Creo Parametric Ideas

Please include detailed documentation such as screenshots, images or video. 1. What product and version are you running? Creo Parametric 9.0.6.0 2. What is the problem? When editing hatching in a drawing, for areas (like an ECAD Keep-Out), it uses the old menu manager system and not the newer ribbon in Creo 9 method that is used for section hatches. This is confusing our users who are expecting a consistent process for managing hatches. 3. Are you using a workaround? If yes, please describe it. No 4. What is the use case for your organization? Describe how your idea would work in context or how it would apply to a practical situation. The hatching mechanism and process would be consistent for all use-cases within Creo 5. What impact does this problem currently have on your organization? (Number of users affected, hours of lost productivity, etc.) This is causing slow down, confusion and some users are not even attempting to edit the hatching for areas as it is difficult.  All of our products have PCBs, which use ECAD features. Now our users need to juggle these inconsistent processes. When the new functionality was rolled out in Creo 9, it should have been done to all hatching workflows.  Users ~100 Hours ~Hard to quantify as this also impacts the overall impression of the tool and this feeds fuel to the users who don't have a lot of nice things to say about Creo. ... View more

Please include detailed documentation such as screenshots, images or video. 1. What product and version are you running? Creo Parametric 8.0.8.0 2. What is the problem? Reference: Case: 16812905 SPR: 14566231   Most of our products we design include PCBs. Therefore, ECAD MCAD Collaboration standards are critical for us to work efficiently and quickly. When the PCB team revises a design (like removing or swapping a component), the mechanical engineer needs to evaluate it and make sure there are no interferences with the mechanical design. Since the assembly is getting revised in our ERP, the assembly in Windchill is getting revised. However, there are many times when the raw board itself is not getting modified. Therefore, in Windchill, it is still released. If we update the assembly with the new EMN file from the PCB team, Creo will flag the raw board part file as modified. It shouldn't! There is no feature or functionality that requires the part to be modified.  For customers that use Windchill, this because a problem. Creo wants to check-out the part and now Creo has pop-ups and notifications that the user needs to manage. Please have this fixed where the part is not modified and does not require the user to manage these warnings, errors, regenerations, etc... 3. Are you using a workaround? If yes, please describe it. We need to set the board part as locked in our workspace. However, this includes additional warnings and popups in Creo each time. We have teams that go through this process multiple times a day. 4. What is the use case for your organization? Describe how your idea would work in context or how it would apply to a practical situation. As a PCB is getting revised, our mechanical team needs to check changes by importing the EMN file from the PCB team to the creo assembly. The changes would be specific to the assembly itself (that is getting revised). It wouldn't impact the PCB, which is released in Windchill and should not be getting modified. The assembly would import the EMN and when the user saves it, only the assembly would be modified. 5. What impact does this problem currently have on your organization? (Number of users affected, hours of lost productivity, etc.) Approximately 50 users. This could end up creating a few hundred hours of lost work a year and a lot of negativity towards Creo and PTC. ... View more

Please include detailed documentation such as screenshots, images or video. 1. What product and version are you running? Creo Parametric 9.0.6.0 2. What is the problem? Reference ticket: 17094872 We are trying to move beyond the IDF standard of ECAD MCAD collaboration to the IDX standard. However, we are seeing some major gaps that need to be resolved before we can fully use the module. The items below are specifically related to BOARD_DATUMS group. We need the ability to add more datums (we include an axis as part of our current ECAD datum setup for regular parts). The ability should allow a user to add/remove datums from this group as needed. The origin created should be using the name from ecad_board_csys_def_name config option.  Allow the datums to be in the model tree without a PCB shape, so we can use it as a start part, with the correct names We need the ability to move the datums to the FOOTER. I've worked with ECAD collaboration for over 10 years and I believe this is critical. A PCB design, whether the shape of the board, the component placement, etc... should not be based on the origin. It should always be created using proper design intent. The origin is only used by the standards as a way to create a fixed point of reference to be used for collaboration. In many projects I have been involved in, the location of the origin is sometimes up for debate between the mechanical, electrical and PCB teams. The origin needs to be flexible enough to be moved at any point before collaboration begins. Many times this is a hole on the PCB. Currently, we can not change the reference to any feature below the first board shape The mechanical engineer could be weeks or months in development and shouldn't be editing the PCB outline to change the origin. Therefore, the origin needs to be able to be moved at any time and should always be at the bottom of the model tree (footer).  3. Are you using a workaround? If yes, please describe it. We are currently not using this module as it has too many gaps. 4. What is the use case for your organization? Describe how your idea would work in context or how it would apply to a practical situation. Engineers would be able to manipulate the origin location and the datums much easier. The admins would be able to create a more effective start part. 5. What impact does this problem currently have on your organization? (Number of users affected, hours of lost productivity, etc.) Over 100 users affected. We are still using the EMN standard due to these limitations. We could easily be more effective by hundreds of hours a year if we were able to get the IDX standard moving. ... View more

