Instance feature and move object problem?

[Tomerl]

Hello,
First of all I apologize, as I am not a native English speaker. I hope you’ll understand my question.
In the attached part created in NX7.5.3.3, there is an instance feature that works on a feature that was moved with Move object feature. The Created instance feature, ignores the “move object”, and creates the instance in the wrong place. After consulting with GTAC, they explained that the root of the problem is the “move object”, as work around GTAC suggested to create the move feature non associative, and to apply “move parents” on.
Is there a way for the instance feature to create the instance, while not ignoring the move object, giving associative move object?
I’ve tried to assign expression to the move object feature while creating it, hoping that although it is not associative, it will retain association with the expression – it does not work.
Any suggestions will be appreciated.

Thank you

Tomer

 

[JohnRBaker]

Please tell me that you are NOT using Extrude/Move Object/Subtract/Rectangular Array as a way of creating a pair of Holes in a Block! Because if so, you have bigger ploblems than the behavior of Move Object and Instance Array.

John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Design Solutions
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Industry Sector
Cypress, CA

http://www.siemens.com/plm

http://www.plmworld.org/museum/

To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.

 

[Tomerl]

I'll be the first one to admit, that this DEMO part is not the preferred way to create holes. The only reason I posted it, is that that I wanted to post the simplest part possible, following the KISS principle "keep it simple and stupid". You can replace the extrude that makes the hole with a complicated solid body, the issue will remain.

 

[JohnRBaker]

But until we see something closer to what it is that you're attempting to create as well as an explanation as to why you're taking the approach that you are, I'm afraid that there is little that we can do in the way of helping you.

John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Design Solutions
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Industry Sector
Cypress, CA

http://www.siemens.com/plm

http://www.plmworld.org/museum/

To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.

 

[Tomerl]

I'm involved in a Data Exchange project from CATIA V5 to NX. In CATIA V5 this is a relatively common practice.
GTAC opens ER for this issue.
Thank you for your time and effort.

 

[JohnRBaker]

One thing that you will soon learn with NX is that there are "10 ways to do everything". Looking to reproduce exactly how another system does something is generally a waste of time since NX probably already provides a way to do what you're looking for if you just stop and think about it and perhaps ask someone who knows how NX works. So if you can supply not only the WHY, but also the WHAT of what it is that you're trying to do, it's very likely that someone will be able to help you, and you will NOT have to wait until an ER is implemented.

So please, if you can provide more information about WHAT it is that you've doing, with sufficient detail so that we can see what you're really trying to accomplish, there's a good chance that a solution will be found.

John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Design Solutions
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Industry Sector
Cypress, CA

http://www.siemens.com/plm

http://www.plmworld.org/museum/

To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.

 

[Tomerl]

To make a long story short, here is what we are doing:
The project I’m working on is a software project. Its goal is to read CATIA V5 parts/assemblies/drawing and using NX Open API create “identical” parts in NX, or in other words “feature base exchange from CATIA V5 to NX”. A 100% success (Identical parts) is not possible, but if the software will do decent work and will be able to convert 80%-90% of the features, and will report where it did not succeed, it will significantly reduce the manual convert time.
It is the automated process of converting that follows the CATIA V5 design technique I created in the demo part.
I’m fully aware that there are "10 ways to do everything" in NX, and this is exactly the reason I posted my problem here.
Going back into my original demo, it appears I simplified it a bit too much, in CATIA V5, the tool body of the subtract operation was a linked body feature, alas I did not have the “source part” so I created a body (non parametric feature). I’ve notice that if I’ll create a broken link feature instead of non parametric body, NX will not ignore the move object feature, and my problem will be solved.
I’m writing the code for it, and hopefully it will work.
Thank you

 

[JohnRBaker]

One thing that you should be aware of (and I'm surprised that GTAC took your IR without mentioning this). In the next version of NX we are completely replacing the 'Instance Feature' function with a totally new set of 'Patterning' functions. The old functions will be removed, at least the interactive dialogs will be, and while it is possible that the NX Open routines will be supported for some time, any new customer applications should be planned based on the new functionality.

John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Design Solutions
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Industry Sector
Cypress, CA

http://www.siemens.com/plm

http://www.plmworld.org/museum/

To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.

 

[Tomerl]

But GTAC did mentioned NX8, I just didn't mentioned it before, from GTAC : In NX8, where pattern feature has replaced instance feature, selecting the move object feature for a pattern results in the following message:
Move Object(20) is not supported and will be ignored.
‘Instanced Body (18)’ can be selected for pattern feature in NX8 and the result is the same as in NX7.5 with instance feature. The ‘Instanced Body (18)’ feature is located at its original position.

I have experience with GTAC and technical support of other cads, and I’m giving GTAC A+. They are knowledgeable quick and very helpful.

 

[capnhook]

How can both ways be the preferred technique?

Proud Member of the Reality-Based Community..