Quantcast
Channel: PTC Community: Message List - Creo
Viewing all 11377 articles
Browse latest View live

Re: Interesting Observation - Offset Features

$
0
0

Hi Tom,

Yes this is strange.  I have not used Offset in this way.  I have used it countless times to do a simple offset of a surface (or quilt) and have also used it to replace a surface (but quite a while back so do not really remember it).

Essentially I found I did not understand how the other two choices in Offset worked so I did not use them.

In the example case you show it makes a solid feature but does not recognise the intersection with the other leg of the solid.  It is as if it has made a surface feature but filled it from below with the surface boundary remaining in the other solid as it would if it was surface only.  This is M060

 

As a complete change of tack how about a projected curve as the base of your weld and a sweep (for me VSS) to give the inclined wall and then use solidify?  Very robust.  If you are really keen you can copy the surfaces of the tube and the block then merge these to your sweep to get a surface volume which you then solidify but unless you need this volume for something it may be over the top.

 

Regards, Brent.


Re: Interesting Observation - Offset Features

$
0
0

Solid should find their own intersection,offset feature is like cross between surface and solid maybe that's why.just guessing.

 

also sometime i find need for "select offset upto or hold shift to catch the point/surface"  while offsetting a curve on a plane instead of giving actual measurement.

Re: Mechanica..Elasto-plastic

$
0
0

Randy,

 

Anisotropic materials are not yet supported in LDA.  Unfortunately, the same is true for preloads in LDA since that requires a similar formulation.  Sorry.  Not very difficult to implement.  We just haven't done it yet.  We should definitely consider it for a future release.

 

Thanks,

 

Christos

Re: Why is pdf export still crap?

$
0
0

The attached image shows pentable settings, location, config options and a comparision of what is being seen when exporting a pdf and what is on screen. All pointing to the right place with all pens turned down to 0.001cm!

 

The PEN Table may not be working as all the pen thicknesses have been set to be the same thickness, the weird thing is that this has worked previously. I wonder if there is some other setting overiding the pentable? I have had that previously when we changed to creo 2 and we had some setting conflicts from our standard settings causing unusual behaviour. .

Re: Creo 2.0 - Attaching to Dimensions (Geo. Tol., notes, etc.)

$
0
0

It is always hard to know what you are looking at when you see it on a drawing.

 

The .0001 tolerance really should have been a tolerance as part of the dimension.  If you don't know to change the detail config to show tolerances, people tend to just type it in.

The feature control block can be "attached" to the dimension through the GTOL dialog.  But again, you have to know how to properly define the datums and the GTOL features in the model (or as drawing features) to attach them to the dimension.

Re: Creo 2.0 - Attaching to Dimensions (Geo. Tol., notes, etc.)

$
0
0

The option is not always available as it is dependent on the tolerance type that is selected but when it is available, you will have the option to attach the GTOL to the dimension using the GTOL properties dialog.

 

GTOL_ON_DIM.PNG

Re: Why is pdf export still crap?

$
0
0

What method are you using to create the PDF?

Re: Why is pdf export still crap?

$
0
0

Remove those entries from the config.pro and make a file named

table.pnt

Add the following to the file:  make sure the file does not have a hidden .txt extension

pen 1 thickness .002 in

pen 2 thickness .002 in

pen 3 thickness .002 in

pen 4 thickness .002 in

pen 5 thickness .002 in

pen 6 thickness .002 in

pen 7 thickness .002 in

pen 8 thickness .002 in

Place the file in your working directory (folder).

 

Use the export to PDF dialog and check the Use Pen Table option in the option dialog.

 

Now export the PDF.

 

This worked for me on this file using 600-PDI setting:

pens_at_002.PNG

 

That is a 1/8" ball at 1:1 on an A-size drawing zoomed 800% in Adobe reader.


Re: Contacting Brent Drysdale re ProE/Croe stuff

$
0
0

Thanks Dan.

Back to WF4 for now but maybe Creo 2.0 soon.  Should be fun.  Who knows one day may get to see you at a conference again but no expectations on that.

 

Regards, Brent

Re: Contacting Brent Drysdale re ProE/Croe stuff

$
0
0

Thanks Frank,

Choosing not to start for another month yet.  Plenty to get sorted before shifting.


Regards,

 

Brent Drysdale

Re: Contacting Brent Drysdale re ProE/Croe stuff

Re: Assembly cut?

$
0
0

I go with Tom but then TDD is pretty much second nature to me.

If you don't have this or simply want to do it another way then:

 

Make an assembly surface of the outside of the parent tube then use this to cut your child part.  Never tried to make the cut in assembly but you could definitely make the surface of the parent in the child while in assembly and do the cut in the child.  Definitely creates cross references and these can get very tangled up if you are not careful (hence my preference for the formality of TDD).  Also there can be an issue of cross referencing not being allowed in your setup (by system admin).  You are allowed cross references by default in ProE/Creo but configs can be set to limit or disallow such references.

 

Do the same thing but activate the child and Copy the outer surfaces from the parent then use this quilt to cut away the unwanted "intersection".  This is probably what I would do if I did not have TDD.

 

You can hunt and peck at cutting away the "intersection" as made up features in the child but there is no guarantee that if you update the model to say 50° then the "intersection" will no longer be valid and must also be manually updated.  Do not recommend this as it is a minefield for later.

 

Regards, Brent

Re: Why is pdf export still crap?

$
0
0

I had a lot of trouble getting PDF's to plot correctly, too. Here is what I ended up doing:

 

Put the following lines in your config.pro file:

 

pdf_use_pentable yes

use_8_plotter_pens yes

pen_table_file T:\Engineer\Library_Proe\6_Creo2_System_Files\config\Plot\pen_table_pdf.pnt

 

"T:\Engineer\Library_Proe\6_Creo2_System_Files\config\Plot" is my path to the "pen_table_pdf.pnt" file.

