Suppressing component features
Suppressing component features
(OP)
I'm looking to have multiple instances of a component with suppresion of some features in some instances. I've done this in solidworks. Not sure in NX. Starting to read docs on Arrangements. Am I in right direction?
Thanks
Thanks
Ray S
NX 7.0.1.9
www.appliedprecisionproducts.com





RE: Suppressing component features
Ray S
NX 7.0.1.9
www.appliedprecisionproducts.com
RE: Suppressing component features
Best Regards
Hudson
www.jamb.com.au
Nil Desperandum illegitimi non carborundum
RE: Suppressing component features
What I'm after is in fact elegance or best practice. This is something I do often so I'd like it to involve as few moves as possible. It is not a situation where I'm going to need to suppress and unsuppress at will. To provide some context, this is for manufacturing and I am trying to adhere to the master model approach(without it being to cumbersome). When I add the finished part to my mfg. file, I often need another instance with certain features suppressed to represent the part before machining. I've tried creating duplicate .prts and suppressing what I need with one, but that seems labor intensive, as does the wavelinking/timestamping. The latter also requires write access to the component file (for suppression), which is not something machinists generally have, which lead me to think there must be another way.
The funny thing is, when I'm in solidworks, I spend a good deal of time cursing the lack of functionality I have in NX.
But in this (limited) instance, the SW solution seems easier: You have access to a feature tree for each instance within the assy file.
Ray S
NX 7.0.1.9
www.appliedprecisionproducts.com
RE: Suppressing component features
It sounds like for your needs wave links would typically be among the most frequently used techniques, some people use promotions more often for weldments, and a recent posts discussed for holes in assemblies NX-5 up support Hole Series.
http://www
If however you are working with castings then it is quite usual to design the casting and the machined final product in two stages. That is probably the only area where I'd really refer to any single method as best practice.
Most other times I'd seek to avoid anything that requires the model to change to support the machining method as opposed to straightforward design feasibility. We'd typically write lock released designs before they're sent for machining and wouldn't want to have to unlock them to convenience cutter path creation if we could avoid it.
Other than that whatever NX supports as standard that works for you probably ought to be used and to be usable, after all you paid for a capable system that has built in flexibility. Making too many rules for yourself might just turn "best practice" into lowest common denominator to your detriment.
Best Regards
Hudson
www.jamb.com.au
Nil Desperandum illegitimi non carborundum
RE: Suppressing component features
Best regards
Simon NX4.0.4.2 MP10 - TCEng 9.1.3.6.c - (NX6.0.3.6 MP2 native)
www.jcb.com
Life shouldn't be measured by the number of breaths you take, but by the number of times when it's taken away...