Community Tip - Visit the PTCooler (the community lounge) to get to know your fellow community members and check out some of Dale's Friday Humor posts! X
I am creating a UDF of the J1926-1 feature on the end of solid round bar.
When I run the UDF on other locations, the revolves and extrudes 'flip' and do not follow the way they were created. Using the hole command, I have been able to create the spotface, drill depth, etc without any issues. When I run the UDF, the helical sweep cut (thread) of the feature flips. I have created other UDFs of this same feature and all appear to work correctly. Any ideas of what I am doing wrong?
Solved! Go to Solution.
All of your models appear to be using legacy start parts that have accuracy set to relative and not absolute. I strongly advise you to correct this ASAP. If you are working in Creo 7 or newer this is mandatory according to PTC. If you do not do this, you are in for a world of pain going forward.
Creo 9 models enclosed for reference. This implementation of the UDF works on your test model. I changed the references of the helical sweep profile section. You will need to verify the dims of this feature. I have no rigorous proof of the issue in your models but as I suspected it seems to be related to the references used in the helical sweep. I changed the references of this sketch and added a csys to the sketch.
In general, always minimize the references used for any feature to be included in a UDF. This is a shot of the profile sketch in the helical sweep. Change your UDF definition to match this and it should work.
Are you certain that the UDF contains a complete definition of the reference frame? If you can use a CSYS in the UDF definition that is usually quite robust. If you are using a reference that is not within the UDF that could be the issue. It is hard to tell without seeing how the UDF and target model are defined.
All of the References are tied to only features created in other features in the UDF. It is tied to a centerline and the surface of a hole feature. There are no references to features created outside of the UDF. Is this what you are asking?
Yes, that is what I was asking in the context of the references used by the helical sweep. Are you able to flip the direction when placing the UDF and if so, does it regenerate correctly?
I have tried to flip it when it shows the failed feature but nothing seems to work. to view?
Put the UDF definition files and a sample target part in a zip archive and post them here. Without the files it is difficult to diagnose.
J1926-1_CYLINDER-END is the model that I am using to create the UDF .
Test-3017 is tha latest UDF that was created.
Just FYI, this UDF is ultimately to be used in Smart Assembly.
All of your models appear to be using legacy start parts that have accuracy set to relative and not absolute. I strongly advise you to correct this ASAP. If you are working in Creo 7 or newer this is mandatory according to PTC. If you do not do this, you are in for a world of pain going forward.
Creo 9 models enclosed for reference. This implementation of the UDF works on your test model. I changed the references of the helical sweep profile section. You will need to verify the dims of this feature. I have no rigorous proof of the issue in your models but as I suspected it seems to be related to the references used in the helical sweep. I changed the references of this sketch and added a csys to the sketch.
In general, always minimize the references used for any feature to be included in a UDF. This is a shot of the profile sketch in the helical sweep. Change your UDF definition to match this and it should work.
Thanks. I will give it a try.
We are using Creo 9.0.4.0 and i just created the start parts so I must have pulled old part to create them. Will check in to see what other things that might be an issue with the legacy parts.
thank you again.
It seems you selected the wrong post as the solution. If the models I provided solved the issue, please mark that response as the solution. If it is still unresolved then post back with the open issues.
Thx
I'm not seeing anything here to accept as a solution?