Searching for constrain sets
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Notify Moderator
Searching for constrain sets
Hi, we work with big assemblies and sometimes structure of the model is a mess.
I want to find which part position will be affected after i change constraint of specific part(move). This is downstream example.
Next case is I want to know which part placement will affect this part position. This is upstream example.
How can i do it in creo?
Thanks in advice)
Solved! Go to Solution.
- Labels:
-
Assembly Design
- Tags:
- constraints
Accepted Solutions
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Notify Moderator
Conclusion. In this topis solution wasn't found or it doesn't exists
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Notify Moderator
The reference viewer supports such queries. Use the RMB in the model tree on the component of interest to activate the reference viewer as shown below.
Then set the context of the reference viewer to current component placement feature as seen here.
Involute Development, LLC
Consulting Engineers
Specialists in Creo Parametric
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Notify Moderator
Yes, you are right it is actually possible to find constraint this way. But only one level further. And also when working on assebmly level you don't want to know which feature is creating this constraint. Most of the time(99.999%) you want to know which surface or which part is making constraint.
But this feature... it does something i don't know how to describe. It is unreadable.
For example:
In this case i've modeleed simple boxy thing and connected everything with coinsident constraints. Each box has 3 mating surfaces with previous one.
For some reason there is 4 reference surfaces from 1 extrude. But I've made mating by coinsident constraint with only 3 of them.
Next problem that i can see from here is that there is no children found. But if you look at the model it is obvious that next box is connected to the one I've highlited.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Notify Moderator
I think I know why there are 4 surfaces documented for your case, I would need the models to confirm. Are you able to share your test model? I have Creo 7 and Creo 9 installed.
If you hover the mouse pointer over each of the surfaces it will highlight them in the graphics window. By doing this you may understand why there are four surfaces used to define the constraints (references).
Involute Development, LLC
Consulting Engineers
Specialists in Creo Parametric
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Notify Moderator
Hi, no problem here they are. Models from Creo 7.0.4
Also screenshots:
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Notify Moderator
I always try to do these kind of analysis in 2D since its always pain in the ass. I would try getting parrents from pro-program, export it as text and build a quick tree with some programming in python/batch
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Notify Moderator
I wouldn't say that it isn't the solution. But, doesn't it have to be a instrument inside of a creo parametric.
Let me explain. Creo allows you to create huge structures. To follow up all of the connections you have to be able to look at it the way so it is at least readable. Not one by one loading structure of some specific subassembly created by pro program.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Notify Moderator
@ilyachaban wrote:
Yes, you are right it is actually possible to find constraint this way. But only one level further. And also when working on assebmly level you don't want to know which feature is creating this constraint. Most of the time(99.999%) you want to know which surface or which part is making constraint.
But this feature... it does something i don't know how to describe. It is unreadable.
For example:
In this case i've modeleed simple boxy thing and connected everything with coinsident constraints. Each box has 3 mating surfaces with previous one.
For some reason there is 4 reference surfaces from 1 extrude. But I've made mating by coinsident constraint with only 3 of them.
Next problem that i can see from here is that there is no children found. But if you look at the model it is obvious that next box is connected to the one I've highlited.
Hi,
your testing model (6 identical parts) is the root of the problem.
Martin Hanák
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Notify Moderator
Hello, I don't think so.
This instrument has to work with instances. Not with an acutual part.
When you work with constraints they are applies to instances of a part not to an original part.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Notify Moderator
@ilyachaban wrote:
Hello, I don't think so.
This instrument has to work with instances. Not with an acutual part.
When you work with constraints they are applies to instances of a part not to an original part.
Hi,
I agree with you that the Reference Viewer should also work with your test model. If you feel that the error needs to be fixed, then contact PTC Support. I won't do it. It is up to you to spend some time with PTC Support.
Martin Hanák
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Notify Moderator
Conclusion. In this topis solution wasn't found or it doesn't exists
