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

Assume "coincident" instead of "normal" constriant in assembly

Assume "coincident" instead of "normal" constriant in assembly

I would like to set set the constraint coincident per default instead of normal when assembling an component in assembly using component interface and automatic coinstraint type option in Creo Parametric 2.0

23-Emerald IV

The option "auto_constr_always_use_offset" set to "never" is supposed to do this.  Unfortunately it doesn't seem to be working correctly in Creo 3.  (I have a case open.)

Take a look at these past discussions:

23-Emerald II

This is already implemented. Use the following options:

For eliminating the normal constraint from happening by default:

comp_angle_offset_eps 91

comp_normal_offset_eps -1

Add this option to get it to default to coincident instead of distance:

auto_constr_always_use_offset never


Thanks, it works fine in Creo Parametric 2.0


I tried all 3 configs and they work well in Creo 2 M120

23-Emerald II

I don't like this idea being set to current functionality!! REALLY??  You have to add 2 obscure options that aren't intuitive. You would never accidently find these settings. Maybe a setting that said "use_normal_constraint_as_defualt" or something that someone may accidentally stumble across.

I appreciate that there are options to make it work right, it's just that no one would ever find them without help.


Agreed. Creo didn't even have the Normal constraint in WF5; why does it seem to be the default when you select planar references? And when assembling components in the real world, how often would you want to use Normal as opposed to Coincident?


Yup, as Stephen says there is no way a user could be expected to work this out, and as David says why was this even introduced?  The way it worked in WF was significantly better (although I'm not going to claim it was perfect).

What does "comp_normal_offset_eps" even mean, and why does a value of -1 make it work?

Also make sure you have "work_like_i_expect_you_to yes" and "make_ridiculous_assumptions no" in your


I've been struggling to fix this for a while and PTC support could offer no help.  Now I find the answer is in the comments of an idea; nice job PTC.

I can't imagine what they were thinking when they wrecked all of the assembly constraints, but I have noticed that the defaults seem to be based on how the component is oriented when you first start to assemble it.  Which is an awful way to base assembly assumptions.

To add insult to idiocy, all of our custom component interfaces for the hundreds of thousands of fasteners we use, assemble exactly opposite now.  PTC says they are considering looking at it in Creo 4. 

@jonathan I love your switches.  😄


As of Creo 2.0 M150 the default will be switched to coincident.

Community Manager
Status changed to: Archived


We are archiving your idea as part of a general review. This action is based on the age of your idea and the total number of votes received, as per this announcement.

You can always post a new idea with all the details required in the form.

Thank you for your participation.