[Moderazione]but what does a product configurator have to do with editing the model quotas from drawing? Can we stay there please? that then already this double-click on the drawing quotas had started as an ot, which I accepted as always interesting.[/Moderazione]
yes, even in mass form without pdm.
center because it was written that the model was a simple plate, the product configurators are made complex assemblies, also managed by mating rules and interferences, condition variables, etc.
You stole my words. But I just wanted to write: "modifying an airbus 380 starting from a table 2d is an insult to reason."
You're the one who makes the wife watch movies... :biggrin:
Product configurator? and what loop now has to do with the product configurator.
It's always interesting to see these things, but a product configurator non is a bidirectional change from the table. We say they're not even relatives, and I don't think I'm so wrong.
let us make this phrase the interpreter not as it appears but in this way: You don't have time to explain this to us otherwise you would.Let's not understand, huh? ?Product configurator? and what loop now has to do with the product configurator.
You showed a change of the part from the table. in that context (not of the simple plate) i.e. what I said, that the changes are potentially dangerous, not because the model fails, but because the modification in turn generates unexpected or unwilling in the assemblies and any evaluations you make when looking at the regenerated table. It doesn't rain on that.
That's why you work first in 3d then you make the boards. to me it never happened to have to make a change to the model during the putting on the table because in creating the 2d view I realized that something was changed and that I had escaped in 3d.
It doesn't rain on that.
It's always interesting to see these things, but a product configurator non is a bidirectional change from the table. We say they're not even relatives, and I don't think I'm so wrong.
... be careful that I embroider your family jewelry with crochet the big one.If you don't understand, I'll explain again: the product configurator does not have to do with the bidirectional modification!
about not understanding (or not reading what you write... :wink
look that it is exactly what I wrote in my first post. for the modification of that plate caxxo, understood as the modification of a simple and independent model, there is no problme to edit the quota everywhere. If that plate is inside an auatomatic machine of 10,000 parts maybe it is better to open some together and make the change from there.I have a couple of wrought iron panties that your crochet makes me 'na pippa. :smile:you and that other allergic to constraints, go to celebrate Christmas and do not break the palms, which I have changed trade and I have a lot of embroidery to do
I will be cautiously, you see that you have not had to deal with a product configurator.:tongue:
and who has ever talked about machine of 10,000 components? I did the example on that plate because the topic is focused on usability and it seems to me that it was even easier to editate it from the table without even opening the model, less click. you of swx should know well.:biggrin:
Then you'll show me, huh? ih ih- I see that to quote in 2d losing references and remittance quotas every time is more beautiful...ih ih (example of moving hole), continue to quote manually losing references, you will be fine that we are under birth and are better also I otherwise were birds for diabetics.
Yes, but what's the difficulty of opening a 500 kb model, in the face of the risk that the particularist-stagist completely breaks my assembling?
the risk of deputation is equal, so the change you must always do it no? so if there is something wrong that you change it in 3d or in 2d nothing changes, to yes.. The slave intern doesn't see the songs you've done if he's inhibited by the change and he can't even fuck you.. can only ask you to change the asap model 3d so it can put the right share and if you are not there? If you're in the toilet? Wait... and stick to the snitch! :smile: or second hypothesis (I have seen a tide do so...) force the system, the plate 200x100 makes it become 180x80 with an eye changing the values (even in creo you can do), so it can go ahead, then when you come you put the values in 3d, this is the iter...
The stagist is lazy and so if he finds something wrong (but he doesn't find it) he goes to something else, the problem is that if while he's putting a sign of processing he gets a samantha chat and then, believing he clicks on "likes", instead he shows up the quota and then they are pains! :biggrin::biggrin:
ahahah you are worse than a dealer! and it is a compliment!:biggrin:
continue to mix different situations: one is the simple, single part, modified on the table, the other is the simple part belonging to a complex set modified on the table
I don't mix anything, you're the one who confuses!:biggrin: the example was on the simple part (as a video) but it wasn't good, you pulled out the Assyrians and I simply told you that even on the Assyrians there can be considerable advantages, on the product configurators you could put there your secretary who knows nothing technical design, make them change the table and your axes for magic they regenerate all, to me But what do you want to know about knives and helical excavations? :smile:
There is one thing that you do not understand
... the big assemblies manage them with the skeleton, and how important odds are commanded by the skeleton your monocellular peculiarist can strain as much as he wants, the changes will never make them, neither from the table nor the model ... :biggrin:I attack here, go too fast, and I can't stand there.
also the d25 bearing that goes on a d25 tree which then for a click of too much and typing error becomes d24 you manage it on the skeleton?? ? :biggrin:There is one thing that you do not understand