Making a part independant from fam table

[htxb]

Is there a way to make a part that was created using a family table indedpendant from that family table? We're trying notto use family tables for new parts anymore, but some of the family tables around here have been used for years and years and breaking old designers of old habits is hard...so when a new part is created I end up having to check out and verify 200 parts when all I need is 1.

 

[htxb]

I may have found my answer:
[url]http://www.mcadcentral.com/proe/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=28 956&KW=family+AND+table[/url]

If anyone knows of a different/newer/better way, please post.


Thanks!

 

[Israr]

open instance, save a copy, open this copy and delete all the rows in family table dialogue box.


Israr

 

[Dell_Boy]

Ever stop to think why THEY have been doing it for years and years but it is YOU that is having the problem.



There are many things that I model that I wouldn't even dream of NOT
using family tables in both assembly and part mode to model.





DB

 

[AHA-D]

Dell_boy,


You're right and wrong in the same time. Family tables are the fastest way to get different versions of assemblies, or different states of operation. And when you need a new drawing of a part that is in a family table then you can move forward very fast. That being said, family tables can also be a real PITA and fiddling around with a part feature can throw you into resolve mode in all assemblies and parts that happen to be anywhere related to this feature, which is like living hell.


If ProE were built differently I would certainly use far lesser family tables, because most of them tend to build relations between assemblies that could be better handled when not related. In SE I can exchange a part for another (independent, different part) in the middle of an assembly without blowing up the entire assembly. I can copy a part, give it a new name, copy the drawing, rename, and link the new drawing to the new part without ever having to use family tables or move through sneaky workarounds.


Alex

Hey, just noticed, I'm one year old in this forum !
Edited by: AHA-D

 

[htxb]

Ever stop to think why THEY have been doing it for years and years but it is YOU that is having the problem.

There are many things that I model that I wouldn't even dream of NOT using family tables in both assembly and part mode to model.


DB

Because once THEY finish modeling it THEY don't have to mess with it anymore. THEY create whatever parts and assemblies THEY want, jimmy-rig it to work, then THEY check it and never have to see it again.


It wasn't my suggestion to stop using family tables. It was our Intralink Admin's suggestion, who has been affiliated with PTC and Pro/E for years and years. I'm simply looking for the best way to follow his direction when the designers don't. I don't know what his exact reasoning was, but I'm sure it had something to do with dozens and dozens of multi-level family tables that created nothing but headaches for any and everyone that needed to work on a single part buried in those nested tables.


I'm not saying family tables aren't useful. They have their place and they really help to keep a lot of things organized and the creation of parts very easy and simple. But the use of them can be abused which can cause major headaches down the line.

 

[Dell_Boy]

Aha-D



If you have somthing that is really difficult to control inside a
family table then it probably shouldn't be in one or the family table
is too big and tries to do too much. If you are deliberately creating
external relationships inside instances then I can see you will have
problems. If you did not intend to create external relationships, then
it is either a bug or a mistake.



When modifying an instance, sometimes it is better to be in the
instance but most of the time I find it is more reliable to be in the
generic which does not have to represent any particular instance. And
for really major operations you are probably better to erase the
dependant instances and assemblies from memory.



Also research Functional and Simplify Interchange Assemblies which
makes swapping of components far more capable than what SE has to offer.



In terms of copying parts and drawings I can do that as well however I
can change dimension schemes and tolerances in the model and drawing
will update. Also when swapping instances I have no problem with MOST
of the dimensions failing to update and turning grey. Try dimensioning
lathe-turned parts with lots of internal and external features as well
as secondary machining ops such as keyways and splines and you should
see the PIG that SE detailing is.







HTXB





I think your problem is more the jimmy-rigging of instances rather than
family tables per se. Admittedly family tables take more understanding
and forethought than their base components but if they are making bad
family tables there is a good chance they are also making bad
components.



If people are abusing them, an re-education is probably in order.



Don't throw out the baby with the bath water.





DB

Edited by: Dell_Boy