BUMP
↧
Re: How to export boundary box dimensions in Modelcheck?
↧
Re: How to export boundary box dimensions in Modelcheck?
It should be a parameter created in each model by modelcheck
You may need the check ADD_CHK_PARAM set to Y too
↧
↧
Re: How to export boundary box dimensions in Modelcheck?
ADD_CHK_PARAM was changed to Yes, Modelcheck interactive was ran again, but still no size parameters appear in the models. Is there something special you need to do within Modelcheck?
↧
Re: How to export boundary box dimensions in Modelcheck?
Ah-ha! Now that you mention it... ... ... ...
I sort of forgot an important bit 
in the .mcs (start) file you need to have (in my case)
PRT_ADD_CHK_PARAM MC_SIZE OVERALL_SIZE
where MC_SIZE was what I called my parameter and OVERALL_SIZE is the value that will be given to the parameter.
Same for assembly if you want assembly/sub-asssembly size.
Sorry, I've been to bed since configuring ModelCheck and obviously my little brain has overflowed
Hopefully this will see you straight!
↧
Re: Map Key not Loading And Diffrent Drawing Properties
Many of us have wanted this but it is not how Creo works. A "per sheet" detail.dtl option would be terrific. Maybe you can create the idea in the Ideas section and get some traction for Creo 3.0.
↧
↧
File, save
Is there a config option to stop Creo from creating a new file with every file, save? I end up with a ton files if I forget to purge.
Also, for some reason in Creo when I save a file that has a family table instance I need to either varify the table instances or open each and regen in order to save the instance or generic that I was working with. Pro/e never did this, it would just save and I would be on my merry way.
↧
Re: File, save
Mark,
a behaviour of Save command cannot be changed.
Martin Hanak
↧
Re: File, save
Mark,
As you already know, you can just delete old versions of the models as shown below, and this will prevent you winding up with a "ton" of files, as you called it. It's true, that every time you save the part, it will accumulate a list of parts, adding a new number at the end of the file name (prt.1, prt.2, prt.3, etc.). The intent of this was that if your current file became corrupt, for any reason, you could revert back to the most recent saved file without losing a lot of data.
↧
How to call parameters of the instance in the BOM table of Drg file?
Dear all,
I have a standard part, say screw. It will have diff sizes diff length . I have to call the parameters of the instances like size, length, description and part no in the BOM table in drg file. How to make that??
Pls help
THanks in advance
Thiru
↧
↧
Re: File, save
Needing to verify predates Creo. It is part of Intralink/PDMLink integration in order to make certain that parameters in the instances are correctly calculated so that they appear correctly in Intralink/PDMLink. I haven't worked outside a pdm system for a while, so I don't know if the verification is required there, but there is a verify-on-save option to make it automatic with saving.
What's the dislike about the files? Disk space is pretty cheap, though large numbers of files do require more time for making backups. As mentioned, the reason for the increments is to act as a safety net against file failures or user errors. I've seen users delete all the older versions, only to discover the latest one is corrupt, which you don't discover until it's been opened again.
If you often want to purge older files, look into creating a script that runs when you start Pro/E or prompts you to run when you start as a reminder.
↧
Hidden lines show light on PDF but not on printouts
I am having an issue with ProE5/Creo Elements. When I export a print to a PDF I can see the hidden lines, they are a light brown or green but when printed to paper they are so faint they really cant be seen. I have been through the whole pen table line thickness issue so I assumed it would be fixed there. From reading the hidden lines are driven by pen3, is that correct? Below is my current pen table
pen 1 thickness 0.003 in pen 2 thickness 0.005 in; letter_color,magenta_color,half_tone_color pen 4 thickness 0.010 in; drawing_color pen 5 thickness 0.005 in; attention_color pen 6 thickness 0.005 in; section_color pen 7 thickness 0.002 in; dimmed_color pen 8 thickness 0.007 in; highlite_color,edge_highlite_color
I then added a pen 3 to see if it whould help. Do I need to restart Proe for it to read the new changes? Do I need to redirect it to the file again once changes are made? Any help appreciated. Thanks
pen 1 thickness 0.003 in pen 2 thickness 0.005 in; letter_color,magenta_color,half_tone_color pen 3 thickness 0.010 in; black_color## pen 4 thickness 0.010 in; drawing_color pen 5 thickness 0.005 in; attention_color pen 6 thickness 0.005 in; section_color pen 7 thickness 0.002 in; dimmed_color
pen 8 thickness 0.007 in; highlite_color,edge_highlite_color
↧
Re: Selection Tricks/Workarounds?
ahh, now i see what you meant by the find tool.
there were two workarounds in that video, the inverse select and getting the name of a component to copy/paste. That was another I've been wondering about!
