make datum planes hidden

[ptc-1315170]

Many times when I am in an assembly, I would like to make all datum planes hidden. Then I can unhide the ones I am interested in using. This would be with datum planes showing activated. How can I do this. I would really like to make this a mapkey.

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.

[BrianMartin]

Hi Michael...

You're easiest answer is layers but there are probably a couple of ways to get you to where you need to be. Let me run through some possibilities though and see if these fit what you're trying to do. Hopefully you have at least Pro/ENGINEER Wildfire 5.0 because some of the things I'm going to suggest are only available in Wildfire 5 or up (Creo 1, 2, etc).

First, go to our view manager. Select Layers and New. This will allow you to create a new Layer State. Name your new state "Default" and save it. Now you're free to experiment with layer manipulations all you want and you can immediately return to a default state without a problem.

Next, turn ON your datum planes using the datum plane toggle icon. Next, go through and unhide all datum planes on ALL layers in your model. If you need a quick way to find all datum planes on all layers, use the Find Tool . Ctrl-F is a shortcut to brings up this tool or you can simply select the binoculars icon. using the Find Tool is a bit beyond the scope of a simple reply but it's not difficult to figure out. If you need help, let me know.

Once all your datum planes are on, select them all again, right-click and select Hide. This will put all layers on the Hidden Items layer in your layer tree.

Now... the datum plane toggle is on. All datum planes are on the hidden item layer therefore they are not being displayed. Now you can feel free to select any datum from the model tree or using the Find tool. Simply right-click and select Unhide and you'll have what you're looking for.

As a side note, if you have certain configurations of datum planes on/off that you need to keep coming back to, consider setting a new layer state for each of these configurations. You can name the layer state and instantly activate it through the view manager. There's another really ultra useful way to activate layer states... sort of like the best kept secret in Wildfire 5 and Creo... "Combination States"... but that's a topic for a much longer post.

If this isn't giving you what you need, write back and I'll see what else I can think of!!

Thanks!

-Brian

[jhall2]

Brian,

I tried this method, and didn't get very far. I was able to collect all the planes into a selection set, but didn't understand how to move them to a hidden layer. Do you move the entire selection set to the layer at once, then hide it?

James

[TomD.inPDX]

Yes, you can move the features to a layer, and then hide the layer. Remember to save the layer status so that this will remain with the part, not just the session.

[jhall2]

Thanks Antonius, but how do you move them to a hidden layer. I have a layer ready for them, and can select them via the above process, but where I am loosing it is taking that selection set and the actual process of moving it to that layer which I am going to hide.

I will point out that a competor simply has a button to push to turn on only assembly planes.

James.

[TomD.inPDX]

I always have trouble with that dialog as well. I have found that when I am setting up a new layer, I open the search dialog and collect all the planes. Once I hit okay in the search dialog, the features are added to the layer.

I do this a lot with feature axes that only get in the way of primary axes that I am interested in.

[dschenken]

Have you tried adding the rule Axis-By Feature to a layer to automatically sweep them up?

[TomD.inPDX]

I have no love for the automated layering. 1st of all, I don't understand them and second, I like having control over my models. I have become accustom to creating new parts from completely blank part templates (empty) for that very reason.

[dschenken]

I'm sure you like having control of your car, but isn't the hand-cranked fuel pump a bit much?

Seriously, layer rules are pretty valuable. The thing people don't put in them are exceptions. For example, I usually have a layer called Construction, for placing items that are used as references to build other things; but not items that would ordinarily be displayed on drawings.

Because I choose what those are, there's no rule for it. But I have rules for other layers that might sweep up the Construction geometry, so those layers get the rule "Not Included on layer" "Construction." Datum Planes, Datum Axes, whatever, automatically skip anything I put on Construction.

Since layer rules are the same as the Find tool options, learning one gets you both.

[TomD.inPDX]

Actually, David, it is more like putting a motor on a bicycle and wondering why I am not getting the exercise I need.

My clientele varies too much to bother. Doing this on the fly is still simple and manageable. No templates to manage for each client; no rules to follow; clean exports; no extra -stuff- in my models. Often I only need 1 extra layer - HIDEME.

I appreciate the insight on the find tool being similar in action. I still have no love for that either.

So can you import and export layer lists that already has rules applied?

It is not that I don't care, I really appreciate Doug's post (THANKS DOUG!) but I find working with other people's models that have highly integrated layer rules very cumbersome.

[dschenken]

You can save a Query to a File (or save to a layer, helpful if it's Find) (Look for the Options drop down in WF5; dunno where it might get to in Creo)

It's in XML format so you could probably tweak it with a text editor if you liked.

Layer rules aren't any worse than BOM relations. Piece of cake.

In my case many of the rules are so that items end up on the right DXF layers. Sigh.

[dgschaefer]

I saw a presentation in 2007 on rule based layers by Glenn Beer and I came back and implemented them and never looked back.  I love having all "layerable" items on a layer and then having complete control over  what is displayed.

You can get Glenn's presentation here along with a looong thread of Q&A on the subject.  I also wrote up my experience with them on our company blog, here.  The link to my actual presentation  in that post is broken, I've attached it here as well.

[jhall2]

thanks for this Layer PDF, Doug. As complex as this layering situation is, this is detailed explanation is very helpful.

