Add Features to an Existing Pattern?

[TheSwener]

Hi All,

First off, apologies if this has been asked before (seems likely), but I didn't see it. I'm evaluating Creo 1.0 v. Solidworks for a new drivetrain components company, so expect lots of "how do i" questions in trying to give Creo a fair chance...

Question 1: Can I add features to an existing pattern? like say I pattern a hole and then decide I want to add a chamfer. Is there a way to chamfer the originating hole and then "push" that added feature into the pattern? At the moment I see no option besides deleting the pattern... this is cake in Solidworks.

Thanks in advance!

 

[dgallup]

If your hole was created with the hole tool you can simply add the chamfer in the hole feature definition. If you revolved the hole you can simply add the chamfer in the hole sketch. If you extruded the hole then you need to add the chamfer to the lead hole and pattern the chamfer with a "reference pattern" which will follow the hole pattern.

There probably are some additional ways to do it.

----------------------------------------

The Help for this program was created in Windows Help format, which depends on a feature that isn't included in this version of Windows.

 

[mjcole]

May be possible using a Group Pattern but easiest way would be to reference pattern your object. For something like a Chamfer on hole it will make a pattern dependant on your original one so if you change instances in your original feature pattern the reference pattern of the chamfer or other feature will be created at each instance.

Things PTC needs to fix about it's patterning scheme which is left over from the Pro/E dark ages. Even CoCreate does a better job at patterns because it makes a pattern feature that can be modified as to what is getting patterned or included. Eventually when then fix things I'm betting 10years down the road it will be smooth sailing but until then it will be a wait. SolidWorks can't do Reference Patterns so Pro/E has a 1up there. SolidWorks is only really a 2.75 D program maybe I'm being Harsh but they are only interested in making as much money as possible and not in the stability of their products just look at there attempt at or failure to allow negative dims something proE has done well for years.
show_dim_sign yes

Pro/E finally got off there Ellipses can only be XY 90deg rotation problem and Make Datums at angles are no longer needed for that purpose. Pro/E IS still the king at Copy-Paste Copy-Paste Special. The only thing SolidWorks can cut paste is an Extruded Feature or Sketch reliably or at all. Their Library Features are more comical than useful.


"It's not the size of the Forum that matters, It's the Quality of the Posts"

Michael Cole
Boston, MA
CSWP, CSWI, CSWTS
Follow me on !w¡#$%
@ TrajPar - @ Shweep
= ProE = SolidWorks

 

[jvian]

dgallup is right in that you simply add the feature to the reference feature for the pattern. For me it still requires the creation of two patterns one for the hole and one for the chamfer which references the hole but if the pattern is curve or relation driven then there is a big time savings.

If your evaluating the Creo 1.0 vs Solidworks then I recommend you look at whether you want "ease of use" or "more power over your model." Having used both Solidworks and Creo (and ProE) now for 5 and 3 years respectively I am hands down sold on Creo. I will say that the learning curve was tremendous and very very frustrating but now that I understand the functionality of Creo there is no going back. The capability is amazing and the more difficult of a model I pursue the better Creo can handle it as compared to my experience with Solidworks; however, again I have never been more frustrated at times than with Creo. Be warned the documentation can be difficult to find but most of it is there.

These are just my opinions and good luck,

- J -

 

[TheSwener]

Thanks a bunch for confirming - in the past I've found reference patterns a little fussy (sometimes the option doesn't come up when I go to pattern, and I usually can't figure out why), but the majority of my experience is in WF3.0 so maybe things have improved...

J -

Interesting perspective, thanks for the input. I've been a SolidWorks user about the same length of time as you, and have maybe one year of ProE WF3 under my belt and still feel utterly lost in it. I am evaluating Creo right now and it seems about 60% caught up to SolidWorks in usability.

My biggest reason for even giving Creo a serious thought is that a good number of auto OEMs use it for their drivetrain design, so compatibility with them would be nice (and although we aren't planning to CAD more than components, I'm sure Creo would handle large assemblies better). The learning curve is very important because we are in aggressive startup mode.

I also don't know as much about Creo's supporting cast/product family. Damn near everything works with SolidWorks...

 

[dgallup]

I would suggest taking a look at Leo Green's video on Turbo patterns....

http://www.e-cognition.net/pages/TurboPattern.html

----------------------------------------

The Help for this program was created in Windows Help format, which depends on a feature that isn't included in this version of Windows.

 

[mjcole]

For Stability reasons Hands Down I''d choose ProE or CreO SolidWorks crashes more frequently from what I've seen in my 10 years of using it. SolidWorks also seems to demand way more system resources than ProE for similar tasks.

I know for a fact that the Quality Assurance teams at PTC work very hard Quality Testing the software. I worked on several QA teams doing a Co-op while studying at Boston University. I worked in the QA team for Core Modeling which tests Basic and Advanced modeling including Datum Curves and Features Sketcher and Advanced Modeling techniques like Variable Section Sweeps and Swept Blends Drafts Rounds Chamfers Shells and other Features. I worked a lot o Testing the Customize Screen and Tools Options Config.pro files.

Pro/E can be customized way better than SolidWorks and doesn't require someone to be an expert at modifying and configuring the Registry because most settings are controlled by basic text config files and other options that can be modified without users being given special Power User registry access which is required for SolidWorks. Another thing that sets Pro/E in a separate class than SolidWorks is that settings files can be loaded on the fly while in the program. In SolidWorks you still have to Exit the Program launch a Copy settings wizard and import new settings before restarting the program. Hopefully SolidWorks will learn how to write software that can be installed for any users and not Local or Full Administrators.

From a usability Standpoint SolidWorks is a lot easier for newcomers to CAD to come up to speed with. They also have really good training examples that can be accessed easily by anyone. It's way easier to learn but I learned Pro/E first and got used to steep learning curves so when I saw SolidWorks I picked it up in no time at all. PTC has improved learning resources recently and have a great interactive web based learning system with it's PTC university. I got access to these when working at a Company that did contract work for the Aerospace industry and also taught cllasses at several of their offices accross the country.

Michael

"It's not the size of the Forum that matters, It's the Quality of the Posts"

Michael Cole
Boston, MA
CSWP, CSWI, CSWTS
Follow me on !w¡#$%
@ TrajPar - @ Shweep
= ProE = SolidWorks