create assembly group

[mtvonno]

it would be useful to create groups (subgroups) of parts within the assembly... selecting 2-3-4-n parts in the model tree and creating a group from there, without having to be forced to create it first as a "real" subgroup. Hi.

 

[ceschi1959]

it would be useful to create groups (subgroups) of parts within the assembly... selecting 2-3-4-n parts in the model tree and creating a group from there, without having to be forced to create it first as a "real" subgroup. Hi.

You need a license with the advanced assembly.

Hi.

 

[mtvonno]

I don't believe it! For such nonsense you must have an advanced license? with pro/e-cree and these functions were basic... even a fem application was inserted... I hope that siemens will change political licenses even because if I were the great boss I would not acquire it and I would turn myself on other software. I am not considering the strengths of the program, I recognize it, that then I do not even know what they are

 

[The_Matrix]

I don't believe it! For such nonsense you must have an advanced license? with pro/e-cree and these functions were basic... even a fem application was inserted... I hope that siemens will change political licenses even because if I were the great boss I would not acquire it and I would turn myself on other software. I am not considering the strengths of the program, I recognize it, that then I do not even know what they are

but that you're in disrespects on nx if you don't even know what strengths are.
a cad choose it because it has a function in a separate package or in the basic module?
For example, we brought all clearance functions into the assembly, removing them from the advanced... the same for lightweights.

returning to topic, I ask you a question: but this "group" you want to create, selecting the 2/3/4 components, should be a node of assembly or a separate hierarchy?

ps. I ask you a question about creo/proe: can you change the structure of a assembly, bringing a component from one subassembly to another if this component has mating conditions and ties?

 

[supertramp]

I don't understand the meaning of certain complaints, they're useless and indisputate those who read. However, if I had to work with such a poor software as nx and knowing pro-and I would change software to the company. I would not look for a way to bypass the inconvenience type that I can create a part to copy and paste components that interest me inside directly from the tree. Good luck:wink:

 

[The_Matrix]

I don't want you to make things easier. :tongue:
you can also select 2-3-4 components and drag them into another sub-assembly, so you don't have to do ctrl/c - ctrl/v.
4 keys saved: in these times of crisis helps.
You can also make a new relative created if the group is a level above one of the components.
or you can create the assembly using the multibody and then the dad go to create the children directly.

ps. from nx9 forward the license of advanced assembly has become "sticky" so if you can take 1 that who needs it can use and then release.
content is the usual:
- advanced weight management
- linked exterior
- alternative hierarchichy (group components)
- areas
nx advanced assemblies extends the toolset for building, editing, and evaluating assembly models. it is especially useful for users working with large assemblies, but it also improves the productivity of most users who work regularly in an assembly context.
component filtering techniques allow the user to quickly identify and load the components of relevance to their current task, avoiding unnecessary delays and screen clutter caused by loading irrelevant components.
the module also provides extra flexibility in the use of faceted representations to further improve the performance and memory efficiency of loading large assemblies. assembly enveloping techniques enable the user to represent major subassemblies as simplified abstractions to further reduce assembly load times and avoid the display of unwanted or proprietary interior detail.
the sophisticated clearance analysis and weight management tools provided in advanced assemblies are also optimized for the analysis of very large assemblies, enabling users to keep a close eye on potential problems with fit, clearance and mass properties.
this module will remain attached to the user session until manually released

 

[Utente NX]

it would be useful to create groups (subgroups) of parts within the assembly... selecting 2-3-4-n parts in the model tree and creating a group from there, without having to be forced to create it first as a "real" subgroup. Hi.

what you ask is not possible.
subgroups you ask must be physical, in the sense that the subgroup must generate a file.
what you have suggested are groupings, filters, with an advanced license, which you do not see in the assembly navigator, but in an area of the assembly navigator called component group.

What's missing is:
1) create subgroups in the environment together as casket, solidworks and wildfire
2) move components to subgroups without losing couplings

 

[mtvonno]

Relax! It's just software.

 

[The_Matrix]

what you ask is not possible.
subgroups you ask must be physical, in the sense that the subgroup must generate a file.
what you have suggested are groupings, filters, with an advanced license, which you do not see in the assembly navigator, but in an area of the assembly navigator called component group.

What's missing is:
1) create subgroups in the environment together as casket, solidworks and wildfire
2) move components to subgroups without losing couplings

I didn't understand.
Maybe it's about the question I asked before?returning to topic, I ask you a question: but this "group" you want to create, selecting the 2/3/4 components, should it be a node of assembly or a separate hierarchy?point 2) I think it is only inventor (correct me possibly) . nx can do it, but it adds wave links to preserve mating geometries.
- - - updated - - - -

Relax! It's just software.

we like to discuss. . . .
It's always an increase.
and when you discuss with passion... :finger:

 

[Utente NX]

beppe,
I answer points 1 and 2.
1) I buy a hydraulic cylinder, which as you can imagine is a set. for me it is only one code or item if you want it to English.
in catia, solidworks and wildfire, I can generate a set that is only one file and within it there are all components.
clearly the assembly file does not weigh some kb, but it will weigh according to the amount of components and modeling of each individual component. It's still a combination with all the features of the axieme.
There is no such thing.

