Skeleton Modeling
Skeleton Modeling
(OP)
Hello Everyone,
Can someone post a link or a good guide for skeleton modeling in CATIA ?
Thanks.
Can someone post a link or a good guide for skeleton modeling in CATIA ?
Thanks.
Warm regards,
Akhtar Aziz





RE: Skeleton Modeling
RE: Skeleton Modeling
Since this is the newest thread on skeleton subject, I'll ask my question here..
Is it valid solution to make subskeleton part for subassembly that is component and not product?
Standard version:
1. Main Product:
What I would like to do and I'm not sure if this is valid solution:
1. Main Product:
I'm asking this because in second example I have 2 skeleton parts saved in "Main product" and I don't know if there are any cons for that.
RE: Skeleton Modeling
or
And for parameter defined in subassembly skeleton
or
or
Thnx
Hope somebody reads this
RE: Skeleton Modeling
Links between files are going one way A --> B or B --> A but never A <--> B
in fact the A <--> B need is why we bring C as : A <-- C --> B
In general I would avoid #2 and #3 as this create unused links which use CPU/memory for nothing.
so #1, #4 and #5 is left, that could find an answer with "Who owns the information" if you have a team working with your skeleton, maybe skeleton assembly owner owns the information, or maybe it is owned by sub-assembly 2 team.
You also have to bring into the equation the other link, like I said before it goes only A --> B not A <--> B. so if you already have some link going down from top level down to sub product 2, then #4 and #5 is not working.
So option #1 seems the best, but what if you have parameter A owned by team 2 and parameter Z owned by team 1?
then maybe you need to bring a new part team 1 and a new part team 2 in the top product, at same level as sub product 1 and sub product 2. So you can have top product parameters in main product, part team1, and part team2 sharing respective parameters and sub product 1 and sub product 2 getting info from top level product, or top level parts.
Would that do?
I have some skeleton as your #4 but this is because I do not have any link going down from top level to sub level 2. I prefer #4 and not #5 as it is easier for me to see/manage/control the flow, I did not really try #5.
indocti discant et ament meminisse periti
RE: Skeleton Modeling
for single user skeleton I have the feeling component could be used (to be tested) but for team usage skeleton, products is the way to go as ownership might be different for main product and sub product...
indocti discant et ament meminisse periti
RE: Skeleton Modeling
#6
What if the person who is working with "P_1 skeleton.part" (Main product skeleton) needs data from sp_4 skeleton? Is the yellow link in #7 allowed?
#7
RE: Skeleton Modeling
parameter B and C should start from top level part, for each owner you should have a top level part (some could be manage within the main root product)
indocti discant et ament meminisse periti
RE: Skeleton Modeling
it looks nice but because of the need to synch or create new parameter I would prefer the solution bellow
indocti discant et ament meminisse periti
RE: Skeleton Modeling
Let's say that master GREEN is the owner of parameter "A" and parameter "C". ORANGE is the owner off parameter "B". For the definition of value "B", ORANGE needs (in some aspect) value of parameter "A". He gets this with link GREEN --> ORANGE. Master GREEN on the other hand needs parameter "B" for creation of parameter "C". Does this mean that "A" and "C" can not be created in same file? This would also mean that master GREEN has to have two skeleton parts at same level as "sub product 1" and "sub product 2"(directly under root product)?
RE: Skeleton Modeling
Who said skeleton methodology was easy to put in place?
indocti discant et ament meminisse periti