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

Community Tip - Learn all about the Community Ranking System, a fun gamification element of the PTC Community. X

January 2015 TC Meetings: Enhancement Requests for Creo

BrianMartin
11-Garnet

January 2015 TC Meetings: Enhancement Requests for Creo

Hi Everyone...

 

 

It's that time again! Each January, PTC/User holds it's bi-annual "face to face" Technical Committee ("TC") meetings. These meetings are held twice a year with the Winter Session being held next week at PTC Headquarters in Needham, MA.These meetings are mostly attended by representatives of large, influencial customers who pay to send their personnel directly to PTC for meetings with Product Line Managers, software developers, and technical staff.

 

Every 6 months or so I (foolishly) try to gather enhancement requests, issues, and problems from Community members who cannot attend the TC meetings. Obviously I work for one of those large, influencial customers so I will be in attendance to represent their interests. Still, I believe there's tremendous value in the contributions of PTC Community members who do not work for companies with the means to lobby PTC directly for enhancements.

 

In order to track submissions by Community members, I've previously posted an exhaustive spreadsheet of requests and issues complete with a "disposition" for each. I've reposted that spreadsheet here for reference. For this next set of meetings, I think it's necessary to clear the docket a bit. Many of the requested enhancements have either been added to Creo 3.0, slated for implementation in Creo 4.0, rejected outright, or "overcome by events" meaning they're not as relevant as they once were. Continuing to manage and update such a massive spreadsheet with stale data is a tremendous chore. I think the best way to move forward is to go back to the start and gather requests anew.

 

 

So then... if you have requests or nagging problems with Creo 2.0 or 3.0 now is the time to speak up.

 

Please know that topics like the User Interface (ribbon) and annoyances with the color schemes are perennial complaints which are often discussed... but rarely changed based on TC input. The most useful enhancement requests are very specific. Vague requests like "fix the measurement tool" or "improve the interface" are not as easy to fight for as a more focused request. Here are some tips:

  • Errors or problems should be described well. Please try to completely describe your request or issue clearly and concisely (if possible).
  • Screenshots and pictures are tremendously helpful even if they're just mock-ups of some new feature you'd like to see. I realize it takes time to put these together but this makes your issue stand out and helps communicate your request to others.
  • Use Cases are very helpful. "Use case" is a term we use to describe a particular work scenario that requires attention or demonstrates the need for a particular enhancement. For example, this is an example of a "use case" (this is a real request I've submitted):
    • "I have an irregular surface - such as an elliptical tank. I'd like to drop a coordinate system offset from the irregular surface such that one axis of the coordinate system is always normal to the placement surface but offset at some height above the surface. Currently the only way I can do this is to add a point on the irregular surface offset by the appropriate amount, then add a coordinate system on the point. It's possible to drop a point on a surface offset by a specific height and it's possible to drop a coordinate system on a surface with the normal automatically adjusting to the surface but it's not possible to create a coodinate system with an offset and the automatic normal. See slides below (click for larger images)...Slide1.PNGSlide2.PNG

 

 

 

A picture is definitely worth a thousand words in this instance. The better you can describe your issue, the easier it is for me to bring it to the attention of the PTC developers and Product Line Managers.

 

As always, our goal is to make positive contributions so that we may influence future releases of the software. Reasonable requests supported by sound logic and a true business need have the best chance of being well received. These are professional meetings held at the pleasure of PTC and it's employees. I'm an invited guest at this event and I'm also representing my employer so I need to remain professional. While I'll do my best to make a case for incorporating your enhancements, please remember that I probably can't get to every request. Numerous meetings occur simultaneously and it's tough to hop around between rooms.

 

Add your comments, requests, pain points, and feedback to this thread. I'll do my best to get it in front of the developers. I'll catalog the requests and post a synopsis and a final report after the meetings.

 

Remember to keep it positive if possible... but let's hear what you have to say!

 

Thanks!!

-Brian

 

PS: I am currently a member of the following Technical Committees so I can address topics in any of these areas:

  • Routed Systems - Cabling/Piping & Schematics
  • Core Modeling
  • Model Based Definition (ASME Y.14.41 Standards)
  • System Administration
  • Sheet Metal
  • Detailing
  • Creo NC / Manufacturing
  • Creo View / Visualization
  • Windchill

 

If you're interested in joining a TC, go to the PTC/User Website, create a login, and sign up!

 

Thanks everyone!

