Control side 2 of a hole from family table?

[ptc-1701983]

I have a generic part with knock outs. The holes start from a datum within the solid geometry and are through all on side 1. I want an instance with the side 2 of the hole through all, so there is a hole through the solid, but can this be done? Thanks in advance, Richard.
This thread is inactive and closed by the PTC Community Management Team. If you would like to provide a reply and re-open this thread, please notify the moderator and reference the thread. You may also use "Start a topic" button to ask a new question. Please be sure to include what version of the PTC product you are using so another community member knowledgeable about your version may be able to assist.

[eric.mills]

Richard If you were to do an instance of the generic, than the instance would have to have a new hole added with the both sides definition. Sorry to make this comment but the question comes into my mind how does manufacturing create the hole starting inside the part first? I know what you are trying to do from the computer model, but one of my design best practices is the model exactly how it will be built, therefore your hole would start on a surface and goto a blind depth on one instance and go through on the second. That would get rid of the two holes in the model. Regards Eric

[GunnarHansen]

No, not in the table, is the short answer. You can either: 1) Make side 2 blind and put the dimension in the table with the values "0" and "big enough". or 2) Make a new, separate feature for side 2 (through all) and put y/n in the table.

[DELETEME]

On the generic you could have the hole start at the buried datum, then have the feature mirrored about that buried datum, and that would give you the thru hole. This mirrored feature could then be regenerated/suppressed as needed in the instances.

[ptc-1701983]

"C M" wrote:

On the generic you could have the hole start at the buried datum, then have the feature mirrored about that buried datum, and that would give you the thru hole. This mirrored feature could then be regenerated/suppressed as needed in the instances.

[GunnarHansen]

Eric, That might be an OK best practice, but only if you don't get extra dimensions or features/datums out of it, I think. I think it will some times be overuled by a practice that says keep your model simple? But again, that is a matter of taste and situations. Regards Gunnar

[GunnarHansen]

IMPORTANT MESSAGE: In WF3, at least, if you mirror feature with a sketch, you cannot change references in the original sketch. This can be fatal if a reference disapears! So a best practice of mine is: NEVER, EVER, EVER use mirror features with sketch. Unless for fun and temporarely stuff. I don't know if its becoming better in WF4 and WF5

[DELETEME]

"Gunnar Hansen" wrote:

IMPORTANT MESSAGE: In WF3, at least, if you mirror feature with a sketch, you cannot change references in the original sketch. This can be fatal if a reference disapears! So a best practice of mine is: NEVER, EVER, EVER use mirror features with sketch. Unless for fun and temporarely stuff. I don't know if its becoming better in WF4 and WF5