Family Table Accuracy - Verification Issues

[jschwankert13]

Often when creating family tables (of parts that get larger in length and associated patterned features), I find that the model accuracy causes a number of issues during the verification process. While the failures often occur in patterned UDF features... random rounds, chamfers, and other basic features also often fail in random instances during the verification process. Could someone please explain how best to handle these issues as it will often take HOURS of pure trial and error to find an absolute accuracy that allows all 20-30 instances to verify.

[dross]

It shouldn't take hours.

Set absolute accuracy to .0001" in the generic, almost anything will regen at that setting though it may increase regen times.

[jschwankert13]

Unfortunately, I've tried many absolute accuracy values (including 0.0001) and it while the generic will succeed, some of the instances (longer lengths) will fail during verification. What takes hours is the trial and error game that I am forced to play finding the EXACT accuracy that works for all 30 instances. For example, on one part I found that 0.0013 works, but 0.0001 - 0.0013 and 0.0014 - 0.0019 do not.

Often one accuracy will work for 27/30 instances, then the next accuracy I try will work for 28/30 instances, but with now occurring on different instances than those that failed previously. 

[dross]

I don't know what is causing your problems then.

I use .0001 for everything from very small parts (.010 x .015 x .005) to very large parts (100 x 1200 x 200") without any problems.

Are you sure that you set absolute and not relative?

[dschenken]

This behavior is almost always because of specific part geometry. Without a picture of the part it's not possible to give a good idea of what to change. Almost always geometry related regen problems are where various features generate surfaces that ideally end up exactly coincident, except due to numerical round-off errors they either leave a gap or interfere; either one leads to failure of differing kinds.

[jschwankert13]

Thanks for the responses everyone. I wish I could post images but I am unable to as this is a company project.

Sadly, I have cleared my generic part of Geometry Check issues, and yet still encountered failures in the family table verification process.

I have found solutions for these parts after trial and error, it is just so time consuming and I would love to avoid having to go through the same process going forward.

[dross]

Then I would save the instances as separate models and eliminate the family table after creating your drawing.

[dgschaefer]

Do you have any geometry checks in your part? Look on the Tools tab for Geometry Checks in the Investigate section.  If it's grayed out, there are none, if not you have some. If so, I'd track those down and correct them.  Frequently they are of little consequence, but in situations like these they can cause trouble.