I was wondering if anyone had a set of best practices for setting up master models and simplified reps? Currently I'm dealing with a very large master model containing about 10 different versions of a large piece of machinery. The master model has a simplified rep for each version of the machine, but the current structure is causing the simplified reps to fall apart when parts are changed or updated. Here is an example of the current structure:
Master-top.asm
|->sub-100.asm
|-->part-100A.prt
|-->part-100B.prt
|->sub-200.asm
|-->part-200A.prt
|-->part-200B.prt
In this example, sub-XXX would be a major subsystem like an engine or chassis. The part-100X would be a part/subsystem for a specific version of the machine. For example, machine A may have a 4 cylinder engine and machine B would have a 6 cylinder engine. The problem we are having is that the simplified reps have been created using the part level (in bold). When parts are changed, the simplified reps are no longer correct and someone must go back and update everything again. This has caused a great deal of frustration and wasted time, so I'm proposing that we change the structure to something more like this:
Master-top.asm
|->sub-100.asm
|-->sub-100A.asm
|--->part-100A.prt
|-->sub-100B.asm
|--_>part-100B.prt
|->sub-200.asm
In this example, the sub-100 and sub-100A levels would be a permanent structure that is setup when the master model is created. The 100 level would represent something like the engine group and the 100A level would represent the specific size/type of engine. The simplified reps would be created using the permanent structure rather than the part level so that they will stay up to date when parts are changed.
Is this the best way to make sure that the master model doesn't constantly fall apart or is there a better way?
