Speed of Creo and Family Table

[Dale_Rosema]

When working with family tables, had there been a bench mark or testing of speed for the following scenarios?

1. When creating a family table of an assembly, is it better to have all of the components turned on in the generic (or at all that are possible) or is it better to have as many as possible suppressed.

2. In the family table of an assembly, is it better to have in the columns defining the instances the "*", the model name, the "Y" or the "N".

3. Do you verify all instances of the family table before you close?

Thanks, Dale

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.

[MartinHanak]

Dale,

I am not able to comment point 1. and 2.

In case of point 3. - I think it is a good habit to verify instances, when you modify generic or its family table.

Martin Hanak

[BenLoosli]

1) When I save an assembly FT, I leave all components visible in the generic. I turn the ones off when building an instance to allow me to see them better.

2) I always use the 'Y' or 'N' when I define the visibility of components in the assembly FT.

3) YES - If you use Windchill it is required that you verify all family tables before checking them in. Even without a PDM, it is good practice to verify all FT instances before saving the generic file.

[Dale_Rosema]

Ben Loosli‌

Is/was that standard practice (#1 &#2) or was that a result of testing that showed it faster?

#3 - I don't have Windchill and sometime it takes 15-25 minutes to verify family tables, so I am trying to find a balance.

Thanks, Dale

[BenLoosli]

1&2 were my personal preferances. My assembly FTs were never big enough to worry about performance.

The largest one I did was for plastic extruded cable runs. the base runner was in one FT, the cover in another. Then we added 'nuts' to hold the cover down. I think I had about 15 lengths when I left the company. It was getting hard to add more component columns to the table and see them all. The engineer who I did the FT for and I were discussing breaking the assembly FT into individual files since there wasn't enough variation to make the FT worth the hassle of maintaining.

If it takes that long to verify the FT, you may want to consider how much content you have in there and break it up somehow.

PTC recommends that you always verify all instances, and have them all loaded when doing a change, before saving a modified FT.