Extracting Features to make a New Part

[vc66]

Hi All-

SW08 SP 5.0

One of my colleagues has created a weldment as a part with many different features constituting the individual parts. He now wants to extract one or two of the features to make a new part. Can this be done? If so, how?

Thanks in advance.

V

 

[TheTick]

Copy the weldment, remove whatever isn't a specific part.

Repeat as needed.

 

[vc66]

Tick-

Thanks for the response. I figured he could go that route, but all the features seem to be dependent on each other, so if he removes some of them, it's going to be a nightmare trying to shore up the remaining sketches.

I was hoping there was an easier, more cut-and-dry way of doing it, i.e. click this, this, and this, and you're done.


V

 

[dgowans]

There's always the complete hack method - add features at the end of the tree that cut away material that isn't needed. Now that I've said that, I'm heading off behind the woodshed to flog myself for suggesting something so colossally stupid...

Alternatively, your colleague can try to copy and paste features and sketches into an empty part and use them to recreate the subset of the weldment that constitutes a single part. This could turn out to be a piece of cake or a total nightmare, depending on the relationships between current features of the weldment.

 

[NL8]

Expand the cutlist in the weldment, find the structural member you want to be a separate part, right-click, choose "Insert into new part..."

The system will create a dervied part linked to the weldment so that it is seperate, can be detailed all on its own, but will still parametrically update based on changes in the weldment.

Joe Hasik,
CSWP/SMTL/MTLS
SW 09 x64, SP 4.1
Dell T3400
Intel Core2 Quad
Q6700 2.66 GHz
3.93 GB RAM
NVIDIA Quadro FX 4600

 

[CorBlimeyLimey]

In the Cut List, select the unwanted body, and hit the Delete key. This will create a Body-Delete feature at the bottom of the tree and will not affect preceding components.

Or you could re-constrain the orphaned members created via the method suggested by [/b]TheTick[/b]. Although it involves more work, that would be the more stable method.

 

[TheTick]

Thanks, CBL. It isn't often that Tick's name is assocoated with stability.

 

[vc66]

Thanks, guys.

I like Dekker's solution, and will tell my colleague to use that; however, thanks for all the alternative solutions.

Always good to have a few in the back pocket.

Thanks again.

V