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

Thread ideas: modeling and drawings

Thread ideas: modeling and drawings

1st of all, I would love to have "actual threads" rather than the just the cosmetics.  If we have it already, someone please tell me where it is, and tell me I don't have to create them from scratch.  I've had great luck using larger actual threads in STL rapid prototyping.  Its overdue, PTC

2nd: The formatting of the Thread Note is insufficient.  We are bound to having a space after a parameter (second bullet below).  This is archaic and needs a better "end parameter name" delimiter in note annotations. 

We all have "standards" in thread call-outs (okay, many of us) and, although a great attempt, the PTC version lacks consistency with many current standards.  Forcing a space at the end of a parameter just doesn't let you do what needs to be done.

I tried to use the very common "4X" on a number of instances and all I could do is "4 X"  The same is true for the depth symbol and controlling the number of zeros on the depth callout. 

I remember the old days when these still used the dimension parameter that could be seen with the "Switch Symbols" button.  We cannot even do this any more that I can see.

I know I haven't researched this a lot (hey, I'm a newbee!) and I really shouldn't have to work this hard to make a good related thread callout per "our" standards, not PTC's.  Here we go back to kludging the callout for threads.

PLEASE... work a little harder on making these parameter a little more friendly to use in drawings.




While I wouldn't agree to actual threads on each hole, I would love the have the option. Threads on a large assembly with many threaded holes can kill a CPU!


Oh, never as a default or throughout a large file.

I'm suggesting an option of toggling the detailed threads for an individual cosmetic thread, a pattern of threads, the part, or the assembly.

Normally, this is used only for illustrative purposes.  I have had success in rapid prototyping.


Or a thread image to give a better visual representation.


Option to switch- turn on/off real thread would be great! Sometimes you screw bolt in sheetmetal and you want to check if hole diameter allows it to be used as a one step thread. Or when needed to check how many thread steps on bolt are in contact with threaded hole(if depth is shallow for example). Adding a right click option to turn on/off real thread on cosmetic thread feature would solve this...


I agree, being able to toggle thread between cosmetic/real would be almost as awesome as having a spring creation feature (

We need actual threads when we do part analysis and I dread having to model actual threads from scratch because of how much time it takes to get out my Machinery's Handbook and refigure it all out. 


We need this for when we create a rapid prototype of a part.  The amount of time that we have to spend to get actual threads on a part for this is ridiculous.  There should be a tool that you can just pick where you want the thread and what size/type, and in it goes.  I would agree that the ability to turn them on or off would be useful for larger models, but that might be able to be accomplished with layers.


I had continued my quest for good threads.  Rapid prototyping is definitely the reason this needs to be addressed.

I made a few tools that go one step further into UDF's.

Have a look and see if this helps your efforts:

Yet another Thread thread - UTS Implementation



like on this picture. Note this was not done with Creo but a competitor

Inventor Thread representation in 3D.PNG

Status changed to: Acknowledged

Over 5-years later and PTC still haven't implemented this. Is there any chance it will appear in Creo 7?


I think @TomD.inPDX  is right. It would be nice if PTC gives us any delivery times...


Audodesk Fusion 360 can model the thread just by clicking the "Modelled" button.




Status changed to: Acknowledged

added to the backlog

22-Sapphire III

Although I think this would be excellent for rapid prototyping and for visualization/presentation purposes, I urge caution.

Several reasons for this caution:

1. MAJOR time penalty for large assembly management. Implementation for this option would be key...if as a large assembly owner, I do can not turn off (or disable) the real thread features in lower level parts that are not mine to modify, I may not even be able to open my model. I do integration of many different groups parts and assemblies in my top level models that are the final product to our end customer. All those parts are not mine to modify. I will not be able to go in to each nut, screw, bracket, valve, etc and suppress thread features. I have to live with what I get from the other groups. We sometimes ask them to provide simplified reps, but dealing with hundreds or thousands of parts/assemblies and getting the reps right and keeping them up to date on the top level model can be a major challenge.

2. Printing and PDF (or other electronic documents). Just think, 8 threads per inch (TPI), 12 TPI, 20 TPI...have you ever printed a drawing and thought, wow, why is there a little black blob on my drawing right here...real threads will do that...again, an overall option to turn off these features would be a necessity.

3. I can't think of a third reason but having a list of just 2 reasons doesn't seem impressive.

4. The forth reason is just icing on the cake, looks like someone has really thought out the potential problems and is really "on the ball".

5. A fifth reason is just overkill, now you are just being silly.


examples of reason #2






@Step . I can't even justifying any icing so my list is not looking so good:


1. I think you are right that it needs to be done correctly, or presented with a config option to disable it. Nevertheless, I think the effort that is involved using Creo to produce a ubiquitous engineering feature, cannot be justified.