What is the best practice for doing this (Assembly configuration question)

What is the best practice for doing this.

I have a machine that can be ordered with or without a tank. If a tank
is ordered, (2) brackets need to be welded to the frame so the tank can
be attached. My first thought was to create a configuration on the
frame weldment. We had some Smarteam training (PDM system we use) last
year, and the trainer said its not good practice to use configurations
for that. He only recommended using configurations for a part or assy
that changes by its width, height, length, etc. I would rather not
make a entire new assy just for those 2 brackets, since everything else
is the same. I planned on making an illustration drawing showing how
to weld those brackets on to the frame, so the main frame weldment will
stay the same.

What is the best way to do this? Im trying to get some ideas what the
"standard" way of modeling something like this is. Thanks.

 

We also stay away from having different configurations for production parts.
What I would do is have another sub-level, create a new assembly insert the
base assembly and add the brackets. Would this be best practice? Who is to
say? The draw back is that you will also need another assembly for your
upper level too. Although a replace part should work quite well to help you
get there. It should even carry over most of your mates.

Corey

 

Thanks Corey for the quick reply . I like the idea of using the assy
as a base and adding the brackets, but I dont like the idea of another
top level assy. In my case, this the top level assy consist of a frame
assy, housing assy, door assy(s), and a belt. If I created another top
level assy, and named it "XXX with tank", then this assy would be
exactly the same as XXX, but with the new frame assy.
We would then have (2) assys to update if something changed on one of
the lower assy. To make things more complex, we have 3 sizes in that
machine, each one can get a tank as an option!
That would be 6 extra assys thru all of the machines. I wish there was
an easy solution for this.

Any other suggestions?

 

Bump.

Anymore ideas?

 

We use SolidWorks (of course) and we use SmarTeam. ...and guess what?
We use tons of configurations. It is one of the most powerful tools
that SolidWorks has and SmarTeam handles them quite nicely, thank you.
Your VAR or who ever told you to limit configuration to sizes is
obviously misinformed. To do this would be very limiting.
If you offer versions in different sizes, then they are/have different
model or part numbers, do they not? To provide for them, you create
different configurations. So if you sell optional hardware, custom
mountings, etc., then they are different model or part numbers. This is
true, even if you say Model # 12345-1 and then 12345-1 with Tank.
I guess the bottom line is 2 "physically" different models require 2
"virtually" different models or configurations and the configurations
will be required for fabrication drawings/assembly instructions anyway.