Duplicate part names in Intralink

[rcamp]

I was told by our IT group that when using Intralink it is not allowed to have two different models anywhere in the system with the same name.



Can anyone confirm, deny, or clarify?



I have standard models I use repeatedly for every job and they always have the same name. That provides MANY benefits that I don't believe I can justify giving up.

 

[charleskim]

Your IT group is correct.

You CAN NOT have two different models anywhere in the system with the same name.



But I'm a little bit confused by you last statement.

Are you saying that you have a part that you use on multiple assemblies?

 

[peterbrown77]

rcamp,



You have to realize that with Intralink if you have, for example, an M6x20 SHCS that you use everywhere, you only need ONE M6X20 SHCS. Assemble it into as many assys as you like, and Intralink will bring it when you check any of the assemblies out to a workspace. Intralink will grab that screw from whatever Commonspace folder in which it resides, it doesn't (actually, shouldn't) have to be in the same folder as the assembly.



Think of it this way: in your stockroom you only have ONE bin with M6X20 screws in it; you don't create a new bin just because you made another assembly that uses it: it is still the same screw. All the assembly components are not sitting side by side on the shelf either, they are scattered around and the stockroom staff knows where to find each component when assembly requests it. Same with Intralink, it knows where each file is and all you need to ask for is the assembly and it will retrieve everything that goes into it, regardless of its folder location.

 

[rcamp]

I know that is perfectly logical for items that are off-the-shelf components that are not modified. But there are often off-the-shelf components that [/i]are[/italics] modified.



In designing molds, you always have standard mold bases with standard plates:



TOP_CLAMP_PLATE

A-PLATE

B-PLATE

.

.

BOTTOM_CLAMP_PLATE



Then there are inserts, which are always unique, but it is still beneficial for them to always have the same name:



A-INSERT-01

A-INSERT-02

.

.

A-INSERT-20



B-INSERT-01

B-INSERT-02

.

.

B-INSERT-20



Now, for each of these I have as many as 20 electrodes named thus:



B-INSERT-01_E-01

B-INSERT-01_E-02

.

.

B-INSERT-01_E-20





B-INSERT-01_E-01

B-INSERT-01_E-02

.

.

B-INSERT-01_E-20



Now, if I average 10 inserts with 10 electrodes per mold design, that equals 100 files I have to rename every time I design a mold. I also have drawings that reference all these, so I have to make sure all my drawings stay updated to the name changes.



These components are used every time for every mold, but they are organized into individual folders based by mold. There is never more than one unique part with the same name in a single mold, so it is not an issue without Pro/Intralink.



Again I see no logical reason to have to make up unique names for all these, or include the job no. in every single model name, except, apparently, Pro/Intralink can't manage it.



If I weigh the benefits of Pro/I against what it necessitates for a naming convention, I think it may not be worth implementing.

 

[wout]

one object is unique for



1. object name

2. version

3. revision

4. branch



we use sometimes (2001) partname_assemblyname.prt to distinguish occurences of same part per assembly



someone other ideas?

 

[bhayden]

> If I weigh the benefits of Pro/I against what it necessitates

> for a naming convention, I think it may not be worth

> implementing.



I guess I don't understand. It seems like your situation is exactly what Pro/Intralink is designed for by saving you the effort of creating multiple copies in different folders.



Depending on how unique the parts are creating an instance in a family table might be an answer.



Also, you can call the components anything you want by using a parameter and then designing the drawing BOM to reference that parameter. Yes, the .prt files would have to have a unique name but that seems to be a better practice than relying on a disk directory structure. You can start a project with a bunch of empty .prt files that have say a job number as a prefix or sufix by using intralink to make the copies. Only the ones you check into the common space would be retained.



-Bernie-

 

[seymours2571]

Using the branch feature inside of intralink will allow you to have two dissimilar parts with the same name inside of intralink. The only catch is that they cannont be in the same workspace at the same time.



Go to ptc's website for technical support. They have several webpages devoted to the usage of branches within intralink.

 

[rcamp]

seymours2571, that sounds like the solution. I will look into the ptc website for more detail.



Thanks to all for the ideas.