Reordering offset x-section (WF2)

How to do it?

Offset x-section doing just fine until you want to redefine its
section when all later features becomes suppressed. Result is that I
can't reference suppressed features during redefining x-section
section. Optimal will be if I can reorder x-section to the bottom of
the model tree.

Vita

 

: How to do it?
:
: Offset x-section doing just fine until you want to redefine its
: section when all later features becomes suppressed.

First, we are talking about normal Pro/e parent/child relations: later doesn't
effect earlier, children don't effect parents. An 'offset section' is just a
simple sketched section. If all the geometry that was used to create the sketch is
still present, the sketch should not fail. If you suppress the parent features of
a sketch, then the sketch will fail.

One solution to sorting out what you want to reference (i.e., what will not later
be suppressed from what will) is to suppress the features before you create the
offset section.

David Janes

 

: Offset x-section doing just fine until you want to redefine its
: section when all later features becomes suppressed. Result is that I
: can't reference suppressed features during redefining x-section
: section. Optimal will be if I can reorder x-section to the bottom of
: the model tree.
:
I realized, after reading the last sentence again, Vito, that I'd missed
correcting a misunderstanding: you can't reorder sections, they're not features.
You can have dozens, hundreds of sections (often the case with complicated
castings); not one of them appears in the model tree. As a sketched cutting plane,
the offset section creation loosely depends on references to existing geometry. If
you want to cut down the middle of a hole, you'll probably reference an axis. But
you'll undoubtedly have noticed that the offset section doesn't disappear when the
referenced geometry is suppressed. It doesn't even lose references, become
orphaned and give errors ~ most unusual in Pro/e, but this is because it is not
based on the typical feature's parent/child relationship.

To deal with this problem of redefining, you could temporarily unsuppress the
features you want to use for redefining the section. Or do something that is based
on this process and captured in a simplified representation of the part. The
Master Rep would have all the features, the Casting rep would have all the
machined features suppressed, etc. You could have any number of other reps showing
the part at different stages of manufacture. Or you could have one for stress
analysis with all the fillets removed to reduce the work needed to mesh the
casting. When you needed to redefine or create a cross section, you'd just open
the rep with the needed geometry. It's a little mmore work to set them up but the
flexibility it offers for dealing with complex parts is a great advantage down the
road.

David Janes

 

I think it is to bad that it's not possible to reorder x-sections.
If you create an x-section then adds more features to your
part or more parts in your assembly it some times causes
trouble.

If you want to relate your old x-section to theses new features
or parts it is not possible, because they are created after the
x-setion they are not visible to relate to.

I agree with the first poster that it would be optimal to be able
to put the x-sections at the bottom of the modeltree or if ProE
automatically always put it there.

It might be sufficient if there where some kind of indication
where in the model tree the x-section is so all features or
parts could be moved before the x-section before redefining.
But the x-section is completely invisible (as far as I know)
The only workaround (for offset x-sections) I know of is to
create a curve where I want the x-section and then relate
the x-section to the curve. I don't like this method but then
I can se where in the tree my x-section is and move it around.

ProE - workaround heaven ...

/Bjorn

 

:
: >: Offset x-section doing just fine until you want to redefine its
: >: section when all later features becomes suppressed. Result is that I
: >: can't reference suppressed features during redefining x-section
: >: section. Optimal will be if I can reorder x-section to the bottom of
: >: the model tree.
: >:
: >I realized, after reading the last sentence again, Vito, that I'd missed
: >correcting a misunderstanding: you can't reorder sections, they're not
features.
: >You can have dozens, hundreds of sections (often the case with complicated
: >castings); not one of them appears in the model tree. As a sketched cutting
plane,
: >the offset section creation loosely depends on references to existing geometry.
If
: >you want to cut down the middle of a hole, you'll probably reference an axis.
But
: >you'll undoubtedly have noticed that the offset section doesn't disappear when
the
: >referenced geometry is suppressed. It doesn't even lose references, become
: >orphaned and give errors ~ most unusual in Pro/e, but this is because it is not
: >based on the typical feature's parent/child relationship.
: >
: >To deal with this problem of redefining, you could temporarily unsuppress the
: >features you want to use for redefining the section. Or do something that is
based
: >on this process and captured in a simplified representation of the part. The
: >Master Rep would have all the features, the Casting rep would have all the
: >machined features suppressed, etc. You could have any number of other reps
showing
: >the part at different stages of manufacture. Or you could have one for stress
: >analysis with all the fillets removed to reduce the work needed to mesh the
: >casting. When you needed to redefine or create a cross section, you'd just open
: >the rep with the needed geometry. It's a little mmore work to set them up but
the
: >flexibility it offers for dealing with complex parts is a great advantage down
the
: >road.
: >
: I think it is to bad that it's not possible to reorder x-sections.
: If you create an x-section then adds more features to your
: part or more parts in your assembly it some times causes
: trouble.
:
The nice thing about sections is that they are not history dependent any more than
the named views are. In fact, in part mode anyway, you can create sections with no
more geometry than the default datums. As you create your solid geometry, you can
watch get sectioned by your cutting planes as you add featues which intersect that
plane. If this came up for a vote (make it history dependent, thus requiring it to
be placed in a certain order, or leave it as it is), I'd vote to leave it. I
haven't heard a convincing argument for changing it.

