Replacing unrelated component --

[TerryJohnson]

I've been fighting this for a while and didn't know why-- I didn't notice
the little check box.  I've now added the config option
to turn it off

--- why would anyone want this??

resolution works most of the time, but I have one being stubborn --- anyone
have any suggestions?


Document - CS46402

Document Actions
      Refresh Data
      Subscribe to this Document
Document Information

         Type          Article

     Date Created      02-Feb-2012 04:10:22 EST

   Date Last Updated   05-Mar-2014 03:12:23 EST




Document Details
|------------->
|    Title    |
|------------->
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.

[TerryJohnson]

I figured it out, you have to FORCE IT..
in the reference viewer- break the reference
suppress a few components , save, resume save..
it stays gone..
just regenerating and saving was not working

[rrich]

This is interesting. I have had a few assemblies that I did not know how a part was related to it. This could be the reason. Here is my thought on why you may want to have this check box on and what this functionality could be for.

It appears as though Creo is building a list of items that you could swap in and out in an assembly. It is very easy with family table parts but this sort of builds that family only from any number of un related components. This is only a thought and un proven or tested but it makes logical sense.

Ron

[ocorten-2]

This is what I have added in our config.pro about this config option.

! 20130416 Added to minimize unneccesary relationships
! 20130527 Removed again after strange color behaviour when replacing a component
! (assembly became grey instead of it's original colors)
! 20140417 turned off again to test in Creo 2
remember_replaced_components no


I might add that i haven't tested this thoroughly yet in Creo 2.
So if you include this option, make sure that the colors of the parts in your assembly don't behave strange when replacing a component.


Kind regards,

Olaf Corten




Olaf Corten | CAD/PLM Manager

Besi Netherlands B.V. | Ratio 6| 6921RW Duiven| The Netherlands
T: +31 26 3196215 | M: +31 644548554
- | www.besi.com



From: "Rich, Ron" <->
To: Terry A Johnson <->, "-" <->
Date: 22-05-2014 13:37
Subject: [proecad] - RE: Replacing unrelated component --



This is interesting. I have had a few assemblies that I did not know how a part was related to it. This could be the reason. Here is my thought on why you may want to have this check box on and what this functionality could be for.

It appears as though Creo is building a list of items that you could swap in and out in an assembly. It is very easy with family table parts but this sort of builds that family only from any number of un related components. This is only a thought and un proven or tested but it makes logical sense.

Ron

[StephenW]

I also have advised my group to add the config option and set it to NO so it won't create the reference.

The reason you would want it to have a reference is for the Interchange Assembly functionality. Not sure why we have both interchange assembly and this option. Seems redundant but like always, you can do anything in pro/e in multiple ways.

I would suggest to PTC that the default option should be NO instead of YES. If you want to use the interchange assembly functionality, you would create the interchange assembly.

FYI, my email REPLY TO ALL is now back to working correctly. Odd that the email address shows with the -<">mailto:-> for everyone even though when you reply to all, it gives you the correct email address. I'm not complaining about that though. Maybe it will keep the web crawlers from finding my email address for the millionth time.

[STEVEG]

How about a friendly suggestion/request? Maybe there is a good reason people do this intentionally. If there is a good reason then by all means let me know.

I suggest not using the Reply All. When I submit a topic and someone uses the Reply All then I get two of the same email. One from the list and one from the responder. Just submit to the list email address using the plain Reply then everyone will get it anyway.

Steve G

[STEVEG]

Sorry. Maybe not the plain Reply as that goes to the originator. I have used the Reply All just to get the list email address then remove all other addresses so it goes to the list only.

Steve G