Two Unions w/ Two outcomes.

[BrianCoward]

Hello everyone,
I've got a routine in model builder that's working perfectly and when I copy that routine over as a base and begin to change the parameters to create different features it�??s changing the available fields at the Union.  The source files are exactly the same but the outcome from the Union is different.  I've tried changing the output location, name, creating a new union in the model, and countless other changes.  Does anyone know how you can have a different outcome on a Union with the same source data?  And more importantly... how can I correct this?  Here are a few screen shots.  Appreciate the help,
Brian

[DarrenWiens2]

Are you sure the fields are actually missing? It looks like many of the fields you highlighted are just in a different order lower down the list. Is it possible that the order of the Union inputs have been changed?

[Anonymous User]

Original User: briancoward

dkwiens,
I do have way to many fields in there but no... after looking through another time it doesn't appear that the [Segment] field is coming through.  The fact that it is, somewhat, alphabetizing the order of the fields in a different way from the Union with the [Segment] field is odd though.  I'm not sure what it means... but it would help if the outcomes were consistent.  Any other ideas?  Thanks.

[DarrenWiens2]

When you look in the two Union tools, is the order of the inputs the same (e.g. COWS first, CMA second)?

[Anonymous User]

Original User: briancoward

Yep... the same in both.  I have noticed when I copy the routine over, initially, the [Segment] field shows up correctly.  I modify the "Expression" in the Make Feature Layer tool to select the different polygons and when I check the Feature Class to Feature Class on the other side of the Union the [Segment] field still shows up.  When I change the output name of the Union to match the new selection... the [Segment] field goes missing and the order changes to alphabetical.  Not sure if that helps�?