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

dimensions-related variants of standard components

SOLVED
Highlighted
Marble

dimensions-related variants of standard components

Hallo,

I have an issue that's not so easy to explain since the topic description already.

I would like to use, in an assembly, a standard commercial component (it's a hook) with a pre-determined customized length of its stem (length obtained by cutting out a piece of stem from the original hook stem length as bought from the supplier): but, at the same time, I would like to keep this standard component stored in Windchill (in a appropriate folder for commercial parts) as one and only, with its original length.

The reason is that in this way every time a user needs it, chooses its length without changing the original father stored in Windchill Common Space.

Shall I do it with the family tables or is there a simplier way to do this?

thanks

Bye

1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION

Accepted Solutions
Highlighted

Re: dimensions-related variants of standard components

It sounds like a good place to use flexible components. See

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4X4dPr__sLM

http://learningexchange.ptc.com/tutorial/1609/adding-flexibility-to-already-placed-components

http://learningexchange.ptc.com/tutorial/386/placing-flexible-components-in-an-assembly

Basically it's like you're creating a family table instance on the fly and you can use measurements to set dimension values. You can also suppress or resume features. You can create predefined flexibility in a part so that when you assemble it, you will be prompted whether you want to use that predefined behavior. It's quite a powerful capability.

View solution in original post

4 REPLIES 4
Highlighted

Re: dimensions-related variants of standard components

It sounds like a good place to use flexible components. See

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4X4dPr__sLM

http://learningexchange.ptc.com/tutorial/1609/adding-flexibility-to-already-placed-components

http://learningexchange.ptc.com/tutorial/386/placing-flexible-components-in-an-assembly

Basically it's like you're creating a family table instance on the fly and you can use measurements to set dimension values. You can also suppress or resume features. You can create predefined flexibility in a part so that when you assemble it, you will be prompted whether you want to use that predefined behavior. It's quite a powerful capability.

View solution in original post

Highlighted

Re: dimensions-related variants of standard components

Hallo JLG,

thank you very very much, that's just perfectly what I was looking for!!

It's really powerful, let's just think about a typ of screw with fixed diameter and varying length...wonderful.

Bye!!

Highlighted

Re: dimensions-related variants of standard components

Flexible components are a good way to vary items that change in the assembly, but they will bite you when it comes to identifying items that need to be altered before being assembled. There is nothing in the assembly that identifies a flexible part as any different from a non-flexible one to alert manufacturing that a part needs to be cut.

The method to track parts is to use Inheritance. This copies the original part as a linked basis for creating a new part. The new part gets a unique name and records the operations performed to the original part. Unlike flexible features, the Inheritance part has its own place on the PL and can have a seperate view on the drawing showing the alteration made to it. It has traceability to the original part.

If the parts are altered on the assembly, the assembly cuts can be used. The presumption here is that the parts will be unique to the assembly and cannot be fabricated in advance of being assembled. Match machining, for example, is a candidate for an assembly cut.

Highlighted

Re: dimensions-related variants of standard components

Indeed I do not need to identify the flexible component: as I wrote in the first post, the big advantage of it is that I keep only one commercial code and the flexibility-related modifications are relative to those mechanical processes that are applied on the same commercial component. In my case, I have to assembly a commercial hook (of a determined brand) with a determined stem length, the only applied process is a cut.

For sure I know that this cannot be applied to everything: screws for instance, need to be family-tabled because even if only diameter and length change, each of their combinations is a given commercial code.

I took a look at the inheritance feature, indeed it seems to be more convenient to create a family table at this point. Furthermore, I do not need the associativity with the original part (of the Inheritance), since the base does not change.

Last but not the least, Inheritance seems to require an advanced license (it's greyed out in mine), we have the basic one.

It depends also on the codification criteria on the manufacturing phases.

The inheritance is interesting feature though.

Match machining, yes I used it for set screws.

Thanks for your reply,

Bye

Announcements