This topic needs a much better title

[BONES1369]

Has anyone ever expereinced this situation:


When creating a cut I use a make datum for my sketching plane.....Then I finish the feature. In the past, proe would create a group of that feature (extrude and datum), and hide the datum automaticaly. In my most recent model I created two cuts that did exactly this but today when I create a cut it does not group them and does not hide the datum. Anyone??

 

[csusie]

are you working in 3.0.


I have noticed that it doesnt auto group features anymore in 3.0. If you are working in 2.0 I dont know I dont know what to tell you on that.

 

[BONES1369]

working in 2.0

 

[sweeks]

I noticed that samethingtodaywitha angled cut on a sq tube, and a fewmin laterpro/e booted me out (before I got it saved of course)

. When I restarted and redone that feature it grouped the datum and put it on the hidden items layer. After I read this post I tried simple cuts on several parts and noticed that 2 out of 5 did this to me. All were originally created by me in version 2001and I'm the only one who has worked on them. Today was the first time I noticed it and nobody else here as said anything about it to me (I'm cad admin.) We are using 2.0 build m130. I just assumed it was a quirk right before my crash, but since you have the same trouble and I have recreatedit as well,maybe not. Nowit's got me curious as to whats causing it.


Sweeks

 

[dougr]

Could it be DOTF is back???

Wonderful...

 

[Zaki]

I just checked it right now but its working fine, no problem at all. I didnt understand why it is not working at urside?? tell me what r u doing exactly?? tell me ur steps

 

[pjw]

I have found a way to make 'datum on the fly' for protrusions in Wildfire 2. When you're selecting your sketch plane - attempt to make a datum axis on the fly but don't actually create it, then make your datum on the fly, seletcting the plane you've just created as your sketch plane. Then, cancel out of the datum axis creaate box (it should still be open). When you've finished your feature, there will be no grouped and hidden datum plane and the make datum offset will be embedded in the feature. The other alternative is to use Legacy when creating features which need 'make datum' (although this may be restrictive in some cases). Why PTC messed about with the make datum in the first place is beyond me...





Phil

 

[rmckinley]

<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comfficeffice" />It is better to have access to all datums that are in your model. IMO, imbedded on-the-fly datums amount to buried features. They are there, bloating your model, but you cannot see them or use them. You never know whether you may need the datums you create on the fly. For example, when projecting views in a drawing, it is nice to use the actual datums that you used to define the feature.

 

[dougr]

<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comfficeffice" /><O>It is better to have access to all datums that are in your model. IMO, imbedded on-the-fly datums amount to buried features.


Aren't dimensions buried in features too??


They are there, bloating your model,


Groups don't bloat a model ???


but you cannot see them or use them.


No you cannot see them unless you're in "redefine" but you can see their result (planar sketch surface or planar "up-to" surface) and use that.


You never know whether you may need the datums you create on the fly. For example, when projecting views in a drawing, it is nice to use the actual datums that you used to define the feature.


You always have a planar face or datum-axis that can be used to project views so why do you need datum-planes ???</O>

DOTF is a veryslick way of managing datum-planes, am sure members are aware of some of my models and can testify to their complexity. You can't see DOTF's but if you're smart enough you can figure it out. I abhor the clutter of datum-planes and my models contain the minimum.



Edited by: dougr

 

[BONES1369]

I think I have found a possible cause. I failed to mention prior that I was working with a family table. Some of the make datums associated with a cut were created in an instance rather than the generic. I believe this is where the problem is. Does anyone agree?

 

[pjw]

Yes. If you make the feature in your instance, make datum will be created in your generic but will be suppressed. The feature will then fail in the generic when you resume it as you'll have missing references. You then need to resume the datum, hide it and manually group with the feature in order to end up with what you initially wanted.


Phil

 

[rmckinley]

Dougr, I suppose implementation of DOTFcan be considereda matter ofpersonal preference.


Aren't dimensions buried in features too??


Technically, a"buried feature" is geometry that is created and then completelycovered by other geometry. Thus, it is rendered useless. It adds unnecessary complexity to a model and is generally bad practice. Dimensions are part of features -- whether or not the features are buried.


Groups don't bloat a model ???


Okay, good point. But I still think they are an excellent way to manage your datums in a manner that gives you more control and a complete understanding of the model. To further illustrate your point, even more bloating probably takes place when you start using layers to control the display of the datums that you abhor. But with this bloating comes more power and control.


You always have a planar face or datum-axis that can be used to project views so why do you need datum-planes ???


That's not necessarily the case. Also, I have found that datums tend to be much more stable parents of drawing views (and other features, for that matter) than surfaces and edges. When models change, datums are reliable when it comes to projecting views -- especially when working with models as complex as I do -- and, no doubt, as complex as the models you work with, as well.


