Skip to main content
M
MiaB3D1-Visitor
1-Visitor
March 17, 2020
Solved

Working with Relations and sub-assemblies

  • March 17, 2020
  • 3 replies
  • 3999 views

I need some help with Relations and sub-assemblies. I am really new to CREO parametric (3 months) and my company has 4.2 version. I do have an extensive experience with Inventor programming ilogic and visual basic so it has been hard to adapted to the lock of programming tools in CREO. Now moving forward and learning the new software I was able to create a frame assembly that will change in size once I change one driving parameter (Depth). No problems there. Next I need to create an assembly that will use the frame and I will be adding other components to the top assembly,  quantities for the new components will change also base in the depth. I want to keep the frame as its own assembly to keep drawings of of the frame assembly simple. I am having problems driving the depth of the sub-assembly from the Top assembly. Is it even possible? In inventor it was possible and easy. I been searching for tutorials but I haven't been able to find anything yet. If possible could you please add some examples of coding any help will be greatly appreciate. 

I am attaching a video of the frame that works no problem and a picture of the top assembly that I am just starting to put together and I have no idea how to write the code to drive the sub-assembly from the top assembly. I need help with the coding. Thank you in advance

(view in My Videos)

Best answer by MiaB3D

Thank you TomU. The session ID worked 😊

3 replies

T
TomU23-Emerald IV
23-Emerald IV
March 17, 2020

Yes, this is possible.  There are multiple ways to do this, but probably the most straight forward is to include the session ID of the thing you're trying to change (dimension, parameter, etc.).  Start with this section of the help docs.  If you get stuck, let me know and I will try to record a video demonstrating.

 

https://support.ptc.com/help/creo/creo_pma/r6.0/usascii/#page/fundamentals%2Ffundamentals%2Ffund_seven_sub%2FUsing_a_Session_ID_of_a_Component.html

 

By the way, if you want to be able to alter the sub-assembly from the top level assembly, but not make the sub-assembly dependent on the top level assembly, place the relations in the top level assembly and push the values 'down' to the sub-assembly.

 

/* Top level parameter

LENGTH = 10

 

/* Sub-assembly parameter set equal to the top level assembly's parameter

LENGTH:3 = LENGTH

 

    M
    MiaB3D1-VisitorAuthorAnswer
    1-Visitor
    March 17, 2020

    Thank you TomU. The session ID worked 😊

    D
    DavidBigelow18-Opal
    18-Opal
    March 17, 2020

    yes - it definitely is possible - but tedious to setup if you are doing pure model-to-model relations.

     

    Looking at your design - the Advanced Frame Extension might be very beneficial for this type of project... more of a skeleton framework down approach.  I have personally not used it, but everything I hear is that it is pretty awesome for this type of work.

     

    The BIGGEST issue in my book for these types of problems -- data flow!

     

    We often use the skeleton model as a 3D-measuring stick for the final parts to regenerate to.  There are MANY ways to synchronize that information - and much of that also depends on how "locked" down you want your final assembly to be relative to the parts and drawings.  The more assembly relations between parts the more testing and validation .. and the more likely the design has to stay together in the long run .... so massive save-as that would include a lot of extra information that would not be typically modeled.

     

    We always advise -- keep things as autonomous as possible, so that parts/assemblies and drawings (never forget the drawings) are reusable and configurable for the next usage of them - and do not carry a lot of baggage as a result.

     

    Here is an example of a machine design problem that we came up with that focused on the movement of data rather than the specific relations that tie the design together in Creo - note that this uses Nitro-CELL in this example:

     

    Creo Machine Design Automation w/ Excel

     

    IF you are focusing on the data flow between parts - you can accomplish the same thing using CREOSON - a bit of programming for this... and I would only consider Nitro-CELL or CREOSON if you are truly wanting to automate the process ... meaning high variability of inputs and outputs.

     

    Designs like you are doing can be really cool when done right, or a headache to manage later.   I would pay close attention to "how" things are released.   Job Shop numbering - no desire to reuse components --or-- reuse the heck of our what is already made.   If you are job-shopping it.... data will be bigger to manage in the end (quite a bit of duplication) - but you will preserve the essence of the design when released.  If you are focused on item reuse, where used and tracking of a design... then it will be very important to avoid building massive dependent relationships to things that are not 100% there all the time.

     

    Just some food for thought.

     

    Dave

     

     

    Terms & ConditionsAccessibility statement