geometric group arranged

[stef_design]

hi, recently I started using the geometric groups sorted in when reading the catia guide wrote:
i geometric groups allow you to collect various features in the same series or secondary series. the order of such features is not indicative as access to them and display is managed independently and without specific rules. however flexible, this structure does not fit the design process.

in a geometric group ordered, the order of appearance of the features in the logical tree of the specifications is congruent with the operations of creation of the project.
Unlike features with a geometric group, the features of an ordered geometric group can be set as currents: a specific project creation operation is selected and it is not possible to view or access what is placed after it.I have seen that they are not used so much, why?
I find them very useful in the modeling of surfaces because, as happens for solids, you can fit into any point of the tree and insert new features.
with geometric 'traditional' groups this is not because the modeling takes place in succession.
I find them useful to insert elements 2d (plans, tips, scraps) or imported geometries.

Hi.

 

[Vittorio]

Hi.
I think you're referring to hybrid modeling?
during the caty courses I did not recommend using hybrid modeling... instead I realized that I am better and therefore for years I use it because it allows me to insert the surfaces in any point of the tree with the command "define work object". .
I have a story in the tree, which has a logic with my 3d model creation. Otherwise the surfaces were inserted into the "geometric group" container and I always had to use.. "fathers and children" to understand.
actually.. also reading some steps in the help line.. recommend hybrid modeling.

Perhaps most use this system because by default catia uses "non hybrid" modeling?

Let me know if we have dealt with the same subject
Hi.

 

[stef_design]

Hi.
I think you're referring to hybrid modeling?

hi, no I refer to the 'normal' modeling with the possibility of inserting 'ordered geometric groups'. In this way the modeling of surfaces, according to me, is congruent with the creation of the project.
instead I use the geometric groups 'stardard' as 'containers' where to insert elements 2d or isolated/copyed surfaces.

turning to the known forum but the ordered groups are used little.
How come?

Hi.

 

[stef_design]

hi guys, as you see from the attached image, with the geometric group ordered If I want to insert a curve before the sup.multisection I can do it.
I also have the convenience of using the function 'define in the object of work'so to see the modeling to that point.

with the geometric group the modeling is step-by-step and so the curve I insert goes to finish at the end of the tree. I can also not use the 'definite in object' function

you do not find them comfortable geometric groups sorted, why are they unused?
Hi.

 

[alpole]

Hello, stef.
I fully agree with you, I find them very useful, and certainly more flexible
as regards construction traceability
try also to see how flexible the reorganization of
feature, changing position, in the tree determine
changes in the result. . .
Moreover, in the ordered geometric group you can
also insert the body-
I tried to use them also with power copy and
the repetition of the body within the group
ordered is remarkable-
to the