English原文：本指南暂无您所选语言的译本。
Short answer: Approved PDM parts set the only components the generator may place, each carrying a part number, an approved revision and defined connection interfaces. Equipment rules say how those parts may be arranged and joined, as hard constraints plus approved objectives. Generation works only inside those boundaries and reports what it can't resolve. The quality of the output follows the quality of both inputs.
The three inputs and who owns them
MST's workflow: P&ID gas-line diagram + approved PDM parts + equipment rules -> native, editable SOLIDWORKS assembly, starting with semiconductor gas equipment. The diagram belongs to process engineering and says what exists and how it connects. Parts belong to the PDM administrator and the library owner and say which real component represents each item. Rules belong to senior design engineers and say how things may physically be arranged. This post covers the last two, because they are where most of the preparation effort goes.
Parts: what the generator needs from your vault
Released state, not just presence
Everyone has seen a vault where a part sits checked in at work-in-progress for years and gets used anyway. For generation, the line has to be explicit: only parts in your approved or released state, at the revision you intend, belong in the subset. MST describes binding approved models in your PDM scope to part identity, revision and actual connection interfaces ([PDM and production models](https://mst-us.ai/pdm-model-library/)).
One identity per part
Duplicates break matching. The same VCR elbow under two numbers, or a regulator file copied into a project folder and renamed, leaves the generator, and any reviewer, with no defensible choice. A filename alone isn't enough to identify an approved revision.
Clean references and configurations
Parts with missing external references, or configurations whose names don't match the BOM description, rebuild differently on different machines. If a valve has configurations for port orientation or actuator type, they need consistent names and a clear mapping to part numbers. Otherwise the BOM says one thing and the model shows another.
Usable interfaces
This is the item most libraries lack. To join parts correctly, each port needs to be identifiable: a mate reference, a named axis and plane, or consistent port geometry on the VCR gland face, the weld stub or the substrate seal. The library engineer who adds mate references to the commonly used components does more for automation than any setting in the tool.
How the subset gets to MST
Start with the approved subset the task needs. Depending on your environment, MST describes either a configured customer-side adapter or an approved, fixed export of the required files and metadata. Permissions, retention and release authority are agreed before access. The default integration reads the source models and creates a separate project assembly. It doesn't silently overwrite released masters, and any PDM write-back or lifecycle change needs a separately approved workflow. [Q29](https://mst-us.ai/questions/reuse-pdm-approved-parts-in-generated-assemblies/) explains why reuse beats generating geometry.
Rules: turning habits into constraints
Hard constraints
These must never be violated. MST names interface compatibility, collision, bend rules, access, mounting and safety requirements. For gas equipment they typically become:
- Only compatible port types connect: face seal to face seal of the matching size, weld stub to weld stub.
- No interference with other parts, the enclosure, or keep-out volumes around doors, exhaust and electrical areas.
- Bends within your tube bending rules, with the straight lengths your bender and weld heads need.
- Wrench and tool access at every serviceable joint.
- Components mounted only to surfaces that actually carry them.
Objectives
These are preferences you approve and the solver trades against each other: a smaller envelope, shorter routes, fewer fittings, lower assembly complexity. MST's layout and routing solvers compare feasible candidates against these customer-approved objectives. Disagreements inside your team about objectives, such as compact versus easy to service, should be settled before generation. Otherwise you'll argue about them in review.
Family-level rules
Some rules apply only to one equipment family: service breaks on both sides of field-replaceable components, welded joints wherever nothing needs removing, actuator orientation toward the tubing side, purge tie-in conventions. A rule set like this defines a design process for one class of equipment. MST states that a new equipment class needs its own rules and validation, developed with the customer. A folder of parts alone doesn't define a design process.
[Q31](https://mst-us.ai/questions/weldment-and-vcr-fitting-routing/) covers many of the routing realities these rules encode.
How it comes together
1. The diagram becomes a directed graph of components and connections.
2. Each item is matched to a part in the approved subset.
3. The layout solver places parts and aligns interfaces within envelope and rules.
4. The routing solver searches paths, fittings and bends between compatible ports.
5. Placement and routing iterate.
6. The selected solution is executed as a native, editable SOLIDWORKS assembly.
7. The assembly is reopened and read back so parts, connections and traceability can be checked against the inputs.
A missing part, an ambiguous connection or a rule that can't be satisfied should come out as a visible unresolved item, never a silent substitution.
Scenario: the fitting nobody released
A team prepares a gas-box job. Matching fails on a tee in the purge branch. The vault has the tee, but only as a work-in-progress file one engineer modeled and never released. The generator reports it as unresolved instead of using it. The library owner checks the vendor model, adds mate references at the gland faces, and releases it through normal change control. A rerun matches the tee. In review, the design lead also finds a run that hugs a regulator body more closely than the team likes for service access. That is a gap in the rules, so a clearance rule is added to the family rule set for future jobs.
Both fixes improve the library and the rule set, which is where the value builds up over time.
Readiness table
| Input | Ready when | Typical gap |
|---|---|---|
| Part identity | One number per physical part | Copied and renamed files |
| State and revision | Released at the intended revision | Long-term work-in-progress usage |
| References | Rebuilds cleanly anywhere | Missing externals |
| Configurations | Names map to part numbers | Descriptions out of sync |
| Interfaces | Ports identifiable | No mate references |
| Hard rules | Written and challenged | Access rules held in someone's head |
| Objectives | Agreed by the team | Compact versus serviceable unresolved |
Tradeoffs
- Stricter is safer but slower. Limiting placement to released parts means new components go through change control before they can be used.
- More rules give more predictable output, and more maintenance. Treat the rule set as controlled design data.
- The interface work is unglamorous. It is also the biggest lever you have.
If your team designs semiconductor gas equipment in SOLIDWORKS and wants to see how your parts and rules would map, [contact MST](https://mst-us.ai/contact/).
FAQ
Does it create new parts?
No. It places approved models and reports gaps.
Which PDM systems?
Each vendor, schema and vault policy needs its own integration review. MST doesn't claim universal support.
Do rules have to be code?
No. Plain language with your engineers is a fine start, and MST configures the supported workflow from there.
Will it touch released files?
Not by default. It creates a separate project assembly.
Two parts fit one item. Which wins?
That is a rule. Set a preference, or let the item be flagged for the engineer to choose.