layers reuse library items using grip/journal

[swale74]

Could we use a grip or journal program to automatically adjust the master files of family parts (nuts and bolts) in the reuse library to adjust to curves/sketches to layer 101 and csys to layer 200? This is our company standard and currently the sketches are on layer 22 and csys are on layer 62. I'd do this manually but there are about 100,000 parts to be corrected. How would you batch run this?

We are running NX6.0 some of us are 32 bit on windows xp and some of us are on 64 bit windows 7 pcs.

 

[JohnRBaker]

Since these parts are components which will NEVER be edited since they are automatically created as READ ONLY (and you have NO control over this) there is no reason whatsoever that I can possible yhink off for wishing to change the layer content for parts which will never be anything but what they are, nuts & bolts. It would be like going to the company who manufactures the actual nuts & bolts that you're going to use to assembly your products and asking them to make sure that they produced only on a Tuesday or Thursday. In other words, what difference does it make? Any effort expended on this would be a waste of time.

John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Engineering Software
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Industry Sector
Cypress, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:

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

 

[swale74]

Depending on the components and the state (raw/machined) our solids end up on layers 1-90. The sketches of the nuts and bolts and csys end up on our prints and require cleanup. I thought the layer change would be a better method of correcting this.

 

[cowski]

The best fix for your problem is to use the master method for your drawings and use reference sets to filter out unwanted geometry.

www.nxjournaling.com

 

[swale74]

http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=321607

This is an extension of the question I asked here. John told me I would have to modify the master templates. I'm not looking at fixing the parts currently in drawings. I wanted to modify at the library level. We are using the master model method but reference sets can be a pain in the a$$.

 

[cowski]

If you are using the master model approach, then you are already using reference sets whether you like them or not. Best to learn how to make good use of them. Remove the unwanted geometry from your "model" reference set, or create a new one that only has the geometry of interest.

Reference sets are a great help if you learn how to use them. They are not difficult. The best practice recommendation is to only use them in part files to filter geometry, do not use them in assembly files to filter components (use arrangements for that instead).

www.nxjournaling.com

 

[JohnRBaker]

If he's actually using parts inserted into an assembly from the Reuse Library, like nuts & bolts, then the family members are 'read only' and they CANNOT BE CHANGED!!!!! Therefore, if you try and change the content of a Reference Set you'd never be able save the changes.

John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Engineering Software
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Industry Sector
Cypress, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:

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

 

[cowski]

the family members are 'read only' and they CANNOT BE CHANGED!!!!!

Even better - in the assembly file, simply change the component's reference set from "entire part" to "model" and you are done.

www.nxjournaling.com

 

[swale74]

That is how simple it is Cowski. The issue was the nuts are in a subassembly and in that subassembly the reference set is "entire part" for what ever reason. The way we were told to use the reference sets is to start at the base part working through the sub assemblies right up to the final assemblies and match all the reference sets. Some where along the way things would get screwed up. No more assembly reference sets for me. Thanks again.

 

[cowski]

Here's a thread explaining reference sets and assemblies: thread561-307788

Here's another, longer thread with the same basic info but contains some more explanation and questions from other users: thread561-282506

www.nxjournaling.com

 

[JohnRBaker]

The Reference Set of an individual Piece part Component, even those within a Sub-Assembly, should be set to 'Model', while the Sub-Assembly part Component should be set to 'Entire Part'.

John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Engineering Software
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Industry Sector
Cypress, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:

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

 

[swale74]

Thanks for the info. I've a background in I-deas and like the modeling features of NX but still having difficulty with the drafting portion. I was told to stay away from arrangements which is all I-deas had.

 

[JohnRBaker]

Why and by whom were you told to stay away from Arrangements?

John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Engineering Software
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Industry Sector
Cypress, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:

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

 

[swale74]

A colleague in from another division (European). We have switched from I-deas to NX and the other division has been using NX for 10 years. We had some training from one of these fellas and at the European division the standard is to use reference sets for raw and machined states in parts as well as raw and machined assemblies. It is the assemblies we are struggling with, especially several assemblies down stream. I'll let the others know to forget reference sets in assemblies. Thanks

NX 6.0.5.3 in Windows 7
Mechanical designer

 

[JohnRBaker]

In a rough analogy, Arrangements are to Assemblies what Reference Sets are to piece parte. Not a prefect analogy, but one that will serve most people's needs.

If your sister company (in Europe) has been using UG/NX for 10 years or so then it's quite possible that they were using it BEFORE we had implemented Arrangements, which BTW were modeled after 'Configurations' in I-deas and were implemented as part of the effort to provide equivalent functionality in NX both in terms of providing common functions as well as supporting the conversion of, in this case, I-deas assemblies which had utilized 'Configurations'. Prior to Arrangements, which were first introduced with NX 2.0 (2003) but not fully implemented until NX 3.0 (2004), many people attempted to use Reference Sets to control the content and positioning of components in sub-assemblies, but this was never what Reference Sets were intended for, so when the opportunity came along to implement Arrangements we didn't hesitate. Note that we had a similar solution under consideration at the time of the SDRC acquisition, but once we looked at Configurations in I-deas we decided to scrape our yet-to-be-developed approach and instead concentrated on implementing a 'Configuration' equivalent in NX and thus was born 'Arrangements' (the name change was due to TeamCenter having already coopted the term 'Configurations' for something else, so as to avoid confusion...).

Anyway, Arrangements are a key capabilities when it comes to defining alternative positioning and content of sub-assemblies which are used in multiple higher level assemblies.

John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Engineering Software
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Industry Sector
Cypress, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:

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