Please include detailed documentation such as screenshots, images or video. 1. What version of the software are you running? 8.0.8.0 2. What is the problem? Reference ticket: 16962068  The ecad_hint.map file is being used as the default information to map our components (mostly as assemblies) while EMN files are being read out and written into Creo. However, if the design data is using a slightly different variant of the ECAD_NAME, Creo will STILL export using the name in the ecad_hint.map file. This should not be! It should use the name in the design file itself. Whenever the ECAD tool opens our EMN file, it gets flooded with warnings saying that the package name has a mismatch. We can't remove the component from the map file because we need the map file to map to the correct assembly model. If we put a wildcard ECAD_NAME "*", the ECAD tool still generates a warning:  The PCB designers can't read through hundreds or thousands lines of their warning log, trying to find the one or two changes they actually care about. 3. Are you using a workaround? If yes, please describe it. No.  4. What is the use case for your organization? Describe how your idea would work in context or how it would apply to a practical situation. If an ECAD_NAME or ECAD_ALT_NAME exists in the design file - it will use those values during export. If it doesn't exist, it will use the values in the map file. On an EMN import, if the values do not match the design file, it will update from the EMN, with the understanding that the EMN is coming from the PCB team which is controlling that information.  This way, both teams have accurate ECAD_NAME and ECAD_ALT_NAME values and there will be proper collaboration without issues and warnings. 5. What impact does this problem currently have on your organization? (Number of users affected, hours of lost productivity, etc.) Our ECAD tool is getting errors about a mismatch to their cell names. It is causing confusion and spamming their warning log. The important information is now hard to see through these warning errors. Collaboration doesn't work well, causing an increase in unnecessary manual work (like creating separate PCB drawings) and human error. ... View more

1. Describe your environment: What is your industry? What is your role in your organization? Describe your stakeholders. We design and manufacture high-end electronics. I am the CAD Manager / PTC SME. Stakeholders for this idea include our Creo user community. 2. What version of Creo Parametric are you currently running? 8.0.8.0 3. Describe the problem you are trying to solve. Please include detailed documentation such as screenshots, images or video. Reference: Article: 387085 Ticket: 16762640 SPR: 14468880   When collaborating with our ECAD team, we transfer EMN files back and forth. If we import an EMN file that suggests a slight movement for a component, it will be flagged as a placement change. Even if the user says to 'keep' the placement that was there before, Creo goes through an operation of removing the old component and placing it anew in the old location. By doing this, all references and children fail. This has drastic repercussions including connector cutouts in our chassis' are failing. If the user selects 'Keep',  Creo should not move or alter the component at all. It seems pretty obvious to us.    4. What is the use case for your organization? See above. This happens often as we are trying to build up our ECAD collaboration processes. 5. What business value would your suggestion represent for your organization? Right now, users can either use the collaboration tool, and waste a lot of time fixing failures after an import OR not use ECAD collaboration and spend a lot of time manually checking changes. Either way, there is a lot of time wasted and a lot of negative energy regarding this functionality.   @Alex_Y  ... View more

1. Describe your environment: What is your industry? What is your role in your organization? Describe your stakeholders. We design and manufacture high-end electronics. I am the CAD Manager / PTC SME. Stakeholders for this idea include our Creo user community. 2. What version of Creo Parametric are you currently running? 8.0.7.0 3. Describe the problem you are trying to solve. Please include detailed documentation such as screenshots, images or video. Reference: Case - C16702146 SPR - 14328925   When importing an EMN into an existing PCB CAD assembly, we can see the changes that the EMN file is recommending. In some designs, we can have thousands of components with hundreds of changes that need to be reviewed. Many of those changes, like resistors, or small chips, we may not care about. It would be great to be able to select multiple components at the same time to 'change status' and review the proposed changes. Going through one at a time is quite tedious.  4. What is the use case for your organization? Our organization designs hundreds of products a year, practically all with PCBs inside. We are trying to leverage the IDF standard as much as we can (since the IDX is not available as part of the licensing for our ECAD licenses). In order to have the engineers leverage the tool, it needs to be easy and stress free for them. This is one of the ways it can help speed up their process. 5. What business value would your suggestion represent for your organization? By improving the basic usability, the users will begin to leverage the tool, which can help speed up the collaboration process and bring our products to market quicker with less issues. ... View more

