Re: Winch assembly mirror...how

Staron · ‎Sep 10, 2014

Hi everyone

I have read a few threads regarding assembly mirror, but still wanted to ask what you think is the best way to do the following scenario.

I have designed a Winch (port side), with drawings and all, but now I’ll looking to make the starboard side winch, it’s exactly the same, but need to be a mirror. How would I go about to do this, in your opinion?

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.

Dale_Rosema · ‎Sep 10, 2014

Is it in fact a completely mirrored assembly, or are a few components mirrored? I think would be one of the basic questions into determining the approach.

Staron · ‎Sep 10, 2014

Hi,

Well I only need to mirror the frame, so I think that all parts/assemblys need to be opposite. Some parts could have been reused, but that again is a bit problematic, as they refer to another skeleton.

TomD.inPDX · ‎Sep 10, 2014

I am surprised the bean counters will let you mirror a sub-assembly of this type in light of economy of scale.

Mirroring the assembly is likely a crutch. The only time I find it useful is if one drawing will work to define both. A simple note and a quick view (by adding the mirrored part) stating the mirror requirement (tabulated drawing) is normally sufficient.

You might consider just rebuilding the second unit. You can try copying the the assembly and drawing and replacing the frame and skeleton. It saves some time doing this.

Often, you will find OEM components do not mirror well because they have some feature that remains asymmetrical. No matter what, you have to review this.

Also remember that the assemblies have to be sustainable. Whatever you do, it must be logical enough that the next person making a revision will follow through at all levels.

There is no easy way. Typically, it is your organization's CAD policy that drives the level of effort required to do something like this. If you are lucky, whoever sets policy also understands the challenges in Creo to meet those policies by providing procedures as well.

rreifsnyder · ‎Sep 19, 2014

If your skeleton methodology is an issue in reusing parts in any different assembly then you should reexamine your policy. Personally I am not a fan of driving part geometry with a skeleton. That is my opinion in the work that I am involved with. Creo is such a powerful tool that many things can be controlled/driven in many ways, but that doesn't always mean it makes sense to use all of that power. There are times that the overhead from dealing with those constraints far outweighs the gain.

All of that being said, I would mirror the frame and reuse the other parts if there is no change needed in the geometry from one side to the other. If your other parts are tied to the skeleton, personally, I would break those dependencies.

Staron · ‎Sep 22, 2014

We are using Creo 2.0 here

Staron · ‎Sep 22, 2014

Hi and sorry for the delay in my response.

I did mirror the frame and came across a few problems.

A few parts where fixed in the original assembly, mirror did have bit of a problem with that, and put a few of those parts “out in space”.
The Relations where gone, so I have redo one and one part, doing Modelcheck Regenerate on Top Assembly did not do all, even if I choose All of the popup-window.
Had a problem with an Assembly cut, I the original assembly it was ok, but when I went to the mirror, it reported error. Then when I went back to original again, it to had error on the assembly-cut. Pressed Regenerate on the original, all ok and but mirror still had the problem. I did redo the cut in original, and all the sudden it worked. All I did was to extrude a bit past the surface, even it should have been valid.
The mirror keeps reporting that my model is not regenerated when I save, even though regenerate does not report any problems.
The drawings is not mirrored.
The datums is not mirrored, or you do not have access to them that I can see in the mirror, and when I need to make Section-cut for drawing, I need to manually make new ones in mirror, and that will be problematic for the next guy who is going to work on my project to know what I have done.
I also receive this message: ModelCHECK will not run - 'NOCHECK', on Original it reports no sutch problem.
Did also report a problem with this error: "Mass properties are not calculated", atm It does not show when I regenerate and save, but had that problem before the weekend, when I was at work (homeoffice atm).
Section(s) is is also not copied.

So to sum it up, it was quite a few errors doing mirror, and that is a bit problematic, because it is a pretty fundamental function in a program like this in my opinion. I have been using Autodesk Inventor for 5 years, up to 2014 (started in this job april this year), and things like this is no problem at all in Inventor.

I’m starting to like PTC Creo, but it is a decade behind Solid Works and Inventor in many areas. And the drawing “module” is quite time-consuming as well, but then again it won’t let you do much other than dimensioning, on the other side that is good, since the model contains all the information.

TomD.inPDX · ‎Sep 22, 2014

It sounds like you have enough data to get tech support busy resolving some limitations of the software.

Do you have a current maintenance contract?

This is not a method many people have the opportunity to make use of. And the fact that you continue to have regeneration issues and problems with mirroring features fail is cause for concern. the only way PTC can make the product better is if they see the issues users are finding.

I am sure that the faults lie with both your technique and with Creo's performance. If you can, please consider submitting your assembly and process to PTC and let them verify the model and the process. They will provide feedback as to what they find that is failing the mirror features.