I also hate models cluttered with datums -- if they are unnecessary. If a model requires a great number of datums, then they should be managed with groups and layers. And not with that horrible "black hole" layer.


sorry about the slightlyoff-topic discussion, bones1369

 

[pjw]

I agree. Always try and set drawing views up using the 3 default planes - whether it's a prt or an assembly. You face the risk of having to redo your entire drawingif you use surfaces or edges that may become deleted or changed. Also, if you're using family table instacnes in drawings; what was used as a reference in one drawing instance may not exist when you replace the family table member in the drawing. Make datum was an excellent feature pre-Wildfire 2. I dont' like the way you have to select the group from the model tree when patterning grouped features rather than just the feature from the model tree. I was led to believe that Wildfire 3 had reverteed back to make datum. Indeed the group feature has gone but the datum plane is still in a 'group' with the feature and you still have to explicitly pick the datum from the tree when you want to edit. I can 't understand why PTC can't just make the embedded 'make datum' datum become active again once the feature is redefined. It obviously exists in the feature so why not make it redefinable with the feature?


Phil

 

[BONES1369]

Thank you PJW

<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comfficeffice" /><O>It is better to have access to all datums that are in your model. IMO, imbedded on-the-fly datums amount to buried features.


I am not sure I understand what you mean here.Are thedatums that I create on the fly not accessable?


They are there, bloating your model, but you cannot see them or use them.


I am not sure were on the same page here either. I do not want to see the datums, that was the whole point of creating a datum on the fly, in order to get a dimension to show up, and not clutter the 3d view, or have to worry about layers.


You never know whether you may need the datums you create on the fly. For example, when projecting views in a drawing, it is nice to use the actual datums that you used to define the feature.


Please clarify. I am able to reference my views using on the fly datums. In the model, go to view, orientation, reorient. When selecting references get them from the model tree, under the grouped feature. Then save the view. When inthe drawing you can then just select the saved view. </O>

?????

 

[rmckinley]

I am not sure I understand what you mean here.Are thedatums that I create on the fly not accessable?


Bones, before wildfire, on-the-fly datums were created as an imbeddedpart of the current feature. Now, in wildfire, they are created as separate features and then automatically grouped and hidden in the model tree. I was just trying to point out that with imbedded datums, you have datums that are only accessible within the definition of the feature -- but with the wildfire method, you have access to the datums from outside the feature definition.


I am not sure were on the same page here either. I do not want to see the datums, that was the whole point of creating a datum on the fly, in order to get a dimension to show up, and not clutter the 3d view, or have to worry about layers.


I usually control the display of my datums using layers (and I keep this easy to manage by using a systematic naming scheme). This way, when I don't want to see the datums, I turn off the layer. And when I need them, I turn them on. If I need to edit the child feature, I just select its groupfrom the model tree and all of the dimensions of it and its parent datums are shown. You may advocateimbedded datums (DOTF)if you feel that layer management is too tedious or time-consuming. Butyou could find yourself re-creating datums that already exist imbeddedwithin features inyour model -- especially if your model is complex. And this can cause headaches when the model is revised.


Please clarify. I am able to reference my views using on the fly datums. In the model, go to view, orientation, reorient. When selecting references get them from the model tree, under the grouped feature. Then save the view. When inthe drawing you can then just select the saved view.


This illustrates my point. Before wildfire, this was not possible. You are selecting datums that were "autogrouped" by wildfire - not actual DOTF datums. In pre-wildfire, you would not have had access to those datums and wouldhave had to create new (read duplicate)datums to orient your view. The group would not exist -- nor would the datums. Just the cut or protrusion feature.


What pjw suggestsmay be agood idea:


"I can 't understand why PTC can't just make the embedded 'make datum' datum become active again once the feature is redefined. It obviously exists in the feature so why not make it redefinable with the feature?"


But how would this work?


Hope this clarifies things a little for you, Bones.

 

[Hacks]

Check this out folks...straight from the horses mouth...a pretty
comprehensive summary on DOTF Pre-WF, WF 1 and 2 and now, WF 3.


[url]http://www.imakenews.com/ptcexpress/e_article000541757.cfm?x =b6TTSNm[/url]

 

[rmckinley]

What pjw suggestsmay be agood idea:


"I can 't understand why PTC can't just make the embedded 'make datum' datum become active again once the feature is redefined. It obviously exists in the feature so why not make it redefinable with the feature?"


But how would this work?


Check this out folks...straight from the horses mouth...a pretty
comprehensive summary on DOTF Pre-WF, WF 1 and 2 and now, WF 3.


