Continue to Site

Welcome to MCAD Central

Join our MCAD Central community forums, the largest resource for MCAD (Mechanical Computer-Aided Design) professionals, including files, forums, jobs, articles, calendar, and more.

Register Log in

Grouping

V

verge

New member
Simple one. I'm trying to group a number of assemblies, and I have one assembly that doesn't want to become part of a group. It's fine to be an individual, but there's a time and place for everything!


What are some of the possible reasons that an assembly will reject being grouped with others?
 
Perhaps it is a clash of the TITANS.
smiley36.gif



Anyway could you please tell us why you wish to group assemblies...? I have grouped features but assemblies never. I make an assembly of the same.


Just curious to know. Perhaps I am missing something.
 
To respond to Srinivasan, I'm simply grouping them to make my model tree a bit easier to comprehend. I'm building a very large assembly which will be used as a "standard" that we can manipulate and use for other jobs in the future, therefore I want to make it easy for the next engineer to understand. Right now, for example, I'm trying to group electrical components and conduit runs under the heading "electrical". Unfortunately, my AC distribution panel doesn't want to cooperate.


Sanjeev and Kev, valiant efforts. The surprise answer to the dilemma, though, was restart the computer. Not restart Pro-E, mind you, but restart the computer.


I love modern technology
smiley19.gif
smiley5.gif
smiley2.gif
. I don't want to know the reason behind the solution. I really don't.


Thanks, everyone......
 
verge,
I dont like grouping. If one member fails, the the whole group fails and you are in trouble.
I prefer using a CS which I give a descriptive name as marker between different chapters of my assemblies.
Cant you use assemblies and subassemblies to structure your electric components ? With AAX and published references this could be an alternative. Otherwise you could place your components to datum planes of your electrical assembly and get an assembly which will require some work but will be stable.
Just a thought
ReinhardN
 
All of the electrical components are tied in to other components within the enclosure: power sources, distribution panel, fuel tank switches, lights, timers, etc. These components need to be able to move around at the engineer's discretion. I'm not sure if it's feasible for me to make an assembly out of these electrical parts because of this.


Of course, I know nothing about AAX or published references. The last time I published references was when I distributed my resume
smiley36.gif
. I will have to ponder this assembly idea a bit...it would take quite a bit of rework.


I was thinking that the quote "If one member fails, then the whole group fails and you are in trouble." Reminds me of a President I know...
smiley2.gif
.
 
It seems like you could use yourown argument against your suggestion of creating subassemblies - if one member fails, the whole 'subassembly' fails.


Often, the reason for Grouping vs. Subassemblies is to keep a flat BOM. I just wish ProE offered a cleaner way to find what group a particular component/feature belonged to. At least in 2001, in order to see what component/feature you've selectedfrom the graphics window, you have to expand the groups in the model tree.


<tg>
 
I am using simplified reps with this project. That's another aspect of making it user-friendly. The grouping is, as I've said, just another way to keep the model tree easy toweed through. I'm developing a very large assembly that will be used as astandard for others to manipulate for custom jobs. All of the others are even newer to Pro-E than I am.


Sometimes things are done for one's own ease, sometimes for that of others.
smiley1.gif
 
I am using layers also. I guess the difficult part of the whole thing is that I'm trying to anticipate the easiest way to present this assembly to new Pro-E users.


I find the whole layer system in ProE to be very non-intuitive. Unigraphics has it over Pro-E with the layering system. They built so much extra junk into Pro-E's layer system - even after playing around with it a lot I still don't understand what half of the default layers represent. Know of any good info on that?


A simple example: what is the real difference between "ASM_ALL_DTM_PLN" and "ASM_DEF_DTM_PLN"? Good luck finding the answer in Pro-E help! Good luck finding the answer by playing around with it!
smiley11.gif



This brings up some good questions. Am I best off deleting all or most of Pro-E's default layers and just starting from the ground up? Right now this assembly has over 100 layers, half of which came from an imported model. Most of the rest are some funky default layers that I never touch.


I'm used to UG, where every new datum, feature or part is immediately placed on a layer of the user's choice. This certainly makes it a lot easier to remember!
 
verge said:
A simple example: what is the real difference between "ASM_ALL_DTM_PLN" and "ASM_DEF_DTM_PLN"? Good luck finding the answer in Pro-E help! Good luck finding the answer by playing around with it!
smiley11.gif



This brings up some good questions. Am I best off deleting all or most of Pro-E's default layers and just starting from the ground up? Right now this assembly has over 100 layers, half of which came from an imported model. Most of the rest are some funky default layers that I never touch.


I'm used to UG, where every new datum, feature or part is immediately placed on a layer of the user's choice. This certainly makes it a lot easier to remember!
Click to expand...


Verge,


ASM_DEF_DTM_PLNare the default datum planes associated withthe assembly (ie first three in the model tree)


ASM_ALL_DTM_PLNare all other datum planes associated with the assembly (ie the ones you create yourself)


Layers that are associated with import geometry, best solution is to attach them to a layer (usually I choose the part layer for that part) manually (ie RMBon the layer that you want to put then into and choose Layer Properties. Then pick all the datums on screen and ProE should add them to the list in the pop-up box (usually top right, WF1). Hit OK


Kev
 
Kev, you should have told me that months ago
smiley36.gif
. I've had it in my head that 'DEF' means "defined". No wonder I couldn't figure it out!


I think I'm going to have to do a major overhaul on these layers. Better tack another week onto this project
smiley2.gif
.


Frankly, I've been lazy about layers. Pro-E makes it all too easy to blow off layers entirely! I went through and cleaned them up right before I imported an entire genset (practically big enough to explode my computer) and ripped out as much of the data as I could get away with. Now I have a whole other mess on my hands!


I'd like to thank Srini for bringing this up and making my day that much more exciting. Thanks, Srini, I owe you one!
smiley36.gif
 
Is there any way to take about 50 layers and jam 'em all into one? Thanks to an hour spent in Pro-E help, I haven't even come close to figuring this out...
smiley7.gif



Don't see me use that one often, eh? Heck, I'll use it again, I'm not scared -
smiley7.gif
.


Hey, that made me feel better -
smiley7.gif
smiley7.gif
smiley7.gif
smiley7.gif
smiley7.gif
smiley7.gif
smiley7.gif
smiley7.gif



Wow, that's catharsis...
 
I remember that thread, Kev. I went about organizing my layer structure for this project directly afterwards. Then I imported a genset from a supplier and had to rip out a ton of data to make it usable. Now I have a mess on my hands. I think I'll post another thread about layers. I definitely need some help on this.


Thanks again everyone...feel free to join the new thread!
 
One more option for organizing a large assembly would be an external simplified rep. I have not needed to used these, but I understand that they can be used as if they are a seperate assembly, but the top leve willhave a flat bom.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Sponsor

Articles From 3DCAD World

Back
Top