Skip to main content
B
bparikh-21-Visitor
1-Visitor
February 24, 2017
Question

Use Simplified Rep in Relations

  • February 24, 2017
  • 6 replies
  • 13018 views

Hi,

I have assembly of, let's say, 2 components, A and B. They are assembled at distance D and angle X with respect to each other. Now I want to create 3 different simplified Rep in my assembly, say 1, 2 and 3. My requirement is to change values of D and X with each Simplified Rep, I choose to have in my assembly to be active. i.e. For Simplified Rep 1,

Value of D=d1 and X=x1;

For Simplified Rep 2,

Value of D=d2 and X=x2;

For Simplified Rep 3,

Value of D=d3 and X=x3

I think, there should be some way to link simplified Rep name and dimension through relations, to change the dimension values with respective Simplified Rep. Or is there any other way around to achieve this without adding same component multiple times in assembly? Please help.

Thanks,

Bhavin

6 replies

D
dschenken1-Visitor
1-Visitor
February 24, 2017

Simplified reps are not designed for this purpose. Family tables are.

    B
    bparikh-21-VisitorAuthor
    1-Visitor
    February 27, 2017

    But that will create additional CAD files in windchill (instances).

    S
    23-Emerald III
    StephenW23-Emerald III
    23-Emerald III
    February 27, 2017

    Simplfied rep functionality is mostly for large assembly management. I have seen a few instance of use of them for controlling part/assembly configuration but it is not what the functionality was designed to do.

    Just from what you are describing in your original post, have you looked in to flexible components in assembly mode?

    B
    BrianMartin13-Aquamarine
    13-Aquamarine
    February 24, 2017

    Hi Bhavin...

    Several things come to mind here:

    • Family tables can perform this function as Dave Schenken mentioned
    • Mechanisms with Snapshots can also perform this function
    • Potentially flexible components (varying dimensions) can also do it.
    • Simplified Reps with duplicate components can also be used (not recommended)

    Your goal here should be to use mechanism constraints. Even if your model is not necessarily supposed to be a true mechanism, mechanism constraint which allow motion are your best friend here. But WHY?

    With mechanism constraints, you can take Snapshots. This allows you to assemble ONE component A and ONE component B - but display them in various positions. You do not have to assemble multiple versions of the same components.  Once you've assembled them, you can move them to the desired values of "D" and "X". Then you take a "Snapshot" and name it! You can recall any snapshot by simply double-clicking it from the list of saved snapshots.

    You can take this further:

    • Make Snapshots available in drawings. This allows you to show both configurations on the same drawing at the same time - without using duplicate components! No simp reps. No family tables. No hassles!
    • Assign Snapshots to Combined States. Using combined states, you can add named tabs to the bottom of your screen. Maybe you name them "Position 1", "Position 2" and "Position 3". You can set the model into any given state by simply clicking the tab.
    • Publish snapshots as combined states in Creo View. You can recall your combined states in Creo View (some publishing settings are required). If you have the Animation license for Creo View, you can make quick animations from these snapshots.

    The benefits of Mechanisms and Mechanism constraints goes farther than this - but hopefully you get the idea. Of course, this is assuming your license supports at least mechanism constraints (as opposed to standard assembly constraints).

    Research this topic a bit on your own and give it a try - I think you'll find this gives you what you want without headaches.

    Thanks!

    -Brian

    D
    dschenken1-Visitor
    1-Visitor
    February 27, 2017

    Consider the use of Explode states. They can be combined with Simplified reps using Combined States to keep them coordinated.

      B
      BrianMartin13-Aquamarine
      13-Aquamarine
      February 27, 2017

      Agreed. And indeed, Snapshots saved within the Mechanism Drag window show up as "Explode States" within a drawing.

      P
      psobejko1-Visitor
      1-Visitor
      February 28, 2017

      I'm pretty sure one can assemble components using the standard "mechanism constraints" without the Mechanism Design extension.  I started a session of with only the FoundationAdv license and no extensions.  Mechanism Design didn't show up in the list of features.  Yet the pin joints, sliders, etc were all available for assembling components.

      And I think the most useful for this problem is the "Drag Components/Take Snapshots" tool.  Without it, the generation of explode states using the view manager is very tedious.

      J
      jmonk11-Visitor
      1-Visitor
      February 28, 2017

      How about controlling the position of the components with relations and then creating mapkeys to change the relations?

      J
      jbob12-Amethyst
      12-Amethyst
      March 10, 2017

      you could use multiple constraint sets, then make the PTC_CONSTRAINT_SET flexible. You only need to assemble in one set of parts for this application.

        M
        manjunathrv17-Peridot
        17-Peridot
        April 17, 2017

        I suggest to create a Pro/Program.

        With inputs like A, B, C.....

        Upon regeneration if user selects input as A, then X and Y values are X1 and Y1,

        If user selects B, then X and Y are X2 and Y2

        and so on.........

        Terms & ConditionsCookie settingsAccessibility statement