mmccall

OH yeah... If you have shetmetal parts ... be sure to go into the part properties for the flatt pattern and un-check "include shape in BOM"... This minor detail has caused me much grief in wondering where all the additional part counts were coming from.

the attached files work... put an un-folded sheet metal in a file structure it beneath another assembly... then do a print.... use configurations to get to the unfolded sheetmetal view. re-structure the same piece at the top level (nothing above and nothing below... the default way it would be strctured in the feature tree) ... and the bend lines will show up in the drawing.

Now I am having the problem where I can't see the attachments....

good one.. I have been wondering about that for some time now.

Is there a way to change the size of the arrows for the "detail" and "crossection" arrows?

One thing to note is that you wont be able to do another BOM on any of the other sheets in that file... I guess thats Ok sometimes.. I suppose you can simpy create another BOM... Tom... I guess you can simply insert or link to an excel sheet?.. So if you have another assembly within an assembly, you can make the first sheet break out the BOM at the part level... any additional bubbles you makeon any of the following sheets will carry the same numbers as the first sheet BOM.. Confusing?

I see now... If you have a sheetmetal part that is moved within another assembly, then the bend lines wont show in the drawing... Inly when you move it outside the sub assembly, meaning at its own level in the file, then the lines will show again. Why is this the case?... You would think that the bend lines would show regardless of where it is structured as long as the "transfer bend line" option is selected... but this is not the case.

Why would my bend lines not show in the drawing? I have the "transfer bend line"... option selected... but the bend lines still wont show. Bin Tag BAR.icd Bin Tag Holder Bar.ics

One thing that you may want to try when doing a large assembly that needs drawings etc. is instead of separating pieces into separate part files, make different configurations showing the individual parts. Then when you create the top assembly print, you simply add sheets and use the different configurations to start your views. Something I have been working on and it seems to work well... since I am reducing the number of externally linked files, I am not running into alot of errors.... at a certain point with all the externally linked files, things start to fall apart quickly. Just a thought that you might try. Of course, there are holes in this practice everywhere if things do start to go bad !... the ultimate being, to loose your main file all together..then you have nothing. Well... unless you are in the practice of exporting and unlinking again, the same is true with having them all linked (unless I am doing something wrong... delete one part and the file goes with it)... plus the extra effort of having to update each individual file when they are unlinked... Yeah.. surely it makes the file size larger (at least the size of the assembly... the drawings are typically smaller), more dangerous to have all eggs in one basket, ... etc. For the sake of constructive input, feel free to say some positives and negatives of this practice.... there may be others out there that need to make 84 prints! Please, share some methods that you use to handle large files with sub assemblies, that all pieces need individual prints etc. Set the stage.

Is there a way to change the default arrows in the drawings? Just get tired of changing them each time a new dimension is created.

cam cam1.sat

ascis format. crank shaft crank.sat crank.sat

Well, here we go again... not sure how many of you out there have been using this scrap work, but that's just what it is... everything is just thrown together in a last ditch effort to catch up with the rest of the so-called "low end" cad systems. They screwed up in a major way; the program is just a simple rip off to tie up their current customer base. It is all smoke and mirrors. Nothing in that program makes sense or works correctly; they just plain and simple did something and released it as quickly as possible, holding on to market share. Any company with some common sense should realize this; stop the bleeding (investment) and move on to something else. Wouldnt you know? Already they have planned to make another release called "M160"!!! What the hell for? What is that - a gun to blow your head off when you realize how much money and time you wasted on this crap?? Why on earth can't they just pick a number that makes sense? Oh well, then again.. history shows that this is probably the 160th revision... add M..then you get 1 million?... People say you can't do production work on IC. What a stupid comment! Apparently you cant do it with Pro/E either!! People at the site have the administrator going crazy; they have been changing the startup screen to say things like "Wild FAR" or "Just Ignore the Bugs" (with a big alien jumping out of the screen). Moral of the story? After 24 some odd revisons, they still have a long way to go. Some people have a sensless dedication to that company and its product. They were surely among the many who just sank all of their money into PTC... hey it's not CISCO Systems... so don't bother! WildFire is not ready for production! Well, if I keep this argument going I may be looking for another contract! Any need for an IC cad junkie? Hey, maybe I will just give it all up and become an IC Activist?... toilet paper the PTC building and chain myself to computers singing an IC song. Friends don't let friends use PTC products !... unless you hate them.