 

The pen_table_pdf.pnt is just a text file that contains the following lines:

 

pen 1 thickness 0.005 cm

pen 2 thickness 0.005 cm

pen 3 thickness 0.005 cm

pen 4 thickness 0.005 cm

pen 5 thickness 0.005 cm

pen 6 thickness 0.005 cm

pen 7 thickness 0.005 cm

pen 8 thickness 0.005 cm

 

For plotting to the plotter or printer, we use the default MS_PRINT_MGR. The ms_print_mgr.pcf file has a line that calls for the pen_table_ms_print_mgr.pnt pen table file. Make sure to use the correct paths to your file locations.

 

Hope this helps,

 

Rick Z.

 

  Attachments: 

Re: Tolerance mode: Nominal vs Limits

$
0
0

I knew about the limits wanting to change the CAD before and yes that is distubing. Especially for shafting and bearings where you have one sided tolerance and someone wants them displayed with limits instead.

 

This was just in changing the .dtl file for a new drawing standard and not knowing why most dimension then change to limits and I have to go and change them to nominal.

Re: Table Relations - Search Function

$
0
0

Good, I took your example repeat region relation:

 

POSITION=search(asm_mbr_description,"SUB")

IF POSITION>0

     QUANTITY="--"

ELSE

     QUANTITY=rpt_qty

ENDIF

 

And then changed asm_mbr_desctiption to asm_mbr_name, and the relation verified succesfully.

 

So you could use this kind of relation:

 

POSITION=search(asm_mbr_name,"SUB")

IF POSITION>0

     QUANTITY="--"

ELSE

     QUANTITY=rpt_qty

ENDIF

 

But only if you are going to follow some sort of model naming convention that can always tell what models in your assembly are sub-assemblies. This might work if you are just trying to exclude the quantity in the resulting assembly component list (repeat region).

 

Or are you trying to do something else? I am not sure.

 

Anyway, as you can see, the search function in repeat region does not work for user defined parameters pulled from assembly models, such as asm_mbr_description, or DESCRIPTION on the model level. This function only works for system params like asm_mbr_name. That means you propably can't have the repeat region alone to care about all of your assembly parameters as you would like. I've tested your relation on both Creo Parametric 2.0 M020, and Pro/E WF4 M220, and it works as you describe, so this is propably not a bug.

 

Well, should I check Creo Parametric 2.0 M070 since I know PTC devs were messing with repeat region relations lately? I should, but that still won't make any difference for you as you are on WF4.

 

 

I don't know if you have to have this kind of DESCRIPTION parameter, and if you wouldn't be ok just with naming the sub assemblies in some sort of appropriate way so that your repeat region alone would be able to process it as you would like. If you really need to have this user defined DESCRIPTION parameter, and the resulting QUANTITY based of off that, then you could add a relation to all your parts, and subassemblies like this:

 

IF search(DESCRIPTION,"SUB")>0

   SUB_PREFIX_CHECK=true

ELSE

   SUB_PREFIX_CHECK=false

ENDIF

 

Part and assembly relations can handle the search function with no problem. Then you can modify your repeat region relation of the top level assembly drawing as shown on the following picture:

 

rr_relations.JPG

 

I am simply using a true or false check to either existing or not existing assembly parameter there, which seems to work as you can see on the picture.

 

There's a bunch of variations to both of these solutions, and I guess you are deep enough in this to know what you are really after. If you are still unsure about something, then let me know, and I can try to explain  further.


Re: Tolerance mode: Nominal vs Limits

$
0
0

All my old 2000i drawings, and several imported Pro|E parts from internet libraries come in with limit dimensions assigned to all model dimensions.  Very annoying.

 

I just tested Creo 2.0.  Assigning new limit dimensions does not try to change the nominal.  It seems to be an issue with a legacy converter as we open old files.

Re: Tolerance mode: Nominal vs Limits

$
0
0

It's not a problem with converter. In all versions, default_tolerance_mode is an option also in config.pro and it also governs tolerance mode for parts' dimensions in 3D mode. Prior to Creo release this option had default setting to limits, thus all parts made in earlier software will have limit tolerance. Somewhere with Creo release it has been changed to nominal as default for new parts, but of course it hasn't affected models made with ProE.

Re: Tolerance mode: Nominal vs Limits

$
0
0

Interesting.  That means that dimensions that -were- changed to a different mode such as +-symetrical, they should not have changed on drawings or in model sketches when opened in later versions.

 

Sounds like you've been through this. Lukasz

Re: Tolerance mode: Nominal vs Limits

$
0
0

Yeah, I think they remain with changed tolerance mode, but I'm home now and have no way to verify this .

 

And yes, I've been through this couple of times, but from different angle: I work for Polish VAR and among other things I do trainings for our customers - the issue with tolerance limits came up alwys with drawing module and showing how to set up tolerances in ProE . They were always in limits mode after enabling tolerance display so that got me to work thorugh this and see what's the reason.

Re: Creo 2.0 - Attaching to Dimensions (Geo. Tol., notes, etc.)

$
0
0

Thanks Antonius,  I'll have to look for the "relate to object" feature as I've never seen it, just "relate to view".  It may help with revision balloons.  Knowing that I can edit the feature control frame after it's attached to a dimension makes me a lot more comfortable about using it.  I'll look around tomorrow and try to put it to work.

 

I can't thank everyone enough for their help.  It's taken so much frustration away trying to learn Creo on my own.

 

Matt

Viewing all 11377 articles
Browse latest View live


Latest Images

<script src="https://jsc.adskeeper.com/r/s/rssing.com.1596347.js" async> </script>