1. Describe your environment: What is your industry? What is your role in your organization? Describe your stakeholders. We are an industrial piping company based in France I am in charge of the piping design 2. What version of Creo Parametric are you currently running? 8.0.6.0 3. Describe the problem you are trying to solve. Please include detailed documentation such as screenshots, images or video. Piping standards according to the ANSI standard (ASME / ANSI B16.9) is available for download from PTC support. Everything is there, even the configuration of the specifications. That would be perfect. However, would it be possible to add this same library for the ISO standard (EN 10253-3 for fittings and EN 1092-1 for flanges)? This standard is widely used in our field. Many of our customers in the industries where we work use this standard for the piping of their factories. 4. What is the use case for your organization? Everyday 5. What business value would your suggestion represent for your organization? A lot of time would be saved thanks to a library following this standard. There would also be less error possible during creation if the operator does not know all this standard. ... View more

I'm using Creo 8.0 and currently in ECAD it is not allow to create a board with different thickness, or use multibody features in the ECAD environment, since I can create only a board for assembly .    I would like to have the possibility: -to create a board with different thickness -to create more than one board in such a way that I can use multibody or can create different board to unite between them self. 2. What version of Creo Parametric are you currently running? 3. Describe the problem you are trying to solve. Please include detailed documentation such as screenshots, images or video. 4. What is the use case for your organization? 5. What business value would your suggestion represent for your organization? ... View more

We are trying to create a flat cable with a fixed length. Apparently we can't! How is this not part of basic functionality? https://www.ptc.com/en/support/article/CS131446     ... View more

1. Describe your environment: What is your industry? What is your role in your organization? Describe your stakeholders. We design and manufacture high-end electronics. I am the CAD Manager / PTC SME. Stakeholders for this idea include our Creo user community.  2. What version of Creo Parametric are you currently running? 8.0.4.0 3. Describe the problem you are trying to solve. Please include detailed documentation such as screenshots, images or video. Reference: Article: CS366849 Case: C16336356 SPR: 13742708   In a typical parametric assembly, if a component is placed using a surface or datum, and then the component's surface or datum is changed, it will automatically update the placement. Apparently this is not true for some use-cases regarding import of EMN/EMP data (from the IDF standard of ECAD MCAD Collaboration). This makes the functionality not parametric in a parametric tool. And there is not even a notification to the user. Even an advanced user would not think that the component should have been adjusted or something is not right. The shocking response by R&D is:   An ECAD assembly is a special assembly that contains many parts and is more complex, especially with many hole features. Editing features such as ECAD holes affect the performance of the software, so in order to avoid the performance problems, the automatic update results in the ECAD assembly are intentionally shielded   Please have at LEAST some notification that the user needs to manually update the placement. 4. What is the use case for your organization? Our business makes hundreds of products a year with PCBs. We have strict mcad libraries and collaborate using the IDF (and sometimes IDX) standards. We would like to avoid these 'surprises', when one use case out of thousands behave differently and now there are issues because of inconsistencies in the tool. If there is a good reason to not have it update, the new notification center needs to notify the user. 5. What business value would your suggestion represent for your organization? It would allow us to use the modules and capabilities (ECAD MCAD Collaboration) for us to efficiently and quickly design our products. Otherwise, issues could occur and be found in production, causing a down line, and a complete redesign. If an assembly is not fully regenerated or changes still need to be reviewed, it should not be released.   @Alex_Y  ... View more

1. Describe your environment: What is your industry? What is your role in your organization? Describe your stakeholders. CAD business owner for SOMFY group 2. What version of Creo Parametric are you currently running? Currently CREO7 and CREO9.0.2.0 in April 3. Describe the problem you are trying to solve. Please include detailed documentation such as screenshots, images or video. The ECAD areas must be created by several extrusion vertical. The proposition is to create this area by using the shape of the close parts (cover for example)  The Hardware CAD need to have points corresponding to height, to describe the authorized area 4. What is the use case for your organization? ECAD creation 5. What business value would your suggestion represent for your organization? We can save time and be more precise and functionnal. ... View more

1. Describe your environment: What is your industry? What is your role in your organization? Describe your stakeholders. Industry - High End Electronics Role - CAD Admin Stakeholders - Engineering, downstream teams, vendors, etc. 2. What version of Creo Parametric are you currently running? 8.0.4.0 3. Describe the problem you are trying to solve. Please include detailed documentation such as screenshots, images or video. Refer to PTC support Case 16345926, and SPR 13757325. See support article: https://www.ptc.com/en/support/article/CS367324?source=Case%20Viewer You should be able to go into the edit definition of any ECAD feature and change the color and hatching options.  Engineers don't know the difference between which features are legacy versus a new ECAD feature and often times they don't want all legacy keep outs to be the same color. 4. What is the use case for your organization? Engineers have to update PCBs will need to specify different Keep outs for different things with different color and hatching options. 5. What business value would your suggestion represent for your organization? It would allow full functionality with ECAD keepout regions and help between ECAD and MCAD collaboration. ... View more

