The way Creo deals with Appearances needs further improvements.
One of them, is the parametric colors assignment based on feature selection or even parametric surface selection methods susch as seeds and boundary. Currently we can use selection intent, including seeds and boundary to assign colors to surfaces. But this is done in a one time way, not as a parametric association between input and output. Meaning, if we redefine some features and new geometry is created, the new surface geometry is assigned the default color appearance, forcing the user to have to repaint whatever surfaces his features generate. Then, there is the problem of inconsistencies.
2. Copy Geometry feature now allows the user to control the copying of appearances from source geometry, which is fine. But if we use "Merge/Inheritance" or "Cut", we cannot control the supression (or not) of the appearances, meaning, the source model always controls color appearence, and we cannot force new colors in an inherited model, even sometimes its the intended behaviour. So, Merge / Inhertiance / Cut should also have the an option to: a) Copy appearances once, b) Copy appearance always c) Do not copy appearances.
3. Mirror geometry, weather be it Mirror Part Body, or Mirror feature, or Mirror Quilt, in general does not copy color appearances, even if this might be the desired behaviour. Allow the mirror feature/geometry/part/Body the option to mirror also the surfaces' color appearances, with the option of "Once", "Always", or "Never". Flexiblel modelling seems to be the exception, and when copying bodies or geometry in general, does keep the new geometry with the same colors as the original.
4. Patterened geometry, or patterened features, also do not pattern the source surface geometry color to the new instances, even when this would be the desired behaviour. Allow the option in patterend to copy the appearnces to the newly generated geometry surfaces.
5. Some generated geometry, should have the option to be color coded, such as hole geometry, with different colors for the threaded surfaces than the for drilled surfaces.
6. Body boolean operations currently also do not assign colors from a tool body to a destination body. We would like to use tool bodies as a way to transfer colors from the tool body to the target body, so that we would only need to color the tool bodies once, and have those colors applied always to a boolean cut (or more rarely, to a boolean merge or intersect operation). In the case of a boolean operation, if the colors of the source tool body and target body have coplanar surfaces that have assigned different colors, leave the option for the user to select if there should be surface simplification or not (eliminating co-planar faces and common edges).
Instead of having so many options to copy color appearances, maybe the better option is to introduce surface coloring as a regular feature in the model tree, where the user could Seed Surface select several surfaces at once to be painted the same color, and having this selection being parametric, and with a time stamp in the model tree to make the process more clear. Or at least, as a specialized feature tree (such as there is a special model tree inside the Style feature) in the Appearance menu, that would let the user reselect, or make Edit Definitions in his process of selecting those features to paint.
I think the adding "Coloring" as a regular feature in the model tree has some additional benefits if used in conjunction to another feature that I propose, the activation and deactivation of some surface modeling options on a feaure by feature basis, instead of a global part selection one. One of the localized options that could be inserted as a feature (a time stamp) in the model tree, is the "Accuracy" (which is an option in several CAD packages, namely, NX and Catia), and also the simplification of geometry. Creo always simplifies geometry whenever possible to elmiinate extra coplanar faces and uneeded edges, which is useful for 99.9999% of the time. But there are situations in which we may specifically want that a few features do not perform surface and edge simplification, to allow precisely to have coplanar surfaces with different colors, where the edges specify different coplanar surfaces (or even cylindrical surfaces in threaded holes), to allow coloring what the user wants as separate geometry, but which Creo always simplifies. In Creo Manufactoring Mold Cavity Module, the extracted parts have the option to be painted with different colors if the surfaces come from the reference model, or from the parting surfaces, which is the intended behaviour. But if the user has to make a feature in a cavity or core, such a draft, or an extrude, that "touches" or modifies any planar or cylindrical face that is split in two, and assigned the two different colors, the co-planar surface separation is removed and suddently simpified to a single surface, even though the user would want to keep tham color coded differently to have a clear edge separation in the parting line. There is a config.pro option that the user can select to turning on and off the "Simplyfing geometry", called "mold_split_dont_merge_same_srfs", which is useful, but only works as long as those extracted surfaces are never included in any of the Creo general modeling features, and another problem, is that this is a global config option. We should have the possibility to activate and deactiivate this behaviour (simplyfing geometry), but localized in a context, ie, activating this option in a "options change feature", then modeling a little bit, then deactivating this option in another "options change feature" to activate the normal geometry simplifying behaviour. Inside this "options change feature" we could also make a localized accuracy change, to be restored to the normal accuracy value later, and thus allow us to better control the behaviour of the software. With localized options defined as a feature in the model tree, and parametrized surface selection for assigning colors also as a feature, instead of the regular Appearances assignment methology, advanced uses would not be su frustrated and not loose so many time due to the current way that Creo deals with surface coloring. Regular users could continue to use current methods, but please allow powe users to assign the coolors, and control surface division and merge on a more granular manner, and in a more parametric way.
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.