Using "Variable" patterns

[WendyM]

Hi All,

I have come across a need I vary rarely have. I need to make a series of hole, evenly spaced and the same depth, but each hole is a different diameter. When I read the Pro/E Help files, it seems like "Variable Pattern" would be my solution. However, after I make my pattern and go back to change the 2nd hole diameter, all 10 update. To me that seems to be violating the "Instance can vary in size" note in the help file.

So, does anyone know how to make variable patterns work? Or do I just have to go make 10 separate holes?

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.

[DavidButz]

Wendy,

If, by chance, your hole diameters vary in a systematic way, e.g. each one is .25 larger than the one before it, you can do this with a regular pattern. Otherwise, what you really need is a Pattern Table, where you include the hole diameter as a variable pattern dimension, and then edit the diameters within the table. (A Variable, as opposed to General, Pattern refers to something else, namely the level of complexity allowed in the pattern which affects regeneration time. Instances of a General Pattern can intersect each other; instances of a Variable Pattern cannot.)

David

[WendyM]

Thanks Dave, they don't, of couse, so I'll use a Table. I appreciate the insight, as once again the language of PTC's help files don't seem to be using tems to me what we over here expect them to mean.

[DavidButz]

P.S. What I said in the main post was a little misleading. You do need to use Pattern Tables to do what you want to do. But you would also have to use a Variable Pattern for a regular pattern whose instances varied in size, so the terminology is not as vague as I seemed to imply.