layers - a popular topic this week.

The unfortunate part of any bit of software, whether ModelCheck or the stuff you have created, is that users simply cannot be forced to use it 100% of the time. Short of using actual force (I find electric cattle prods work pretty well) some users are simply stubborn enough or just don't care enough to do it right. No software will ever force then to care. Even though PDMLink can be set up to reject the check in of any objects with ModelCheck errors, I've yet to see that implemented. Too much fear of necessary exceptions.

That's one of the ways that Layer Rules really shine. They're built right into the start parts, so users have to go out of their way to remove or alter them. The type of user that can't be bothered with ModelCheck is less likely to go removing layer rules simply out of spite. The drawback, and it's one I've had to deal with a lot in the past, is old parts created prior to implementing layer rules. That's where ModelCheck really comes into play. If the start parts have the layer rules (and all the other junk like parameters or relations), ModelCheck becomes nearly an afterthought, except for modeling practices (late rounds, geom checks, buried features, etc.)

IMO, it really should be a two-pronged approach. It is vital that all aspects of start parts be set up correctly. One that hurdle is crossed, it's only legacy data that we have to worry about. (Or data created by outside vendors.)

I know Tool Kit is extremely powerful, but haven't had much opportunity to play with it. From what I've seen, it can accomplish much of what ModelCheck does with layers, views (and then some), parameters, etc, but without the need to run it over and over, correcting stuff incrementally the way ModelCheck does.

Now, if PTC would simply create a way to reapply the start part as a template to an existing file, all our troubles with this stuff would be reduced by a significant amount!

In Reply to alfonso medina:

We have Model check running to keep our quality up. However I found the
checking to be a little S%#$@y and regardless of warning or errors people
will not fix them unless I or another admin is behind them the whole way.
But model check is not too bad. we check for layers, parameters, units,
views out of place, formats yeah the whole shavang. its just not good
enough. I already investigated into automating some tasks and its possible.
But jlink and tool kit are so much better and versatile.

Please do a write up on this.

I have many old parts with messed up layers and would be interested in your method.

In Reply to alfonso medina:

So how do you guys feel about layer rules? Basically you go to a layer and
in its properties you can set up a search rule where it can find certain
items and put them in the layer. That can also be set to "associative"
which really means automatic. If you set it to automatic, then any new
plane goes into the plane folder, and any new feature named for example
"cool_feature_XX" could also be automagically pulled into a specific layer.

My start parts have their layers set to hidden by default. For any older
part or badly imported OTS part I made a map key to create the layers and
set them up with the rules. But then this took a few too many seconds. So I
wrote a Jlink up to not only fix the layers but also create views and check
parameters and remove un used ones. The jlink version runs probably 20 to
50 times faster. Setting rules tends to be the slow part. The views are
created in the blink of an eye and same for parameter checking.

My next step is to make this a batch script and just fix everything once
and for all. I'm tired of opening a part and having to click a thousand
times to get rid of the mess of planes and lines and points and coordinate
systems and notes and surfaces and the kitchen sink. Just tired of it.
Maybe I'll post a write up. I'll post the source code in a few. Its a
modification of some other jlink stuff I found on the internets.

regards,

Alfonso