Welcome to the Onshape forum! Ask questions and join in the discussions about everything Onshape.
First time visiting? Here are some places to start:- Looking for a certain topic? Check out the categories filter or use Search (upper right).
- Need support? Ask a question to our Community Support category.
- Please submit support tickets for bugs but you can request improvements in the Product Feedback category.
- Be respectful, on topic and if you see a problem, Flag it.
If you would like to contact our Community Manager personally, feel free to send a private message or an email.
Answers
I created a new drawing tab/member and the issue disappeared. Initially, I thought it might have to do with the view referencing an explode state and that there might be a bug in OS, but this does not appear to be the case.
Did some additional experimentation and the only way I found to get an unresolved (red) balloon item is to change the Explode/named position such that the arrow pointing to the item geometry is no longer rendered in the view (obscured by other overlapping geometer.) This behavior makes sense.
1) Item Ballooning gets confused if assembly BOM references another assembly (a sub-assembly) which is also in the same drawing (on a different sheet). Item Ballooning cannot distinguish between instances that are part of an assembly instance (sub-assembly), or instances of the part in the assembly at the top level.
2) When you delete and reinsert the BOM item balloons cannot be created; they show up read with a "----" item number.
I have created an very simple OS document that reproduces the bug and submitted a Bug Report.
@shawn_crocker's comment did point me in the right direction, but I completely missed its subtlety. I did recheck to make sure the BOM that was inserted in the drawing was associated with the assembly the view in the drawing was created from. It never dawned on me that it is possible to associate a view of an assembly to different BOM than the one that truly reflects the content of the assembly.
I am at a loss as to why anyone would want to point to a different assembly's BOM to document an assembly view in a drawing, but apparently OS allows it. Could someone describe a real world scenario where this makes sense?
Why does OS not always make the "BOM Table Reference" for an assembly view point to the assembly's BOM the default?
Even in the situation where multiple BOM's for different assemblies might be inserted on the same sheet (which I have never seen done), I cannot fathom why one would want to do point to a different BOM than the "real" BOM (assembly hierarchy) of the assembly shown in the drawing.
I see that OS has a provision to insert a BOM created/managed externally; but it seems that automatic fill-in of balloon text would no longer function - it is all manual balloon text entry at that point.
"There are cases where users want views of subassemblies to use the BOM and callouts that relate to the assembly top level."
The above explains why there is an option for an view of an assembly to reference a different assembly's BOM.
Interesting use case, but I am not convinced this is a wise approach. Might work for designs involving a small number of parts, but certainly would not scale to large products with hundreds/thousands of unique parts. Also, this complicates design reuse of subassemblies in other product designs.
This functionality appears to be partially implemented already; however, it currently only works for a "Flattened" BOM. I find it curious that a BOM must be inserted into the drawing before automatic labeling of callouts/balloons will work. Also, why is it an assembly tab BOM does not have the "Structured - Multi level" view option that drawings have?
It has been my experience there is not a precise definition of what a BOM/Parts List is and how they are used in a company's business process. Personally, I have come to the conclusion that BOM/Parts List should not appear on the face of classic engineering drawings, but should be built and maintained by a dedicated application specifically designed for that purpose, which is tightly linked to the CAD system. The drawing document need only contain a link to the appropriate BOM/Parts List data. While every CAD product has some basic BOM functionality, invariably its "out-of-the-box" capability does not meets the unique needs of a company.
https://forum.onshape.com/discussion/comment/10046/#Comment_10046
For Onshape, we have to maintain some flexibility in how lots of companies choose to work. Still more for us to do for sure, but we do have to keep an eye towards flexibility where it is needed.