-Brian


This thread is inactive and closed by the PTC Community Management Team. If you would like to provide a reply and re-open this thread, please notify the moderator and reference the thread. You may also use "Start a topic" button to ask a new question. Please be sure to include what version of the PTC product you are using so another community member knowledgeable about your version may be able to assist.
67 REPLIES 67

i think the units thing for mass properties should be some what similar to what solidwork does.....

no offence to the way you describe Doug!

Hi Rohit...

It's going to take me some time to get back to you in response to some of your feedback. Some of the items I can agree with and understand easily... others I need to gather more information. PTC is likely to take note of easily solved problems. But if there are problems which can just as easily be handled by a couple of extra mouse clicks in the current software, it's much less likely they're going to make a change.

For example, the one about updating all child views to "No Hidden" when the parent changes. You could just as easily pick multiple views at one time and modify all of them to "No Hidden" simultaneously. That's an example of one I can't see them spending the time to change.

Let me take some time to read through your suggestions and respond to them as I log them into the spreadsheet. Thank you again for your feedback!

Thanks,

-Brian

measurement_proe4.JPG

the red and blue measurement lines have disappeared from creo 2.0 onwards...now we have strain our eyes to look at coordinate system to determine he measurement

Not sure if this is even possible, as no one else does that I know of, but I'd like to see the ability to calculate and show theoretical sharp corners on a drawing view instead of tangent edges.

I'm a tool designer. I don't work with too many sharp edges and corners. Everything vertical surface is drafted and every corner is broken with a radius. I usually show dimmed tangent edges, but none are usable for dimensioning and it looks like a garbled mess and is not interpretable. Turning tangent edges off shows no face detail.

dgschaefer
21-Topaz II
(To:msteis)

Have you tried creating dims to intersection? I use this a lot in molded part drawings to create theoretical sharp dims.

--
Doug Schaefer | Experienced Mechanical Design Engineer
LinkedIn

Doug,

Are you talking about driving or driven dimensions? I usually do a section view and do dimension to intersections on my drawings. With my workflow, my tool models are children of the part model that they're designed to create. Therefore, driving dimensions don't exist on my tool models as most of the face details are created from a Cutout feature, so I have to dimension my drawing separately.

Some forms are complicated and need to be dimensioned from a top view, and creating a projected sketch from the part before adding radii, and carrying that from the part to the tool, to the drawing is a pain.

dgschaefer
21-Topaz II
(To:msteis)

Driven dims. At the risk of starting a debate, I rarely use driving or model dims in my drawings.

--
Doug Schaefer | Experienced Mechanical Design Engineer
LinkedIn

Hi Matt...

I haven't gotten to the meeting where I can address this yet. I believe it comes up tomorrow. I have definitely heard your suggestion and I'll do my best to communicate your problem to the proper people. I'll add your list to the master spreadsheet and give you a final update once the TC meetings are over on Thursday.

Thanks!

-Brian

Hi Martin,

Could you please help to communicate and submit the following high score votes (more than 50 votes) of product idea with PMs:

  1. Support multi-CPUs(processors) for model regeneration action in Creo
  2. Allow spaces in filenames
  3. Use Tabs for open models/drawings in Creo (like in ProE, IE, Firefox, Chrome, FoxIt pdf viewer, etc)?
  4. Sketcher dimensions that stay put!
  5. Default drawing size config.pro option (for example: A4 and not C)
  6. Remember Parametric Sketching References
  7. Allow the status bar to be moved to the top of the Creo Parametric window
  8. Be able to customize Graphics Toolbar (Creo 2.0) - Add icons
  9. Make render functionality more easy and simple to use
  10. Enable Zoom-to functionality
  11. Allow to blank the exterior border lines of table
  12. Define the default size of a template model – Sketch at the right scale of your usual models.
  13. The ability to switch between all the Creo applications "on the fly"
  14. Improve selection sequence
  15. Allow fillets (rounds) & chamfers in assembly mode
  16. Enable Show/Hide Session ID in Model Tree
  17. Default opening multi-sheet drawing on first sheet (Sheet 1)
  18. The Number "1"
  19. Diameter dimension attachment
  20. Limiting the quantity of windows/parts/drawings open to only 15.
  21. Please bring the old sweep (closed trajectory, open section -> add inner face) back
  22. Enhance the contrasts in Creo 2.0 dashboard between tabs
  23. Default choice when assembling two axes should be "coincident" (Creo 2.0)
  24. Point Tables
  25. Allow Comments in Model Tree
  26. Double-click on features in model tree to show dimensions
  27. An Option in Config.pro to specify a separate file for Mapkeys
  28. Diameter or Radius symbol in Sketcher dimension

Thank you a lots.

