I'm testing SpaceClaim these days. Not trying to fully replace Creo Parametric, but I find it pretty neat in the field where I work. That is mostly manufacturing.
These may all seem to be just bells and whistles, but I would like to see some of these things implemented to Creo Parametric in the future.
1) The user should have the ability to change color of an entire part just by clicking on it's face inside an assembly, and choosing the color from a pop-up menu of predefined colors. Pop-up menus next to cursor are kind of Creo Elements/Pro or Co-Create thing right now, they are not in Creo Parametric yet afaik. The part should change it's color on PART LEVEL also, not just on the ASSEMBLY LEVEL, so the user doesn't have to open each and every part just to change it's color.
2) Another nice feature would be to be able to click on a part inside an assembly, and change it's display to transparent from a pop-up menu. I know there is an option to do that in assembly mode, by choosing the part, and then clicking on Model tab --> Model Display dropdown --> Component Display Style --> Transparent, but in this case the black edges of the transparent model aren't visible. The user can actually see what's inside the model but it's rather annoying to look at this transparent model alone as the edges are too hard to see. Also, it changes or creates some temporary display style thing, which takes bunch of clicking in case you want to restore it back to it's original state. Yet, this display state doesn't get saved with the assembly model. So, everytime Creo crashes you have to set the transparency again, just so you can see all the changes you are doing.
3) When measuring a distance between two paralel tubes or tube/hole+wall, it would be nice if it could show the minimum distance between these two objects. Not just the distance from the center of the hole or tube, which then requires the user to know the diameter of the tube that the measurement is being taken from.
4) When switching to Geometry filter the user should be able to select the geometry of a part just by dragging a box over the surfaces or edges of the model, and so should be able to make a box selection just with the mouse, and not any other aditional option such as 3D Box Select, that takes so much clicking.
Brian, can you also report bugs, that arised lately in Creo Parametric, in these Committee meetings? I am not able to report any since I am out of maintenance for now, and I don't think my VAR would care enough to do that.
It requires me to reproduce the issues, which can take me some time, and I am not fond of my VAR taking these issues to PTC support or wherever required if I bothered handing them over just to my VAR.
I wouldn't be suprised if PTC support didn't even care if my VAR would ever try to have concerns like these, but what do I know? Anyway, I already told my VAR not to bother with bugs I found in Creo. They have more important things to do, that they actually can do.
"24. when creating symmetric constrain in sketcher,why there is need for center line,it should be select this and this and it's symmetric,same problem for mirror in sketcher.why do we need center line,and that center line won't even be datum,one that's used for mirror and symmetry. :Sigh: This is one of my pet peeves. I agree with you. Back in Wildfire 2.0, you could sketch symmetry WITHOUT the centerline. In Wildfire 3, they made the centerline for symmetry mandatory. I tried to bring this up in January at the TC meetings but got shot down by other members who did not remember the way it worked in Wildfire 2. This was frustrating. I'll try again to get support for this one."
I do not think that is possible in wildfire 2.0 also.
Do you get the idea that the axes-for-arcs feature is not fully developed
It is very limited only being able to do this feature on a planar sketch. There was a fierce discussion on this topic many years ago vs Solidworks Fill Surface command http://www.mcadcentral.com/creo-modeling/16582-simple-surfacing-problem.html
The outcome surprised many of the long time users and this I believe is an excellent benchmark feature that hopefully could be introduced in Creo SURFACE. I do not use ISDX so the request is for the surface module in Foundation or what it's called nowadays.
See page 3 for the actual comparison and images of the SW Fill Surface command.
My request is related to large assembly performance in Creo Parametric and View while connected to Windchill.
Short Term - The Windchill publisher needs added capability to publish simplified reps where substitute rule was used. In Creo View, the output of Simplified Reps from the publisher are called Viewables.
Long Term - Improved Integration of the "Viewables" into the lightweight graphics rep in Parametric. Imagine being able to load a Viewable in Parametric that loads only PVZ/.ol files into session.
Note: CV2 M040 build has intelligence to only load into session what is associated with the Viewable. Basically, what WF2 did with Intralink which gave simplified reps intelligence to call for required objects from server without making the user add required dependents prior to opening assembly. Example: I have a simplified rep in a million object assembly published as a Viewable that loads in Creo View in 20 seconds to show all a-surfaces of vehicle. Same Simplified rep opens in 24 minutes in WF5.
I am a member in the visualization committee so hope to see you in California!
yes the "surface" option in ISDX works like fill option in solidworks.you can just select the curves and it would fill it with a surface.
The long term would definitely be a HUGE improvement in my opinion. In fact, that was what I was imagining when they launched Creo and it seemed that they would use technology from their present range and also solve the long term fundamental problems such as large assembly management.
So far the LW Thumbnail technology has been a disappointment.
It is possible to save a parameters configuration file to some degree
In you config (one of them) use something like
and that xml file is generated from the parameters dialogue box itself; set it up at the size and columns you want then save this into the location you want and call it up with that config something like that I have shown.
Not the whole story but helps.
I just realised that it resets the parameter box size default BUT does not fix the column widths. Why oh why does PTC have such issues with column widths (example the perenial first column width in the model tree when all other column widths in that same tree can be set)
As usual the promises of increased productivity overlook the extremely low hanging fruit.