cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Community Tip - Did you know you can set a signature that will be added to all your posts? Set it here! X

Sketch common to several parts

Dale_Rosema
23-Emerald III

Sketch common to several parts

I would like to have a sketch common to two parts. Is there a way to bring a sketch into a part (not an assemlby) and be able to modify it and have it update both or several parts?

I think this is leading to skeloton parts, but I haven't used these before. If this is what is necessary, are there some tutorials?


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.
2 REPLIES 2

Hi Dale,

The best way to do this would probably be to have the sketch reside in one of the parts and then create a Copy Geometry in the other parts using the Chain. Skeleton will probably work too but less efficiently.

I would probably opt to use relations in both parts where you can "wholesale" replace the values with a cut and paste. This would avoid dependencies between the parts. You can tie the relations directly to the section feature rather than the top level if you would rather bury the relations a little deeper than the surface. I like this simply because it is easy to manage and the part file remains wholy independent;

Another method is to make the component flexible and drive both parts at an assembly level making them equivalent at that level.

I'm quite sure you can use a few other tricks to drive this from external data but you have to look at how these two similar parts will be used at next level assemblies. Are they indeed fully independent where both part will rarely be used together? In that case I would definitely want to avoid dependencies.

A family table might even be more desirable. You have so many options to drive "common" components that you have to consider context and sustainability.

Announcements
NEW Creo+ Topics: Real-time Collaboration


Top Tags