4) Part types
With name Part I refer to really an equivalent of V5 .CATPart. So actual physical items under each item class.
Here also I would like to have couple of Part types as following:
1) Skeleton/reference Part - Part that includes publications and reference elements. Typically such a part is not included to bill of material or is not released for manufacturing.
2) Physical/manufactured (Real) Part - Part that is really manufactured and is included to bill of material and can be released to manufacturing.
Notice that since we have three different Item level classifications, there actually can be 3X2 =6 types of Parts.
Idea of this Part level classification is to support reference/skeleton based design process and allow usage of such a parts with Top down design process. These part types become very useful when we get to the final rules on how parts work together (that will be the last post on this topic)
I must mention here, that I am not 100% sure if this classification is mandatory; in V6 you can have Assembly level representations that could replace skeleton/reference parts. But re-usability of assembly level representations is not something that feels really appealing for me, so I stick with this requirement. (comments are welcome!!)
With name Part I refer to really an equivalent of V5 .CATPart. So actual physical items under each item class.
Here also I would like to have couple of Part types as following:
1) Skeleton/reference Part - Part that includes publications and reference elements. Typically such a part is not included to bill of material or is not released for manufacturing.
2) Physical/manufactured (Real) Part - Part that is really manufactured and is included to bill of material and can be released to manufacturing.
Notice that since we have three different Item level classifications, there actually can be 3X2 =6 types of Parts.
Idea of this Part level classification is to support reference/skeleton based design process and allow usage of such a parts with Top down design process. These part types become very useful when we get to the final rules on how parts work together (that will be the last post on this topic)
I must mention here, that I am not 100% sure if this classification is mandatory; in V6 you can have Assembly level representations that could replace skeleton/reference parts. But re-usability of assembly level representations is not something that feels really appealing for me, so I stick with this requirement. (comments are welcome!!)