At the Wisconsin EUG last week, several hands went up indicating a flag to control what gets “exploded” to a job from a phantom would be beneficial (materials, operations or both). I put the idea out there - now it’s up to others to help promote it through votes.
Thanks in Advance!
Can you explain better the working parts of this? How would you encapsulate the phantom ops as the initial phantom part to be exploded is either part or asm? I would think you either create a phantom with operations where both are expanded or a set of drop in parts, but I fail to see how your flag would work.
It’s really just a short cut to have consistent operations or components. We mostly care about having the option to explode components. If within a higher level finished good we only want the components and those will relate to the final assembly operation the phantom is associated with (think accessory options like a lighting package). If someone buys that lighting package as an aftermarket add on, we would want the operations to assemble to remain on the job for that lighting package finished good.
Keeping only the operations and not components was brought up by a couple users in the group. I believe one of the examples was mixing chemicals - chemicals could vary but operation to mix is constant. The other related to super methods in configurators.
Hope that helps.
Isn’t that what a configurator is for?