[dgschaefer]

I would agree, layering is far more complex than it needs to be. It strives, it seems, for a huge level of customization and fine control of specific things and in the process becomes too complex for most to bother with. Heck, I enjoy this stuff and it's too much for me at times.

I think a simpler system could be made to give us almost all the flexibility of the current system but would be far more accessible to more users.

[dschenken]

What was described was Hiding the selected features, which puts them on the software managed layer Hidden. It happens whenever you use the Hide operation/command/button. It modifies all the assemblies and all the parts when you do this, making it a rough trip for anyone not in on the process if the parts/assemblies get checked in and increments the iteration, making them out of date for fellow users.

Typically the datum planes end up on a layer controlled by rules or def layers as established in the start part/start assembly or in the config.sup/pro

I typically select that layer in the layer tree and hide it, then change the layer options from all submodel layers to no submodel layers and unhide the datum planes layer. This leaves only the top datum planes visible; change the setting back and you can pick off any submodel layers individually. As long as you don't Save Status for the layers, nothing gets changed.

Note that they are called layers, but are actually lists. Telling Pro/E to hide a layer really asks it to try to hide the items on the list. If those items are also on a list that isn't hidden, they will still be visible.

[JonathanHodgson]

David Schenken wrote:

Note that they are called layers, but are actually lists. Telling Pro/E to hide a layer really asks it to try to hide the items on the list. If those items are also on a list that isn't hidden, they will still be visible.

A good description, except that I thought the opposite was true - if any of the 'layers' a feature is on is hidden, the feature will be hidden?

I've always found it slightly confusing that a feature can be on more than one 'layer'. AutoCAD makes much more sense.

[dschenken]

In older CAD systems layers were a number that was part of each entity, so each entity could only be on one layer. It's an easy enough concept, but there are some disadvantages, the main one being that numbered layering allows only one form of association.

In Pro/E, the lists allow arbitrary associations. The classic example is in a car assembly. One could have a layer called steel, another called rubber, and so on to gather components with those characteristics. One could also have a power train layer and a body layer. Lists offers the user a logical means of grouping items in ways not foreseeable by PTC.

The biggest mistake with layers PTC made was continuing to call them layers.

[jhall2]

Antonius,

Is this the same method to use when I want to hide geometric tolerances in drawing? I often place an assembly in a drawing to use as a layout, and it is full of geometric tolerances and finish notes. They are a MESS to go through the feature tree, and find the files they are in, and hide each one.

Surely there is a better method?

[TomD.inPDX]

I do not know if there is an easy management plan for gtol features. I know you can turn them off with a single button in the model, but in drawing, I suspect we need to do something different. If they are structured on layers, you can manage them that way on drawings. You can also use layers independently for specific views.

I just avoid using the gtol implementation and model annotation all together. Other than putting dimensions up front during development, once drawings are created, all model annotation is removed or otherwise "disabled".

[jhall2]

Thanks Antonius. That is disappointing, because I was thinking that would be the answer, but hoped it was eaiser.
It seems that when I add Geotols to a drawing, they follow the dimesnions in to the models, then if I make an assembly drawing, they are a MESS all over the place.

Could you explain what you mean by "avoid using the gtol implementation and model annotation all together"? Is this something I can turn off in the models or assembly?

Thanks again. James

[TomD.inPDX]

Sure; when I open a model, I want to see the visual geometrical data. Since long ago, when you assign a datum tag to a plane, it becomes pervasive... it is "always on" even when planes are turned off from showing. Even hiding them on layer is insufficient. Then once you echo them on a drawing, they disappear forever! And yes, I files a case and it came back with the "Works to Specifications..." Which is pretty much my experience that it has always been a pain. At least now we can echo off annotations, but the planes remain persistent.

As for GTOL, I can make any feature control frame with the text editor and place them on the drawing... except the very rare occasion there I need a 2-line frame controlled by a single symbol.

I go so far as to add symbol features to the drawing to get my ISO version of datum tags on drawings. The ones created in the model are simply too unruly and have been a serious source of hard crashes.

[dschenken]

Antonius,

This is what you get for disliking rules and layers - Create a layer with a rule that gathers Shown Datums. Hide the layer and they are gone. I prefer the layer name "Set_Datums" as that is in keeping with the rest of the interface.

For those who like having datum planes on a layer by Def Layer or by rule, also include a rule for that layer that the datum plane not be on the Set_Datums Layer so they can operate independently.

The PTC R&D and QA/QC people act as if they don't understand what it meant in the standard that datums and tolerances only apply at the level they are applied. The only set datums ever visible in an assembly should be the ones that are features in the assembly. Never should lower level Feature Control Frames or Datum Feature symbols be visible in an assembly. Ever.

It's amazing how much time and effort those bad PTC decisions cost users for something that should be a benefit.

[TomD.inPDX]

HA!... way ahead of you... nope, even moving the tagged primary datums to layers had no effect. Use that tagged datum in the drawing and HA!... you will never see it again in your model.

[dschenken]

Oh, It's the annotation that doesn't obey.

Sure, why would it.

What was I thinking.

[jhall2]

Never should lower level Feature Control Frames or Datum Feature symbols be visible in an assembly. Ever.

As we say here in Oklahoma- amen!

How did that ever happen that lower level geotolerances show up in upper level assemblies? I don't know of any drawing situation where I have ever wanted that, and I have been drafting since right after I got off Noah's ark....