Hi You...

Each time we have these meetings, I tend to "go off" a little bit about the huge number of product ideas which have been logged on the PTC Community site. At the risk of sounding catty about it, each year PTC managers assure me they're carefully considering those idea submissions. In all candor, I don't believe them.

Last year I counted all idea submissions from PTC Community. There were somewhere over 2000 of them. I had never seen a list of prioritized ideas mentioned in any TC meeting. Many of the submissions were never addressed. Some were "stale" because they'd been submitted for Wildfire 5 or Creo 1.0.

PTC management fairly well admitted they hadn't been addressing those ideas as efficiently as they should have been. They committed to doing better. Again, I just don't believe it. I've heard the promises about cataloging those ideas and getting them in front of developers before. Now I think we're at the point that we've promised it for too long without delivering. Now I need to see some actual progress before I'll believe they're serious.

So... your suggestion about making sure these specific ideas get in front of the developers is a good one. I'm not sure I can get to all of them... but a better course of action may just be to press the product managers about considering all ideas submitted from PTC Community.

As always, the TC meetings are tricky. It's more like a chess match than anything else. The way you suggest an enhancement counts. The way you back up your suggestion also counts. There's a good bit of politics involved. Plus there are other nuances like which PTC product manager you're talking to that also come into consideration. Some are more receptive to enhancement requests than others. I'll try to bring up the topic of Ideas submitted to PTC Community.

Of course announcing that I'll be bringing this up now tips my hand and provides some fore warning that they'll need to have a credible answer for this criticism ready to go. I wouldn't be surprised if they did have a credible answer at the ready. As I said though, at this point I think we deserve action instead of another explanation of why these ideas seem to languish even when they're voted up.

Hi You...

Your set of comments is massive and it will take more than one response to cover everything. The good news is this:

Several of the ideas you listed are already being considered... or already coming in Creo 4.0. Some of the ideas were commented on (see the Ideas page) by PTC Product Line Managers. This is all very positive.

We had a greater discussion about the Product Ideas on PTC Community... and overall the ideas are being read, processed, and considered. PTC agrees they haven't done a good job of communicating that the ideas are being consumed by the right people. I reiterated that they need to do a better job of letting people know that their Idea was received and, at minimum, being considered. In many cases, I was surprised to find the ideas had made it up the food chain...

So overall, the news for all of the highlighted ideas in your list was positive. I'll publish specifics on each suggestion when I complete the spreadsheet from the Winter TC's.

Thank you again for taking the time to compile the list. I think you'll be pleased with the items which are already slated to be available in Creo 4.0

Thanks!

-BRian

My biggest one would be consistency in the interface:

Why does MMB mean so many different things (new, done, cancel, next or even nothing)? (See the product idea here: http://communities.ptc.com/ideas/2422)

Why do IDD and ISDX have interfaces so foreign to the rest of Creo?

Why do we still see the menu manager?

Improved dialog boxes with larger data entry fields and fewer tabs.

Prime example of the former is the assy contraints dialog. There is frequently not enough text visible to see what the references are. Why not make that box a lot longer?

A good example of the latter, although technically not tabs, is the relations dialog with separate areas for initial and post regen relations. Why not a split dialog so that both sections cann be viewed at once?

--
Doug Schaefer | Experienced Mechanical Design Engineer
LinkedIn

Hi Doug,

Interface consistency and better dialog boxes and improved "flow" are major areas of concern. I would expect Creo 4.0 to continue the refinements made in Creo 3.0. While I did not get any specific committments on the topics you suggested, overall PTC's reception to these issues was positive. I definitely got the feeling they are already aware of these problems and are working on them for future releases.

Thanks!

-Brian

That's great, but I'll believe it when I see it. An inconsistent & sloppy UI has been part of the Proe experience for a very long time (Done/Done Select/Done Sel anyone?)

--
Doug Schaefer | Experienced Mechanical Design Engineer
LinkedIn
BenLoosli
23-Emerald II
(To:BrianMartin)

One thing that another CAD vendor used to do, which would reduce the impact that a large company had on future development, was to let each company vote on requested enhancements each year. The vendor would review the lists in multiple categories, modeling, drafting, manufacturing, etc, and assign a weight value to the complexity of the proposal. These would be 2, 4, 6 or 8 points, with 8 being the most complex to implement. Each company would be given 50 points to vote in each category. If I wanted the most complex enhancement to be considered, I would vote for it and use up 8 of my 50 points. I would then vote for the other enhanhancement proposals until my 50 points were allocated. The results would be sent back and compiled into a summary which was presented at the annual user meeting. The company made a commitment to implement the #1 in each categoty when they could get it into the development schedule. It was sometimes 2-3 releases down the road if a complex coding issue. They would report each year on which ones had been implemented and the status of those they were still working on.

