side: Any physical change to the part and update is major rev. Any note changes (like material, casting standards, inspection notes and such but no change to model) that effect the part is major rev. Any change that doesn't effect the shape or function of the final part (spelling correction, adding a missing or reference dimension) would be a minor rev. Document it well so there can be no misunderstanding. Also, in my opinion, model and drawing should always be the same major revision. Using that logic, any major rev change to a model should require a drawing update and therefore they move together. On the other hand, a major revision changed to a drawing may not require a change to model (like an inspection note), but I'd force it to change anyway to keep them on the same page. Note that all of the above is just my opinion. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Major rev vs. minor rev
yep, definitely do NOT allow people to "overwrite". Storage is cheap these days, so if they've got lots of minor revs - no big deal - plus, if they need to revert back to something they saved in the past week (for instance) it is very easy if you can easily refer back to an earlier minor rev.
Whatever you do, ...avoid customizing Model Manager - think very seriously about changing your business processes rather than customizing MM. good luck. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Major rev vs. minor rev
How do you deal with major/minor of linked models and drawings - do you keep let the minor revs of models get out of sync with drawings or still keep them matched?
For our business rules we do require user keep drawings in revision sync with their 3D models. We also, don't use minor revisions at all. This is more of an SAP restriction but we push that down to Model Manager as well. It seems that overwrite vs minor rev is a bit of a judgment call. In a sense the safe answer is always minor rev, but then you're artificially filling the server's storage with negligible benefit. Users can overwrite all they want for any item they own in a WORK state. Once the item is to be shared with a supplier or released to production there is a state change done in Model Manager. Once out of the WORK state the system prevents users from overwriting the items even if its just a desired text/typo change. At that stage users will have to revise.
__________________
____________________ Felipe Rosendo MCAD Tools Manager Agilent Technologies |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Major rev vs. minor rev
Thanks for the feedback. That all sounds pretty much how I saw things as well. I appreciate your caveat, Felipe, about overwrite when they own it in a WORK state. Depending on the complexity of the part, I may save a part many times in the design phase to the point I may have 30 iterations or more before I'm ready to release. Between overwrite and minor rev I'll be able to have a few snapshots in the design process, but not every insignificant change. Once it's released it will be very nice to have minor rev available for color and facet changes, which in our current system I'm somewhat constrained to use overwrite rather than major rev.
How about when you're dealing with assys? I assume cutting planes, configurations, and attaching additional viewsets (like for an illustration drawing) would be minor rev. Revisions of subparts (which sets the assys' modified flag) seems like a judgement call where you determine whether the assy is interchangeable at that level or not. If interchangeable - minor rev. If not interchangeable - major rev up the chain of sub-assys until you get to a level of interchangeability. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Major rev vs. minor rev
How about when you're dealing with assys?
Great question. In our case we have SAP PLM linked with an integration to Model Manager. As a rule we only check-in part numbers (assy or stand alone parts) that are items we must procure. Upper level assemblies are often not checked into SAP by R&D but eventually get checked-in from MFG Engineering as they document manufacturing or assembly materials and then at this stage those assy/part numbers get checked into SAP with their configurations, exploded view drawings etc.
__________________
____________________ Felipe Rosendo MCAD Tools Manager Agilent Technologies |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Major rev vs. minor rev
Most of customers I know are just using major version. They overwrite as they can (I mean as long as the elements are overwriteable from access rights) and they revise to document any change. Most of times Models and Drawings revisions are sync, with some exceptions. Rare are customers I know using masterdata versionning, and they do that just for some MD classes.
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|