Currently Pro/PIPING specific parameters are pushed to extracted solid models in Creo Parametric.   Only system linestock parameters are translated to extracted solid pipes. For User defined parameters from the linestock, enhancement SPR 6434896 is reported to R&D - not implemented, yet.   The system level parameters that are exctracted to solid models are designated by default, which can cause collision with existing Windchill parameters. User does not have any control regarding designation.   Product Idea: Provide control for designation of piping spesific system parameters and enable user spesific linestock parameters to be extracted to solid models. ... View more

1. Describe your environment: What is your industry? What is your role in your organization? Describe your stakeholders. We design and manufacture high-end electronics. I am the CAD Manager / PTC SME. Stakeholders for this idea include our Creo user community.  2. What version of Creo Parametric are you currently running? 8.0.5.0 3. Describe the problem you are trying to solve. Please include detailed documentation such as screenshots, images or video. Reference: Case: 16087371 SPR: 13261009       In our PCB Board start-part, we have ecad areas for the annular rings around PCB mounting holes. These ecad keep outs are on the top and bottom of the PCB. We create an ecad area on one side, referencing the hole. Then we create the ecad area on the second side and reference the first ecad area. We group the 2 areas and reference pattern it to the PCB holes. This works great in the regular part mode. However, in the ECAD module (which is using the sheetmetal code), it doesn't work! According to PTC and R&D, ECAD areas that use projected curves cannot be reference patterned. This seems like a full-on bug to me. If it works fine in one module, yet it doesn't in the other, that can cause frustration and confusion with the user-base. Can we get this fixed? See attached for sample files.  4. What is the use case for your organization? Our organization designs hundreds of products a year, all with PCBs. We are trying to extend our usage to the ECAD module, but we keep on hitting bugs, like this one, that prevents us from using it the way we need. 5. What business value would your suggestion represent for your organization? This would get us closer to use the ECAD module, which would bring benefit to our organization, whether through the IDX collaboration standard, or it's ECAD capabilities.   Thank you   @Alex_Y  ... View more

Even though I am a little dejected by having about 20 of my ideas "archived" this week, we'll still try to improve the product. IDEA: Connector datasheets provide a pitch value between conductors/contacts for flat ribbons. However, you can't enter that value into the 'thick' field in the spool. Instead, you need to run some crazy calculation to generate that value. Really? https://www.ptc.com/en/support/article/CS263593   If the 'thick' value in the spool doesn't correlate to anything 'physical' then why not just have the value mean the conductor thickness. All we need to do is put in the pitch value and that's it.    ... View more

    Hello, When working in Creo Parametric, sometimes the default naming scheme delivred by Creo can be different to the company naming rules. This creates extra work for the designers mainly doing repetitive "Rename" actions in Windchill...  Example 1: in a hydraulic hose, when finalizing the routing with a "solid pipe" feature : the feature gets automatically the pipe name + 0001/0002/0003/etc... :   Example 2 : Skeleton are also created with the assembly name + extra numbers (0001/0002...) All this behavior is described as work to spec in this PTC article : https://www.ptc.com/en/support/article?n=CS58009&language=en&posno=1&q=digit%20piping&source=search&source=copyurl   To avoid losing time doing unnecessary renaming in Windchill, the Creo Parametric naming scheme needs to be customizable for each company! (with config option ... or another method)   Thanks in advance   Related PTC Ticket : CS58009 ... View more

In cabling   each port (CSYS) has an internal_LEN parameter.   allow Creo to show that CABLE EXTENDING beyond the CSYS in the negative Z direction.  This will help when companies move to MBD and away from drawings when showing cross sections  of connectors and a more accurate visual representation when the ENTRY CSYS is sitting on the back side of the connector (even if the terminal is buried deep into the connector.     1. Describe your environment: What is your industry? What is your role in your organization? Describe your stakeholders.  Marine/Automotive, end user 2. What version of Creo Parametric are you currently running? 5, moving to 8 in a  month 3. Describe the problem you are trying to solve. Please include detailed documentation such as screenshots, images or video. Simple visual enhancement of the cable running up to the entry_CSYS and showing its INTERNAL_LENGTH beyond that CSYS 4. What is the use case for your organization? To help migrate to MBD for harnessing 5. What business value would your suggestion represent for your organization? Continue to move forward into advanced mfg. ... View more

Hello, Can you please allow External copies of geometry (ECG) to reference multiple components?   Current behavior makes for very large squeletons with multiple ECG pointing at differents components/parts. Allowing ECG to use multiple models will decrease the modeltree length..., decrease the number of clic necessary to build the skeletons... etc   Thanks in advance ... View more