Hi Ben,

They definitely need a better system than the one we have. No one tracks these suggestions in any sort of reasonable fashion. Some people like me maintain lists. I'm sure some of the Technical Committee leads maintain lists. But there's no document capturing the suggestions and the disposition of them. The best I can do is raise the issue and give you my impression of whether or not the PTC developers and Product Line Managers seemed receptive to it. That and $5 will buy you a very small cup of that overpriced Starbucks coffee (maybe). There should be a better system.

Hi,

Could anyone here recall if there has been anything good implemented to Creo 3.0 from anyones ideas posted on these boards since 2011 and then onwards?

Just for a reference on what's been done:

http://www.mcadcentral.com/creo-modeling/27757-creo-3-0-enhancements-2.html

Hi Jakub,

I'm sure there are some ideas which were added since 2011 that have been implemented. It's sort of the way I'm sure there's life somewhere out there in the Universe. There are over 2000 ideas... and just by sheer odds it's likely PTC implemented something even if they didn't do it specifically because of the idea.

Do you see what I mean? Maybe they were already going to add an enhancement anyway and someone just happened to suggest it. Maybe the Idea submission came after this new feature was already created? I'm certain that probably happened.

I think you're getting at the same thing I was saying before - you want to know if the thousands of ideas are making their way in front of the developers and PTC decision makers. You want to know if those ideas are having any kind of positive effect. (At least I think that's what you want to know).

That's exactly what I am wondering, too.

I actually know about one such idea. I've told you about it couple months ago.

PTC devs have put back the message taken from measurement window to message log. It was being displayed in message log in previous releases, and I am happy to have it back.

It does not sounds like a big deal, but at least one thing was implemented cause PTC people read this forum.

Well, unless this was also mentioned elsewhere. Someone just happened to suggest it like you said.

Anyway, that just shows there is always a chance.

Hi Jakub...

To my pleasant surprise, PTC is actually reading and considering the Product Ideas being voted up on this site. PTC management claimed this was the case. Even still, I didn't quite believe them... until I went back to a good deal of the popular ideas and noticed PTC Product Line Managers or their representatives had commented on the idea.

I only checked about 6 Ideas (from the long list above from You Zhao) but in over half of them, a PTC rep commented on the idea and indicated it would be added to the list of considered new features or bug fixes. I was really surprised by this.

Also at the meetings, we had a fairly deep discussion of the Product Ideas on PTC Community. This is definitely on PTC's radar. They indicated they are reading these ideas... and they are going to work on a method to communicate when an idea has been gathered into the stream of enhancements under consideration.

I'll post more about this in my TC wrap up post.

Thanks again!

-Brian

pimm
14-Alexandrite
(To:BrianMartin)

Hi Brian,

Thank you so much for giving us an input to the Creo product developement team.

I'd like to submit my top irritation with Creo. NOTE: This is already represented with what you zhao copied (4. Sketcher dimensions that stay put), but my request is more specific. I will copy my user idea submission.

Fix radii in sketch constraints so it doesn’t come unglued when the radii is modified.

When modifying the original value of the fillet in a sketch there are 2 different conditions that are causing constraint related failures.

1) 1) When there are 2 intersecting lines that are not in the horizontal or vertical position.

2) 2) When there is an intersection between entities that are not lines.

With the shown example I have locked the dimensions that I need to keep the sketch stable.

OriginalCondition.JPG

With case 1 even though the intersection is dimensionally locked when a fillet is applied it replaces these constraints.

LockRemoved.JPG

Creo even recognizes the error it creates as shown below.

CreoError.JPG

When you modify the fillet to the needed size it will invariably move the position as shown.

PositionChanges1.JPG

With case 2 instead of having 2 lines I have replaced one of the lines with an arc. (The same type of results apply with using a spline), once again when I place a fillet it removes the original locked constraints. Once again in the message tree you see the “Dimensions to Endpoint Deleted” error. Additionally another troublesome entity is introduced. Notice that the system replaces out what should be a construction arc with a construction line.

LineConstruction.jpg

When you modify the fillet to the needed size it will invariably move the position; see below.

PositionChanges2.JPG

With case 1 the work around is to replace the dimensional constraints with the original locked dimensions. This allows the constraints to work correctly, but it adds this extra step every time. If the locked dimensions truly were locked this would not be necessary.