Thank you!
↧
Trigonometric functions give wrong values if supplied units
I have noticed a rather annoying problem with using Creo parameters with trigonometric functions in relations.
The observed behavior is as follows:
(1) Define your parameter with units, for example I define "angle" with a value of 15.0, Unit Quantity of "Angle" and Units of "deg", the result of "tan ( angle )" yields 0.04569. A wrong answer.
(2) Define your parameter with no value for either Unit Quantity or Units, and tan ( angle ) yields 0.267949, which is correct for 15 degrees.
(3) Do a "dumb" evaluation of "tan ( 15.0 )" and you again get 0.267949.
(4) Define your parameter with a value of 15.0, Unit Quantity of "Angle", and Units of "rad", and tan ( angle ) yields 0.267949.
So it appears that if you exercise "proper" practice and define your units correctly, you are delivered erroneous results. Put in the wrong units and you get the right answer.
Luckily, the error is so different from the correct answer that it is easy to see it's wrong. In this case.
Has anyone else observed this behavior?
For interest's sake, I'm running Creo 2.0, build M070.
↧
↧
Assembly Family Tables - Using Constraints in the Table?
I have a query that may become a product idea, I'm not sure:
I have a large assembly comprising a small sub-assembly and a large sub-assembly. The large sub-assembly can be assembled in a number (say 5) of different positions by mating a certain surface in the large S/A with the appropriate one of 5 different surfaces in the small S/A. These positions are not defined in terms of dimension, but are rather determined by which of a number of surfaces is chosen to mate the large S/A to.
In the past, I have made a family table, with 5 of the large S/A assembled to the generic and switched all except one off in each instance.
That's OK, but it really is a large S/A, with all the associated difficulties arising from large assemblies. Stick it in 5 times and its response becomes somewhat sluggish.
What I would like to do is assemble the large S/A once and have its assembly constraints as a column in the family table. I could define 5 constraint sets when I assemble the large S/A into the top model and disable all except one set, then use the family table to selectively enable and disable constraint sets.
I can't see a way to do this in WF4.
Is there a way?
Is it possible in WF5 or CP2?
Is there already an idea covering this? (I can't find one)
Should I raise an Idea?
I look forward to your response.
Thanks,
John
Wildfire 4, M220
↧
Re: Assembly Family Tables - Using Constraints in the Table?
It's definitely possible in Creo 2.0. IIRC, in Creo PTC added in assemblies parameter PTC_CONSTRAINT_SET, which you can use to change active constraint set for given component.
So you started with the right idea of making different constraints set for every placement variant, and now in Parametric 2.0 you'd need to just add PTC_CONSTRAINT_SET parameter to the family table and there you could simply change the constraint set's name for the corresponding family instance.
↧
Re: File, save
How do you purge directories when you say if you forget to? Because you can just purge then?
↧
Re: Selection Tricks/Workarounds?
If you often use find tool,there are differentoptions/combination. you can get so many joys by find tool.
↧
↧
Re: How to call parameters of the instance in the BOM table of Drg file?
Use a table with Two dimensional repeat region. For more, refer to help section. It is well explained there.
↧
Re: Assembly Family Tables - Using Constraints in the Table?
Antonius and James: You're welcome
Also, James: I've found this tutorial at Learning Exchange: http://learningexchange.ptc.com/tutorial/3239/component-of-a-sub-assembly-with-different-constraint-sets-in-one-overall-assembly - it shows how to utilize this feature in assemblies.
Antonius - check this link too, it is shown there that you can use this parameter in flexible components as well.
And David: The ability was there, that's right, now PTC just added additional parameter you can use to switch between defined constraint sets. Plus, as far as I know you can have multiple constraint sets enabled at once, the thing is constraints in those sets cannot be mutually exclusive, because then you'll indeed get "Constraints Invalid" message. As long as constraint sets are complementary to each other, it should work fine.
↧
Re: Assembly Family Tables - Using Constraints in the Table?
Thanks, Lukasz.
That's another (one?) reason for upgrading to the later version.
I tried it in WF4 and couldn't work out a way to use the 'PTC_CONSTRAINT_SET' parameter.
It would let me make the column in the model tree, but, when I tried to modify the value, it told me 'the name is reserved'.
I tried creating a random parameter and making it equal to 'PTC_CONSTRAINT_SET' with a relation, but it didn't like that either.
So, in WF4, it's there, but only to tease us. We have to wait until CP2 to be able to use it.
That sounds like a really significant new functionality.
Well done, PTC.
Cheers,
John
↧