ABOUT TIME !!!

sorry for the late response... I will post the proe file in this thread

HMMM... I don't know of any standard catalogs..... at least none that would be true engineered parts. There are all types of 3d cad examples, not necessarily of cams and crankshafts... if you just want to have some show and tell stuff, it is easy to make your own catalogs.... go to some of the free cad data sites like 3dcafe etc.... usually you may find some engine parts someone made... I have a cam and crank from a pro-e file if you would like... let me know and I will post it tonight. No automotive manufacturers I know of would be too keen on sharing that type of data.... only option may be to get overall installation sizes and rev-engineer to get you in the ballpark... Hope this helps.

Perfect !... finally an answer... that one is a real irritation... in some cases you can zoom and move around until you get it, but this is a sure thing.

Tutorials would be very good... there are so many hidden functions in IC that go way beyond the small booklet. Almost need a "secrets" tutorial that goes in-depth into the key and button combinations.

Do you have a parallel port CD burner or anything?... any other way to backup your data?... hate to think of loosing all your work. What service packet of XP did you download?

HMMM.... so that top triangular corner is where the relief is needed?

Taken from "Machine Design" machinedesign.com Take note of the last statement. "The Features of Feature-based Modeling Feature-based modeling refers to the construction of geometries as a combination of form features. The designer specifies features in engineering terms such as holes, slots, or bosses rather than geometric terms such as circles or boxes. Features can also store nongraphic information as well. This information can be used in activities such as drafting, NC, finite-element analysis, and kinematic analysis. Furthermore, feature-based packages frequently record the geometric construction and modification sequences used in building the model. Old method: Define slot as Boolean difference between the part and space. The problem: Lengthening the part geometry turns the slot into a blind hole. Feature method: Through-hole feature understands that it must pass through the part, no matter how the part changes. " "When Designs Are Dimension Driven Dimension-driven design refers to a collection of solid-modeling capabilities that include variational, parametric, and feature based. Many solid-modeling packages today support elements of all three. Feature-based modeling has, among engineers, rapidly become the preferred method of constructing solid models. In feature-based packages, solid models are constructed from geometric features such as slots, shells, bends, drafts, rounds, and so forth. The alternative is to construct models using mathematical geometric entities such as unions of spheres, cylinders, and boxes. One advantage of features is that they provide dimensions that correctly define how the feature behaves when dimensions change. The classic example of this property is that of a hole drilled through a plate. In a feature-based modeling system, the geometry has enough embedded intelligence to know that the hole should go all the way through the plate, regardless of how thick the plate is. Thus, even if the designer decides to increase the plate thickness tenfold, the hole will still go through to the other side. In a model defined with older solid geometry schemes, the designer would have to manually lengthen the hole if the plate became thicker. Otherwise, the hole would stop within the plate. The formal way of referring to this property is to say that a feature is capable of producing many different geometric instances, depending on the dimension values that the designer spells out. The most important aspect of feature-based techniques is that they capture design intent. In the drilled hole example, the designer intended to put a hole through the plate. This intent was maintained regardless of what changes were made in the plate dimension. Another important property of feature-based modelers is the ability to let a feature reference the geometry of various models in an assembly. This referencing allows changes made in one model to propagate to other affected models. One example is where a metal housing has features that are dimensioned from other parts mounted to the frame. When these parts move or change shape, the housing updates as well. Feature-based models have been likened to a recipe approach to building solid models. Once a design has been specified, it is possible can be created in simple tables. This offers the opportunity to create generic designs. For example, adding a macro program that prompts for inputs would enable the creation of a customized solid-model assembly, complete with drawings and related data such as a bill of materials, cutter paths, and so forth. The variational approach couches the design in a mathematical model such that whenever the designer makes a change, the package recalculates the entire model. This capability makes for a flexible system and is most useful in early design stages where relationships between geometric constructions can change drastically. Variational sketching is a capability used to let designers turn 2D profiles into 3D models. Profiles typically represent cross sections of extrude

Interesting reading. http://www.design-engine.com/ http://www.design-engine.com/stories/battleofthebands.htm

I use the smart dims all the time... for anything from constraints to simple checking... 1) I am just fine with it as it is. 2) Makes sense to make things better.

Reloaded IC ... still the same... just a blank "product activation wizard" screen.

Somebody please help! I am working with IC and shut down for the day. The next day, I can't even get IC to work!.. It says that I have never registered it, and says that I have 0 of 60 days left on the trial version. This crap happens over and over again... this is the 3rd time that I am having to deal with this... re-registering something that I paid for. What is my computer doing to all my liscensing info?... Forget all about registering online.... you will just be waiting... but odly enough, It will work as long as I am connected to the internet... This is CRAP!... What needs to happen to fix this?