With case 2 the work around is more complicated. The replacement of what should be a construction arc with a construction line means that I can’t just add X and Y locking dimensions to make constraints work correctly. The construction line tries to match up with a tangency on the arc and depending on the size of the fillet can really distort the results. In order to fix the constraints you have to extend the arc back to the original intersection (prior to the fillet), divide the arc at the place where the fillet intersects it, change the arc to a construction entity and then add the X and Y locking dimensions. If the locked dimensions were truly locked and if the construction entities at the intersection retained their original entity type the work arounds would not be necessary.

Hi Paul...

Great to hear from you! If memory serves me, I actually documented this problem in the past and mentioned it to the PTC developers. It received a positive response (which is sometimes all you really get). Any time there are pain points like this which seem to be easily fixed, I feel there's hope.

I'll happily add this to the list and try to bring it up again. Your screen shots definitely help to communicate the problem.

Thanks again!

-Brian

pimm
14-Alexandrite
(To:BrianMartin)

Brian,

It is very appreciated that you have gone to the great trouble of helping all of us out.

Hopefully this effort of yours will make Creo a better product for many users.

Thanks!

Hi Paul...

Thank you! I'll do whatever I can to get as many of these suggestions in front of PTC Product Line Managers as I can!

Wish me luck...

-Brian

Hi Brian,

Enhancement request: Right click to open a drawing.

It would be nice to be able to open a drawing of a part or assembly by selecting the part or assembly in the model tree or on the screen, then using the right mouse button.

Thanks,

Chris

I agree... the only wrinkle I see is this - what happens if you have more than one drawing associated to a model? Also, will that right-mouse click only open a drawing if it's in your current working directory (or workspace)? What happens if the drawing is not in the workspace (or current directory)? Should the file be retrieved into the workspace (if using Windchill)? And if so... again the question pops up about what to do if there is more than one drawing associated to the same model.

Note I'm not trying to shoot down this idea... I'm trying to flesh out the details. It's likely the PTC developer would immediately ask these questions. They'll want to know we've thought out precisely how this feature would work and what it would and would not do.

It helps for us to have answers to these questions before PTC puts me on the spot to deliver an answer.

There's a good amount of sparring that occurs in these meetings. It's usually good natured sparring but occasionally there's some thinkly veiled sneering and sniping. After all, imagine a room full of engineers, programmers, and (eww) managers.

Which one has the bigger ego? They're all pretty insufferable after a week of 10+ hour days... so it's better to have answers at the ready when you go into an environment like that!

I know this is a little late but you said there are two meetings a year. I wanted to respond to these questions. These are all assuming either Intralink or PDMLink are involved. All bets are off when they are not.

Q. What happens if you have more than one drawing associated to a model?

A. Easy. It opens a dialog box that shows all the drawings they are directly attached to. Just like a family table dialog that displays when opening a generic model. It should open any drawing of an assembly where a part is assembled to.

Q. Will that right-mouse click only open a drawing if it's in your current working directory (or workspace)? What happens if the drawing is not in the workspace (or current directory)? Should the file be retrieved into the workspace (if using Windchill)? And if so... again the question pops up about what to do if there is more than one drawing associated to the same model.

A. Again, easy. Same thing as the above family table dialog reference. There is current functionality that when I select File > Open I can type in the file name and extension of a CAD object that is not in my workspace and it will pull it in.

We've definitely beaten this horse many, many times...

And we've made many recommendations on needed enhancements. Creo 4.0 was to be the release when we finally saw a new, clear, highly functional text editor that incorporated many of the same features in the tool from that link you posted.

But ... I think the horse could be beaten again! I'm happy to advocate for a tool like this.

Thank you!

-Brian

Brian,

For anyone that uses mechanism snapshots in drawing views.

Please urge PTC to redesign the snapshot functionality so it's no longer dependent on the explode state software code. The way the snapshot funtionality is designed if a component is changed, any snapshot that references the part becomes out of date and you have to update the snapshots. Let's say you modify a edge radius, but the position of the components do not move related to the change you made. You still have to update the snapshots and if you open a previously saved drawing you can't even see the assembly because the part is scaled in the drawing to show you something has changed. Pleae have PTC fix this. example image attached of a drawing where the cylinder is scaled up 100 times in size hiding an assembly that is 20 times the size of the cylinder.

Current software as designed is causing everyone to do unneccary work on drawings do to a simple dimension change.

cylinder+dwg.jpg

Thanks,
Don Anderson

Thanks,
Don Anderson
No time Like the Present!
Top Tags