How to define a limited range of values for a design parameter?

You need to add a specific SELE (i.e. ANGLE) to your piping spec.

ANGLE value will be for example 10,90

Thank you so much!!! :) It works, for both ANGLE and RADI! 

May I ask one more question; is it possible to use expressions in this field? EG define RADI to default value od OD for each part, with something like ATTRIB PARA[2] or ATTRIB RPRO BPAR? I've been experimenting but keep getting errors. 

It is not possible as far as I know.

I think you can manage default values through DATA elements at Category level

Hello

I have similar problem. We have limited in spec angle to 85,90 for elbow LR but however the user can change manually angle in attributes after he has placed the elbow, so in E3D model we have 45 deg elbows modeled with 90 deg elbow.

User can select elbow and type command q ang and than change angle as per the requirement.

that is exactly the problem - it allows the user to set the angle to 45° even if the spec limits the angle to 85,90.

This should NOT be the case, and aveva should report an error and prevent the user from doing so. I however haven't managed to get it to work that way so far. 

Yes but in this way he is out of specification limits for elbow angle. Is there any other way to limit the elbow angle  between 85 and 90 deg?

The system do warn you when using the Command Line.

Unfortunately does not warn you when using Attribute or Properties Form.

But the most important thing is that DATA CONSISTENCY Check Tool will warn you with the following message:

D740 ANGLE OF COMPONENT IS GREATER THAN MAXIMUM ANGLE SPECIFIED IN SPREF

The designed angle of a Pulled Bend, Elbow or Weld is greater than is allowed by the SPECs.

Users MUST use Data Consistency check regularly to avoid this and other issues

that's a problem many of us have with some of the users; they don't... :) :) 

I have turned to developing a set of checking tools which analyze and colour problematic parts and a customized consistency check which hides consistent branches for our responsible users to check other people's work. 

But all of this is cumbersome, requires additional hours and frustrates the engineers assigned to sift through other people's...

So any advice leading to prevention rather than checking for errors would be ideal. Additional issue is that the fabrication check doesn't fail at these errors, which would force irresponsible users to address their problem. If I could do something in the catalogue to fail the fabrication check at the out of spec elbows, it would be very helpful. 

Adrijana, thanks a lot for your comment. I appreciate it.

Regarding the elbow trim angle I have asked our R&D to take a look at that and fix it (if possible).

Said that, during my training courses I always stress the fact that Data Consistency tool should be used regularly. Users must be educated !!!