Creo Parametric - Circular References (Part 1) - Top Down Design

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 22 авг 2024

Комментарии • 13

  • @SeanMcDonnell33
    @SeanMcDonnell33 5 лет назад +2

    @11:07 !! mind blown, so useful, so many hidden gems in Creo..

  • @rodtafarelo
    @rodtafarelo 3 года назад +2

    Super cool explanation referencing FUTURAMA; I will start to use that in my training courses.

    • @CADPLMGuy
      @CADPLMGuy  3 года назад +1

      It's so twisted that they put that into a cartoon.

  • @chrahi89
    @chrahi89 10 месяцев назад

    Good explanation! What bothers me, is that so many Creo user (or maybe CAD users in general) don't take circular references serious and just continue working with their model. My recommendation: If you get circular reference, fix it right away! Or this thing will multiply down the line making your model more and more unstable. If have seen projects with over 1000 reported crcs.
    Do people actually use the reference viewer to fix their .crc? I find the generated textfile.crc to be much easier to understand. Embarrassingly enough I have used the reference viewer hardly ever over the years. Understanding that thing is so hard, that even finding my mistakes manually is less time consuming.

    • @CADPLMGuy
      @CADPLMGuy  10 месяцев назад

      PTC has made Creo and Windchill more robust at handling circular references. The downside is that it removes incentive for users to address the problems.
      When the new Reference Viewer dialog box came out (I forget the previous utility, might have been Info > Parent / Child), I remember thinking that it is lot more complicated. However, it has a HUGE amount of functionality. Users do need to have a good understanding of references and dependencies.

  • @danman155
    @danman155 4 года назад

    Do you know if there is a way to avoid circular references in the case where you want to route piping/electrical hardware in sub-assembly B, which is mounted on part A (through top-down design), and then go back and make mounting holes in A by referencing sub-assembly B part placements?
    The individual features are logically sound, but it keeps giving circular references at the shrinkwrap / copy-geom (because the hole gets added after)..

    • @CADPLMGuy
      @CADPLMGuy  4 года назад +2

      You basically have four choices: (1) locate the holes and then break the external reference; (2) use a higher level Skeleton to control both A and B; (3) use a Copy Geom or Shrinkwrap and then set it to Manual Update; or (4) live with the Circular Reference. There was an interesting presentation at LiveWorx last year by Pete Hollmer that indicated that Circular References might no longer be the bane to regeneration time that they once were. I wrote about that in this blog post on PTC.com:
      www.ptc.com/en/cad-software-blog/unexpected-lesson-faster-cad-assemblies

    • @danman155
      @danman155 4 года назад

      @@CADPLMGuy Will have to look at watching that. But the article was definitely worth the read! It's good to know that at least the circular references doesn't break the model, as much as just slow it down a bit.. That may just be the option I'll go with for most cases.. Much Appreciated!

    • @CADPLMGuy
      @CADPLMGuy  4 года назад

      ​@@danman155 I was surprised. I remember 15 years ago when Circular References would render an assembly unusable to the point that it couldn't be checked into Intralink or Windchill. I suspect it also depends on the nature of the Circular Reference; some are worse than others. I've also noticed that stuff that caused Circular References in Wildfire don't create them in Creo. Yes, they should be avoided, but they're not the end of the world like they used to be.

    • @danman155
      @danman155 2 года назад

      @@CADPLMGuy Just thought I'd come back and note the solution we've gone with because I was thinking about it today and remembered this thread (and thought it could possibly be beneficial to anyone else facing the same issue)..
      Anyways, the solution we've accepted is basically just as you say about having a higher-level skeleton, but instead of the skeleton defining the mounting holes locations (which was my first thought when you mentioned it, and which didn't 'feel' right), the skeleton is the "clean" structure without any mounting info at all.
      So the process goes: 1) create the "clean" structure assembly (not considering any mounting holes, etc. ), 2) Copy assembly geom into a skeleton part for the cabling/piping to be routed against, and add/define the necessary mounting interfaces, 3) create a *new* structure assembly which copies the "clean" assembly but adds the mounting interface information and additional detail features (holes, supports, etc.).
      In the end, it means that you're left with two assembly files for the structure ("clean" and "detailed"), only one of which is actually meant for manufacturing, the other is just an assembly skeleton model (or simply the skeleton part if the structure is a single part). But the flow works with our design process (clean/skeleton is completed as part of preliminary design, and then switch to detailed version for detailed design stage), and it eliminates circular references!
      Would still be interested if others have any different processes they use?

  • @cokcury
    @cokcury 3 года назад

    the example got engraved into my memory man..

    • @CADPLMGuy
      @CADPLMGuy  3 года назад

      Futurama is awesome.

    • @cokcury
      @cokcury 3 года назад

      @@CADPLMGuy thank yoy for such a hard work..