I want to create an assembly that uses a skeleton-model and control/change the parameters of the parts in the top-assembly using parameters.
For example I have defined a rectange in the skeleton-sketch that is used (extruded) in another part of an assembly. The edges of the rectangle are roundet in the part. So there is one dimension of the part in the skeleton-model (rectangle in sketch) and the other dimension to change the model is in the part itself (radius of edges). My Idea is to control all the parameters of the skeleton and the parts (e.g. the rounding of the edges) in the top-assembly.
is this the proper procedure ? And how can it be done ?
I have found this answer: https://community.ptc.com/t5/Detailing-MBD-MBE/Use-top-assembly-dimensions-parameters-in-a-sub-assem...
but I cant select a skeleton-model in the window "relations->look in"
Similar discussion which references further similar discussions, etc.
Previous discussion of assemblies used for parameters and such
Pro/Notebook (layout) functionality will allow you to define the variables and relations in a top level file (layout) you can then declare this layout to files which then provide access to all of the values enetered/calculated in the layout.
Think of the layout file as defining global variables that can then be referenced by any object it is declared to. They also support automatic assembly of parts through the layout. You can also undeclare the layout at any time breaking the dependency if needed.
You can see a simple example here:
IF your submodels are always going to be the same references and they are just "flexing" to the requirements of your assembly/skeleton parameter requirements - then a Pro/PROGRAM with an execute statement to pass parameters down to the models via INPUTs in each model is probably the best...
This assumes that you would keep these models in relation to each other always.
Layouts - I would avoid them - they tend to create baggage and hinder reuse of models due to declarations. BUT they can be more obvious when it comes to central management vs Pro/PROGRAM.
I would look at Pro/PROGRAM first as your solution to this... it is one less thing to manage - but is not as obvious to the next user of the file.