Did anyone already mention the Draft angle limitation to 30 degrees? That retarded. It should allow up to 89.99.
The point is that you are modeling a part, not creating features whose names match the features' real mechanical nomenclature.
Otherwise, we'd have 50 different types of extrudes and revolves.
A draft angle should be simply a tool to create an angled face hinged from a selected reference feature...
This was fixed in Creo 3.0. I did noticed that they did screw up the clipped dimensioning in the drawing files. I used to be able to click on a theor. sharp corner, centerline, and theor. sharp and place a clipped diameter dimension. In 3.0, you click on the theor. sharp, then the centerline, then a drop down comes up to double the value. Great except the dimension line and arrows point in the wrong direction. Too bad I use this all the time.
We enhanced the draft angle limit to support angles up to 89.9 in Creo 3.0 both for the Draft feature and the Extrude feature.
Awesome, except it doesn't help me until we switch...
Still don't understand why this was developed this way in the first place.
no way...i would never curse Creo..i have used CATIA...very very good in surfacing....
assembly..struggles in Catia
I am big fan of pro/e..do no know where Creo is headed though...
Assemblies struggle in CATIA???
CATIA blows CREO away in assemblies.
CREO assembles with a timeline, 1 part at a time.
CATIA is dynamic and allows for mutual constraints. It is a more logical method. You can move items in the tree, and group them together without having to deactivate constraints. Flexible subassemblies, etc. all work better in CATIA. I can insert groups of part.
Man, I've literally written the training curriculum for CATIA courses at the CAD CAM Lab at NIAR at Wichita State. Dassault uses our curriculum.
CREO handles assemblies like crap in comparison. If you think CATIA struggles with assemblies, you simply weren't trained.
I can't address how CATIA handles assemblies, it sounds a bit to me like components aren't really definitively constrained? I recall another CAD system that I learned prior to Creo that didn't either, so there could be a discussion on CAD theory here but none of us are probably qualified to debate it here.
I do know positively, that your statement about Creo only being able to assemble one part at a time is blatantly false, but I can see where the basic user might believe that to be true. If you hate Creo so much, and you're such an expert on Catia, perhaps you should stick with Catia. I would have a difficult time and struggle doing everything I've done with Pro-E, on Catia.
I have been impressed with some of Catia's surfacing, and I did complete some Catia solid modeling tutorials, and I am of the belief that Catia, as well as NX, appear to cater more toward the user's needs, where PTC seems to focus more on sales and marketing.
I appreciate the candor.
I have tried to obtain additional training, however my company has not afforded me that opportunity.As I am no longer in the Aerospace industry and now am a Product Development Engineer for a Food Production Equipment OEM, I am now at the mercy of my employer's choice of CAD.
As far as importing multiple components into an assembly for constraining, I am referring to when you assemble components such as in the Windchill interface.
Sure, you can copy and paste multiple components, but then you still must constrain them in the timeline sequence of their insertion.
As of yet, I am unaware of being able to select multiple parts and/or subassemblies for the purpose of building assembly BOMs quickly.
Daniel, if you can direct me in that, I'd be obliged.