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

January 2015 TC Meetings: Enhancement Requests for Creo


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!





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!


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.

Hi Don...

We discussed the deficiencies with Snapshots today. We discussed the specific issues you're having. I think we have a commitment that in Creo 4.0, we may have some modifications to snapshot which might alleviate the problems you're seeing.

Thanks again!



There was some interest on adding a mechanism clearance check that creats a surface in the components or colors the components in the assembly to show clearance between components that are moved thru a range of motion. Composite of all clearances measured in a motion analysis. Could you pass this on to the correct people?

Mechanism Clearance Check with Spatial Field Point Reporting (highlight on parts where clearance needs to be added) Currently able to to do it for one static state of the assembly motion but not automaticly and combine all motion time steps. Simalar to Abaqus composite results.

Don Anderson

Copy and pass this link to the idea if the link does not work

Don Anderson
No time Like the Present!

Hi Don,

This is a very nice, very detailed request. I actually missed the simulation and analysis meeting where this needed to be raised. However, you've done such a fine job of documenting it, I can just pass along your powerpoint presentation to the Technical Committee dealing with Analysis. I believe they will be able to run with this idea.

By taking the time to explain the problem, current functionality, and suggested future enhancements, you've made it easy to see the benefits of your idea. This is a textbook example of the way enhancements should be documented to insure they get seen by the right people.

I'm sorry I couldn't be in more places at one time (which is why I wasn't able to get this in front of the analysis team), but I will forward your documentation on and the proper people will see it.

Thank you again!


I will add this because it keeps coming up (including today)...

We need a way to automate, or at least assist inspection of a part to print.

The tool would:

1) create reference bubbles next to every drawing dimension

2) capture the value and tolerance into a table indexed with the bubble values (index no.)

3) allow data entry of captured values. Data import hooks would be nice form the CMM.

4) options for "first article", "random inspection", "serialized inspection", etc... and a means to store or catalog results as a form.

This is such a common practice that anything that PTC can do to help will certainly sell a few seats into the inspection departments of their major customers. I cannot see how this hasn't been requested at higher levels by some of the larger customers.

Thanks Tom... I've added this one. I'm not sure which TC to bring this up in... but I'll see if I can synthesize this into a suggestion and get it in front of the right people.

Take care...


HI Tom...

I like where you're going with this suggestion. I have no idea who to get that in front of. You're almost talking about a suite of tools specifically for inspection. This seems to be something Creo View could probably do much more easily... but I'm sure you're thinking these would be Creo tools.

I'll see if I can figure out which group might be receptive to this idea. I imagine other companies could use similar tools in their business models.



There are third party solutions to at least part of this, if not all. InspectionXpert is one that we use and it works quite well, I would recommend it.


CAD / PLM Systems Manager

TriMark Corporation

Thanks for posting the TC Enhancement Request "mega thread" again, Brian. Really helps provide some additional members the opportunity to be heard by PTC product management.

P.S. - This goes for everyone, if you're in Needham for the TC meetings this week feel free to send me a shout! Would love to take the opportunity to put some faces to names while you're in town.