: If you want to relate your old x-section to theses new features
: or parts it is not possible, because they are created after the
: x-setion they are not visible to relate to.
:
This should not be the case. It should be irrelevant when the section was created
and order of creation does not decide what is included in the section. Assembly
sectioning is a little different. Because components can be included/excluded from
the section, later components have to be deliberately added to the section by
redefining

: I agree with the first poster that it would be optimal to be able
: to put the x-sections at the bottom of the modeltree or if ProE
: automatically always put it there.
:
: It might be sufficient if there where some kind of indication
: where in the model tree the x-section is so all features or
: parts could be moved before the x-section before redefining.
: But the x-section is completely invisible (as far as I know)

I'm not sure what you are referring to by saying the section is invisible. It will
be until you go into the section creation/maintenance interface under 'Tools>Model
Sectioning', pick the section name and check 'Show section'. With planar sections,
you can even make it clip the solid part, front or back, to 'see inside'. New
features created after the section was created will also show in the section view.
They have to show up ~ there's no option, short of suppressing the feature, to
keep it from showing up or to exclude a feature from a section.

David Janes

 

Actually they are history dependent in a way. When an offset
x-section is created it is placed in the model tree and features
created after that is placed after the x-section in history.
Although the whole part will be x-sectioned, the x-section
feature will be in the middle of the tree somewhere, 'invisible'.
Same thing with assembly offset x-sections.

Try this. Create a box. Create an offset x-section straight
through the box. Then create a hole in the box where the
x-section isn't. Now try to redefine the sketch of the x-section
so it goes through the hole, relate it to the hole axis for
example. You can't.
You won't see the hole when redefining the sketch since it
is later in history than the x-section. Therefore it should be
possible to reorder, or the x-section feature always be
placed last in the history tree.

What I meant by invisible was that you can't se the x-section
feature in the model tree. I know you can turn on/off visibility
for the section in the 'Show section' menu.
I'm referring to an x-section as a feature even though it might
not be a 'real' feature. Maybe it should be.

/Bjorn

 

: Try this. Create a box. Create an offset x-section straight
: through the box. Then create a hole in the box where the
: x-section isn't. Now try to redefine the sketch of the x-section
: so it goes through the hole, relate it to the hole axis for
: example. You can't.

I see now what you're talking about. A hole created later than the cross section
will appear in the section if placed on the cut plane. But doesn't show up when
redefining because the section sketch is, after all, just a sketch and dependent
on a model 'snapshot', a picture at a point in time.

: You won't see the hole when redefining the sketch since it
: is later in history than the x-section. Therefore it should be
: possible to reorder, or the x-section feature always be
: placed last in the history tree.
:
When I got it to work (by reordering the hole before the section) and got the
section successfully redefined, the message says 'Feature successfully redefined'.
If it's a feature, why doesn't it show up in the model tree? And, since it is, in
fact, history dependent, you should be able to reorder it. Have you submitted this
as an SPR? You really should, this needs to be fixed.

David Janes

 

I haven't thought about submitting an SPR, I've just been agitated
when I've been in this situation but accepted the fact. Should be
an 'easy' thing for PTC to fix
I also don't know how to do and SPR, but I guess it is explained
on their homepage.
Thank you for your input.

/Bjorn

 

:
: >
: >: Try this. Create a box. Create an offset x-section straight
: >: through the box. Then create a hole in the box where the
: >: x-section isn't. Now try to redefine the sketch of the x-section
: >: so it goes through the hole, relate it to the hole axis for
: >: example. You can't.
: >
: >I see now what you're talking about. A hole created later than the cross
section
: >will appear in the section if placed on the cut plane. But doesn't show up when
: >redefining because the section sketch is, after all, just a sketch and
dependent
: >on a model 'snapshot', a picture at a point in time.
: >
: >: You won't see the hole when redefining the sketch since it
: >: is later in history than the x-section. Therefore it should be
: >: possible to reorder, or the x-section feature always be
: >: placed last in the history tree.
: >:
: >When I got it to work (by reordering the hole before the section) and got the
: >section successfully redefined, the message says 'Feature successfully
redefined'.
: >If it's a feature, why doesn't it show up in the model tree? And, since it is,
in
: >fact, history dependent, you should be able to reorder it. Have you submitted
this
: >as an SPR? You really should, this needs to be fixed.
: >
: I haven't thought about submitting an SPR, I've just been agitated
: when I've been in this situation but accepted the fact. Should be
: an 'easy' thing for PTC to fix

You've already done the hard part ~ identifying the problem, documenting and
explaining the solution. As to how hard to fix, PTC is moving more and more into
making sketches independent features that other features can use. Seems like this
would be an excellent time to do the same with the offset section sketch, making
it more of a feature, manipulable in the Model Tree. It's something they can do as
they convert functions to the Dashboard paradigm.

: I also don't know how to do and SPR, but I guess it is explained
: on their homepage.

This topic has been discussed before in the group. If you do an Advanced Groups
search on this group in Google, you'll find a couple recent ones with some help on
how to go about it. Apparently, the only difficulty is that you (or your company)
needs to be on a maintenance plan. You have to pay them to listen. But once you
get past that, the enhancement process is documented and explained on their
website.

: Thank you for your input.
:
You're welcome. But I'm sure you were more help than I was. See it through with an
enhancement request.

David Janes

 

What makes it even more discouraging in regards to the inability to Reorder
'Offset X-sections', is the fact that 'Offset X-sections' are actually
'Cosmetic' features. If you choose Program-Edit Design in Release 2001, as
an example, and scroll through the model's feature list, you will see a
'Cosmetic' feature even if you didn't create a sketched 'Cosmetic' feature
in the model. Now this tells me that PTC really and truly should be able to
offer its customers the ability to Reorder 'Offset X-sections' relatively
easy--considering the fact that they are already treated as 'Cosmetic'
features. Even though they DON'T show up in the Model Tree. To quote David
Janes, this is another aspect of the Pro/GOOFY module. ;-)

S.T.