2) if at the first level of a set I have the screw coupled to the washer and the washer to the nut and I want to move them to a sub-group, I lose the constraints.
in other cad, see solidworks, this does not happen, not because there are relations fathers and son as in solidworks has monolevel couplings as in nx.

 

[The_Matrix]

beppe,
I answer points 1 and 2.
1) I buy a hydraulic cylinder, which as you can imagine is a set. for me it is only one code or item if you want it to English.
in catia, solidworks and wildfire, I can generate a set that is only one file and within it there are all components.
clearly the assembly file does not weigh some kb, but it will weigh according to the amount of components and modeling of each individual component. It's still a combination with all the features of the axieme.
There is no such thing.

2) if at the first level of a set I have the screw coupled to the washer and the washer to the nut and I want to move them to a sub-group, I lose the constraints.
in other cad, see solidworks, this does not happen, not because there are relations fathers and son as in solidworks has monolevel couplings as in nx.

1) Sorry, I don't understand. but if in nx copy all solids in the file of the assembly is not the same thing? you have only one file that contains the geometry of your hydraulic cylinder.
Maybe I miss something.
2) in nx lose matings. from what I knew, I catch and I create them anyway. The only cad I knew didn't lose them was inventor. obviously swx from what you say.

 

[Utente NX]

1) Sorry, I don't understand. but if in nx copy all solids in the file of the assembly is not the same thing? you have only one file that contains the geometry of your hydraulic cylinder.
Maybe I miss something.
2) in nx lose matings. from what I knew, I catch and I create them anyway. The only cad I knew didn't lose them was inventor. obviously swx from what you say.

1) if you cover solids, the axieme is not really a set but a multibody part. I want a set with couplings that allow me to move the stem, the fittings, etc.
2) when there were mating conditions, this was possible, it is also true that the old mating conditions were a great mess.

 

[The_Matrix]

1) if you cover solids, the axieme is not really a set but a multibody part. I want a set with couplings that allow me to move the stem, the fittings, etc.
2) when there were mating conditions, this was possible, it is also true that the old mating conditions were a great mess.

1) ah ok... I understand... I feel dumb. :frown: they are like "fittizi" components.
2) Yes, with the mc you could... That's what I remember. on the other cads, I thought it could only be inventor. told me a client who is going nx that inv does not store ties in the assembly, but in the pieces parts.

 

[ceschi1959]

Sorry, but I miss something:

groups serve not to have a file together but only a container where to put some components with particular characteristics, I find it very useful when you want, for example, to have a group containing plastic or titanium details.

there is still the override position command with which I can couple the components 'outside the subassieme'; typical case, remembered by user nx that of the subassieme piston rod.

 

[Max-C]

beppe,
2) if at the first level of a set I have the screw coupled to the washer and the washer to the nut and I want to move them to a sub-group, I lose the constraints.
in other cad, see solidworks, this does not happen, not because there are relations fathers and son as in solidworks has monolevel couplings as in nx.

in solidworks when you create a subaxieme directly within a set depends that you have couplings.
if they are all coupled with parts that will go into the subaxieme then (when we open the assieme son) will be all bound.
vice versa, if you also have only one component (we call it x) that is bound to a part that will not be part of the subaxieme then we will have all the parts bound in the assieme father. when we go to open the assieme filgio, however, that part "x" will not have couplings (in fact when creating a subaxieme of this type sw returns a message of warning).

 

[Utente NX]

in solidworks when you create a subaxieme directly within a set depends that you have couplings.
if they are all coupled with parts that will go into the subaxieme then (when we open the assieme son) will be all bound.
vice versa, if you also have only one component (we call it x) that is bound to a part that will not be part of the subaxieme then we will have all the parts bound in the assieme father. when we go to open the assieme filgio, however, that part "x" will not have couplings (in fact when creating a subaxieme of this type sw returns a message of warning).

If you read what I wrote, that's what you bring back.

 

[Utente NX]

Sorry, but I miss something:

groups serve not to have a file together but only a container where to put some components with particular characteristics, I find it very useful when you want, for example, to have a group containing plastic or titanium details.

there is still the override position command with which I can couple the components 'outside the subassieme'; typical case, remembered by user nx that of the subassieme piston rod.

1) Override positions has the function of bringing the degrees of freedom of the subgroup to the same level.
what I don't like about this function, which you don't immediately understand which component you put in override position, in case you want to disable this function, despite all the degrees of subgroup freedom go to the top level.
I would love, as happens in other cads, that the icon of that subgroup changed, so as to visually guess.
I would also like to do so on the subgroup and not on the component, also because the result is the same

2) this feature of having subgroups that behave as a whole, but that reside in toto within the same is a convenient but not fundamental functionality

3) what I feel missing, always according to the subject, is the possibility of revising the structure of the assembling without losing the constraints, this shocks me very much.

 

[ceschi1959]

what I don't like about this function, which you don't immediately understand which component you put in override position

I agree, it's a little intuitive! You have to go and suppress the conflict. However the constraints are represented with a different icon.

I would also like to do so on the subgroup and not on the component, also because the result is the same

to me instead would like the opposite, that is that only the component you put in override would 'swink' from the subaxieme. the question perhaps of different needs.