cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Community Tip - You can change your system assigned username to something more personal in your community settings. X

How to check in a shrinkwrap part without pulling its reference parts.

jbaumann
1-Newbie

How to check in a shrinkwrap part without pulling its reference parts.

Hi Pros,


I'm having trouble with creating a "stand-alone" shrinkwrapped part. I can create the prt-file containing the shrinkwrap feature without problems. I deselect the DEPENDENCY check box, which I thought was sufficient for decoupling the shrinkwrapped part from its origin assembly. But still, when I try to chek in the shrinkwrap part, I am prompted to check in the "parent" parts as well.


Please help. 😃



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.
1 REPLY 1

I got the solution by email from Matthias Stüber:


"Here are two options how I handled this in the past:


1a. right-click on sw-part in model tree


1b. Info, Reference-Viewer


1c. Switch radio-button from "references" to "dependencies"


1d. right-click on link between sw-part to parent and choose "break dependencies" (deselected DEPENDENCY check box is prerequisite for this to work)



2a. Add "independent geometry" feature to sw-model (in insert-menu, part-mode)


2b. move independent geom feature above sw-feature


2c. Edit definition of independent geometry feature and "collapse" geometry of sw-feature



Result in case 1 should be a broken reference that is stronger than just removing the dependent-check, in case 2 you have created an import-feature without importing anything."




Case 1 worked perfectly.


Cheers, Johann

Top Tags