Still trying to figure out PMI.
One question users have asked: What do you do with info that (in a traditional drawing) is in the title block?
While some stuff is obviously irrelevant ("sheet n of m", sheet size, scale, etc.), other info (I think) still needs to be carried forward somehow.
- Cage Code / address
- default tolerances (although perhaps using default profile tolerance, rather than "2 decimal place dimensions = +/- .010" or whatever)
- tolerancing standard - e.g. "ASME Y14.41-(year)"
- Customer info (customer name, job number, etc.)
- "Signoff" info (we are in TC, but do not yet do TC Change Mgmt. And in any case, if we send file to customer after translation, they would have no record of what is in our TC database)
- Part number & revision (I know they can be part of the filename, but what if someone renames the file to get it into their PDM system?)
- Proprietary / export info (yes, I am aware of the "Government Security Information", et. al., and the dialog that pops up when part is opened in NX or JT, but what if this part is translated to Solidworks or Catia - will those "pop ups" still exist?)
The other issue is...If all that stuff is put in (independant) PMI notes on a specific view,
a) how do we make sure users put it on the correct view (name of view)?
b) how do we make sure users arrange it in a consistant manner?
i.e. "Dilbert" may arrange it like:
but "Alice" may arrange it like:
and "Wally" might arrange it like:
I'm thinking about a tabular note in a "PMI_Titleblock" view, that looks vaguely like our drawing title blocks.
Or am I completely missing the point about PMI?
I realize a lot of this could be stored in attributes, but those aren't particularly "visible" to end users (and may not translate to other systems).
Thanks for any thoughts/ideas...
Production: NX10.0.3.5 MP5 + patch/TC11.2
I'd rather be e-steemed than e-diseaseled
My company has made use of 8.5x11 A-size drawing format to capture Title Block information. This allows us to place and image of the model on the sheet, with a couple of dimensions to indicate overall size. We are not particularly happy with this solution. It creates confusion for downstream users, as they don't readily comprehend that they are dealing with Model Based Definition. It also forces us to continue to instruct Drafting skills to our users. But, it works, and it satisfies customer requirements. We've also placed Title Block information in the model as free standing annotations, in proximity to the model. But is doesn't include all the Title Block infor, like Cage Code, and sign off. We, like you, are not happy with the "free form" unformatted nature of this approach. We've also adjusted the font size to be appropriately visible with respect to the model (small font for small model, large font for large model). I would like to see a standardized way to capture and display Title Block information in Model Based Definition.
My company has also adoptd a practice of creating a mandatory MBD view named MBD-Title Block. Ironically it is simply a drawing title block copied into a PMI custom symbol with PMI text. The MIL_STD-31000 defines this Title Block view as a mandatory view. We do not show the model in this view, only the title block data. You can associate the PMI text to the attributes of the file to auto-populate part number, file revision and title.
This data is aslo created in a "seed part" that can be imported into an existed model to update to MBD. We also place it in the +X,-Y quandrant in hopes that the 3D model will not cover it up.
We have had the exact same discussion at my company.
We have a similar solution as some of you in here it seems. We have a default view called "PMI Notes" which includes all the general notes (in a list, like on a drawing) and an iso view of the model with the basic dimensions (in parenthesis). We put this model view on a traditional drawing sheet with title block and everything and store in our PDM system as a PDF file. This document works as an overview/"front page" of the article with the basic info - a document to base a quotation on.
The positive thing is that it goes pretty fast to make this sheet since it is only based on an already made model view. The downside is indeed, like Mark also mentions; the font size, which we always have to adjust regarding to the model size, the confusion with downstream users ("is this MBD or not?"), another document (both number of doc and doc type) to manage, and the non-consistansy of our model based work methodology.
The ideal would indeed be to have a title block PMI.
I believe the new feature in NX11 that makes it possible to put the PMIs "Parallell To Screen" is a small start. But it would still be great if we could have a default title block.
The 3D Annotation Standards do not support the creation of a traditional 2D title block in the context of a 3D environment. Most customers I speak to do one of two things to capture and convey information that was traditionally found on a drawing title block. They add this metadata to the Part Properties as attributes or they create a dedicated model view and add the content as a note. Most often the note contains part attributes that auto-populuate just like a title block on a drawing. I understand as companies transition to MBD that there is a tendency to want to migrate traditional 2D drawing workflows in 3D; however, based on many of the comments made in the exchange and others in the group not all agree this will add value to their strategy. My take away is that some would like to see a dedicated mechanism for capturing and conveying this type of information. Interesting exchange. I hope more will reply with the approach they use today and/or share their thoughts.
Now that companies who have invested in NX and are forced to find solutions for 3D PMI implementation it would be wonderful if Siemens would help us by developing their software to support the 3D annotation requirements that they are aware of instead of wating for the customers to solve the problem on their own.
We did the same. Created a mandatory "MBD-Title Block" view to meet the requirements of 31000.
Being similar to a 2D drawing the formatting looks familiar to everyone.
We worked with our IT folks and created a Title Block, Revision Block, Part Block and etc. that populate their own model views and essentially create a custom symbol. These all look like traditional drafting views.