modeling part wf4 - separate extrusions

[Alberto.E]

Bye to all,
I wanted to ask the most experienced, if there is a way to keep separate two extrusions (or any other solid feature) within a part despite the same intersect or come into contact and then perform a boolean operation. the question that may appear strange arises after seeing the method of construction of a particularly complex solid executed in solidworks. who knows both pro-e and solidworks perhaps is able to understand better in concept.
Thank you.

tree

 

[Trotto@81]

I understand what you mean, but I'm not an expert. :biggrin:
as far as the two parts know are always distinct, even if they intersect, you can check it by selecting the two parts in the model tree.
in any case, wait for someone who is more competent.

 

[Parametric_Ozzy]

Bye to all,
I wanted to ask the most experienced, if there is a way to keep separate two extrusions (or any other solid feature) within a part despite the same intersect or come into contact and then perform a boolean operation. the question that may appear strange arises after seeing the method of construction of a particularly complex solid executed in solidworks. who knows both pro-e and solidworks perhaps is able to understand better in concept.
Thank you.

tree

hi aberto,

pro/e-creo does not support multibody, so one part-one solid!
If you want to simulate the same thing you have only one way in part mode and that is to run it or turn it into a surface, then you can simulate a boolean operation.
otherwise (but you have to pass together) you assemble one part and the other you can remove it without passing through the surface.
That's all. ;-)
greetings

 

[Alberto.E]

Thank you, I was hoping for a

multibody_support yes

to be added to the config.pro

Thanks again

tree

 

[Parametric_Ozzy]

Thank you, I was hoping for a

multibody_support yes

to be added to the config.pro

Thanks again

tree

It doesn't exist. ;-)
I do not see this great utility in this case, if you have to do a simple boolean, it came to mind that you could also create a fdu.

 

[zimmy]

for those who have the aax module there is the union/heritage function that is ideal for these things and it turns out to be definitely better for me than the multibody technique. more versatile and effective

 

[Alberto.E]

Stop everyone. too much information comes to me.
@ ozzy: please explain this fdu. However I do not have to do a simple boolean but many complicated Boolean

@ zimmy: aax what form is it? I get new.

 

[Mauri:66]

hi aberto,
For comfort, I think I can understand your dilemma by passing from soldworks to proe, I have lived it and now it also touches catia :biggrin:.
They are basically two different methods of approach to modeling which however do not imply restrictions on the creation of a part either a simple cube rather than a steering box or other particular considered complex. if you have no particular application, the sw multibody forget it at least that you do not want to operate with blocks of surfaces and then then apply the respective boolean. may be that it appears unintuitive proe at first but then you will see that the beast is much more docile than expected.:smile:
the important factor in the modeling of a particular complex is the logic of process with which the particular is created, giving precedence to certain features of construction and leaving ultimately unformed and radiated as far as possible.
good work:finger:

 

[Parametric_Ozzy]

Stop everyone. too much information comes to me.
@ ozzy: please explain this fdu. However I do not have to do a simple boolean but many complicated Boolean

@ zimmy: aax what form is it? I get new.

fdu feature defined by user, you can think of recreating one or more cutting tools by taking them from a warehouse, but I think it's not your case, if you've never used them let it go.
aax is the module for advanced assemblies, which in its interior has functions of copying geometry and inheritance from other models without passing from assemblies, the inheritance function is very used for the process : crude-semifinite-finished, in essence you can start from common x roughs or x semi-finished, when updating they go automatically to update even semi-finished or finished as a result, if you have your own model extension
but everything depends whether you have it or not..

hi aberto,
For comfort, I think I can understand your dilemma by passing from soldworks to proe, I have lived it and now it also touches catia :biggrin:.
They are basically two different methods of approach to modeling which however do not imply restrictions on the creation of a part either a simple cube rather than a steering box or other particular considered complex. if you have no particular application, the sw multibody forget it at least that you do not want to operate with blocks of surfaces and then then apply the respective boolean. may be that it appears unintuitive proe at first but then you will see that the beast is much more docile than expected.:smile:
the important factor in the modeling of a particular complex is the logic of process with which the particular is created, giving precedence to certain features of construction and leaving ultimately unformed and radiated as far as possible.
good work:finger:

You can see who did ad hoc courses...

 

[Mauri:66]

courses and various handcuffs... :biggrin:

 

[Parametric_Ozzy]

courses and various handcuffs... :biggrin:

That always takes!

 

[Alberto.E]

thanks to all suggestions. In fact I had already begun to work with the surfaces using avalanches of intersection, size, solidification. I don't come from solidworks but I just saw the same detail I'm creating modeled in solidworks and I wanted to understand if pro-and hid some little secret somewhere, but apparently it's not a matter of secrets but of right approach to modeling. Don't worry, I'm always convinced that pro/e is one of the most advanced cads and I will never abandon it.