[url]http://www.imakenews.com/ptcexpress/e_article000541757.cfm?x =b6TTSNm[/url]


Thanks, Hacks! It sounds like wf3 actually does exactly whatpjw issuggesting. It harmoniously blends the functionality some of usneed and the tidiness others of us want. Now I'm ready for an upgrade!

 

[dougr]

This is a thread all the way back to 2003 about DOTF:


http://www.mcadcentral.com/proe/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=23 976&PN=5


"However, Gohil says the best solution is not to restore the Make Datum function but to come up with a new technique that makes parts easier to position without causing confusion."


Is this the same Mr Gohil in:


http://www.imakenews.com/ptcexpress/e_article000541757.cfm?x =b6TTSNm


If so this is a 180 degabout turn!!!!! Congratulations PTC on hiring a Pro - it took a "big" person to do this..


I'm encouraged, so encouraged I'll accept "embedded datum" instead of the term DOTF....


"Embedded datum" will transform Wildfire from a Buick into a Ferrari..


Up to 2001 I had two gripes about DOTF:

1. 
   <LI>General lack of understanding of DOTF (sorry "embedded datum") even amongst (or especially amongst) PTC AEs. With the "embedded datum" push this seems to have been turned around.
   <LI>DOTF did not work correctly with datum_axis/2 planes and the resultant planes were always visible in the model tree..</LI>

As a point of reference, I have a model of a Rolls-Royce Merlin.


Model consists of about 575 features. In thefeature list/model treethere are only4 datum-planes listed and 3 of those are "start part" features.


My "make datum" count is 131 (in 2001)- this would be 131 "auto groups" in"bile matter"- what a ball ache!!!!!


This model is done in 2001, I believe the "auto grouping" in Wildfire 1 thru 2would have been too much to contend with...


Congrats to PTC - not sure who they listened to but they sure listened....

PS:


"I can 't understand why PTC can't just make the embedded 'make datum' datum become active again once the feature is redefined. It obviously exists in the feature so why not make it redefinable with the feature?"


DOTFalways has been redefinable up to misfire 1...


My Merlin:
View attachment 2306


And not a single"auto group" in sight....


2006-05-23_223658_merlin.zip
Now I wish could afford to upgrade to the real "Wildfire"....
Edited by: dougr

 

[dougr]

What pjw suggestsmay be agood idea:


"I can 't understand why PTC can't just make the embedded 'make datum' datum become active again once the feature is redefined. It obviously exists in the feature so why not make it redefinable with the feature?"


But how would this work?


Check this out folks...straight from the horses mouth...a pretty
comprehensive summary on DOTF Pre-WF, WF 1 and 2 and now, WF 3.


[url]http://www.imakenews.com/ptcexpress/e_article000541757.cfm?x =b6TTSNm[/url]


Thanks, Hacks! It sounds like wf3 actually does exactly whatpjw issuggesting. It harmoniously blends the functionality some of usneed and the tidiness others of us want. Now I'm ready for an upgrade!

A hammer from Home Depot - what a crappy anology...


DOTF is more like internal structure - like frames in an airplane fuselage or ship's hull or building steelwork - can't be seen but you know it's there and necessary...

 

[donha]

God, this is such an old rant. I partly read the changes coming in WF3 and wondered what is wrong with WF2? WF2 was better than previous versions to me. Is it because we have had so many whiney people complaining?

In viewing the article Mr. Gohil talks about the benefit of creating an asynchronous datums without having to leave the screen. In 2001, I did not have to leave the screen and most commands had the "Make Datum" command available, if not, I just chose the "Datum" Icon from the menu. A huge obtrusive selection box did not appear that I had to half move off the screen so I could choose the make datum or my geometry. Other selection boxes did not appear and get hidden because I chose the wrong option (the selection box somehow becomes non-selected). I did not get confused during feature creation and mistakenly make the datum out of the feature as I sometimes now do. I applaud being able to re-use existing datums including any datum features. A big step forward.
If the group node disappears, how do I know which feature they were created in besides choosing every feature I think they might be in? Someone in WF3 can tell me if this is better, from what I read it is not.
Given the WF3 scenario, taking Dougr's case, 500+ features, I might have to choose 300+ features to find what I am looking for? On the positive side, if people named the features, what we were looking for would be easier to find. Mr. Gohil does not tell me wether the Model Tree has the option to turn on nodes (groups).

Perhaps I am complaining about something (the windows always being in foreground) is available as a config.pro option? I think I would prefer working with allowing all windows to be in the background and the window you choose to be in forground. Right now in WF2 some windows go to background and others do not.
7 beers now and my vision is definately clouded

Edited by: donha