I would like to share info with creo I don't have any other sw in the company, I have specially opened the discussion in the creo environment ... have I wrong?discussion should be treated under forum "mechanical design" e non su creo.
hi, I quote in 3d for simplicity; I insert tolerances or annotations. I do it to simplify my work later when the production boards are needed. at the moment 3d annotations do not replace the tables because in production they still serve. However, it speeds up the execution because as soon as you whip the view you already have the odds and annotations turned on.Does anyone have or is it going to leave the tables in favor of the quotation of model 3d?
perfect... but do you insert annotations or "light" the odds you used in the creation of features?hi, I quote in 3d for simplicity; I insert tolerances or annotations. I do it to simplify my work later when the production boards are needed. at the moment 3d annotations do not replace the tables because in production they still serve. However, it speeds up the execution because as soon as you whip the view you already have the odds and annotations turned on.
both things... if I have the features I turn on the modeling quotas first. If it's not enough, I'll have to add new ones that will have a [bleep] word.perfect... but do you insert annotations or "light" the odds you used in the creation of features?
but if I give you a 3d for example in step242 format with all semantic information related to surface tolerances and roughness... why do you need the table?at the corporate level, the abandonment of 2d drawings is very broad as an argument, not all entities are able to abandon the diesgnities (see for example acceptance materials, quality, testing etc.); Each body should be equipped with computers/tablets linked to a single database managed (pdm), with adequate size monitors (so space required) and especially protected adequately (which is not always easy).
in a company where I worked, the paper was reduced internally to 5-10% of the total (standard industrial machines), but the external suppliers, however, required drawing 2d.
great here I wanted to arrive ... if I already listed the features (not the imported ones) I do not add annotation feature that would be a "duplicate" of the quotas inserted in the sketch ...both things... if I have the features I turn on the modeling quotas first. If it's not enough, I'll have to add new ones that will have a [bleep] word.
not always are available modeling quotas because you may have imported geometries, external copy geometry etc... in this case if you already know that you will not have to change the piece does not make sense to remake the modeling from scratch. so for me it is faster to quote in 3d geometry.
It is not a cultural issue, but because of the simple fact that design, construction and verification quotas, rarely coincide, on the 3d add them all can be heavy, also there is extra information (sealing pairs, operating instructions, special tools to use etc.) that on a 2d find plenty of space, on the 3d much less and this even if then the 2d view it and just without printing it.but if I give you a 3d for example in step242 format with all semantic information related to surface tolerances and roughness... why do you need the table?
I understand the habit even cultural if you want ..and maybe not all have work centers able to read 3d objects
what is present on the 2d cannot be reported on a 3d? having in the company also windchill in practice all that is not graphic is thrown into the wtpart (various notes,material,treatments ..)the "problem" is that a mechanical design has developed over the decades to be a rare example of compactness and completeness difficult to beat. for this I would recommend, for now, to use the 3d annotations only in the drawings that have few information, so I would exclude construction drawings and focus on the drawings use and maintenance, assembly or other.
Good morning calacc is just what!! Enough paper, but already we turn little, but above all it is enough 2d!saving time is definitely because there would be no more drw to create, so manage, store etc... But today it would be minimal if we compared it with the lack that there would be no more to have them.
However, I imagine it a day when in a company the manager stood up from the bed and said from today we don't draw anymore! We do that we work without paper, only with tablets and files. a revolution dictated by an unprecedented radical choice. Let's just stop smoking. . .
Cool: