Community Tip - You can subscribe to a forum, label or individual post and receive email notifications when someone posts a new topic or reply. Learn more! X
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.
Conclusion. In this topis solution wasn't found or it doesn't exists
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.
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.
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).
Hi, no problem here they are. Models from Creo 7.0.4
Also screenshots:
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
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.
@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.
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.
@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.
Conclusion. In this topis solution wasn't found or it doesn't exists