part management - layers

[The_Matrix]

I wanted to make a small survey (open also to those who do not use nx):
1) Do you use layers to organize your part?
2) if you do not use them, how to graphically organize the part? with what tools?
3) if you use them, do you use them massively? do you have common corporate "metodologies"?

For example I never use them. They mess up the model and often and willingly make me lose my brain in looking for those to activate/disable.
I prefer to group geometries into feature gruop and turn them on/off/select them from the model tree.

 

[SER.CAD]

I use them a lot and I find them very useful, and trouble!!! If you take them off!!!! , while I put the solid in layer 1 and I make many categories, datums, sketches, cutting surfaces, curves outside the sketcher etc..., solid support , surfaces connected with wave from the set, in this way I better control the work I do.

then I do various reference sets depending on what I want to see together, uploading alternative solutions or parts into the layers (which I know inserts ..ecc...).

I worked for companies in the motorcycle industry where there was no rule for the layers, instead other (American) car industry for every type of geometry there was the layer ( 1 solid, 2 wireframe and thread , 5 sketch , 7 mate ...etc... if I remember correctly ) checked by the final check-mate on the model.

It will be that I am accustomed so ..I would never find myself with a caty to put everything I need simply in no-show ... (or blanck to tell the nx ) ...

However I have seen so many at the work of cad .. and maybe it will be more than 10000 hours from v.18,nx2,nx5 ... but unigraphics nx is the most powerful and versatile cad that is on the market ...it is not even worth taking products mid-range between the 7000-8000euro when with 2000-3000euro more' you take home the top!!! and the speed with which you do the studies. the fact that if you want to do fast and "flight" to do tests... makes you work "sporty"...

ug nx is phenomenal ... leave it so!!! improve it but do not overwhelm it!

 

[The_Matrix]

I use them a lot and I find them very useful, and trouble!!! If you take them off!!!! , while I put the solid in layer 1 and I make many categories, datums, sketches, cutting surfaces, curves outside the sketcher etc..., solid support , surfaces connected with wave from the set, in this way I better control the work I do.

then I do various reference sets depending on what I want to see together, uploading alternative solutions or parts into the layers (which I know inserts ..ecc...).

I worked for companies in the motorcycle industry where there was no rule for the layers, instead other (American) car industry for every type of geometry there was the layer ( 1 solid, 2 wireframe and thread , 5 sketch , 7 mate ...etc... if I remember correctly ) checked by the final check-mate on the model.

It will be that I am accustomed so ..I would never find myself with a caty to put everything I need simply in no-show ... (or blanck to tell the nx ) ...

However I have seen so many at the work of cad .. and maybe it will be more than 10000 hours from v.18,nx2,nx5 ... but unigraphics nx is the most powerful and versatile cad that is on the market ...it is not even worth taking products mid-range between the 7000-8000euro when with 2000-3000euro more' you take home the top!!! and the speed with which you do the studies. the fact that if you want to do fast and "flight" to do tests... makes you work "sporty"...

ug nx is phenomenal ... leave it so!!! improve it but do not overwhelm it!

I swear I didn't pay him! !
However, as I may not agree with you.

ps. vote the poll, otherwise, love layers and then stay at 0, poor!

 

[SER.CAD]

... and I would like to add...

The layers are not old stuff...

They are, perhaps because of old conception, one of the fastest and most logical and simple ways to do things! ...

Maybe because they are "old school" computer stuff!

 

[zivago]

we use layers massively.
to identify the content we cataloguing them also inserting the appropriate decritions. the latter are very useful in case they take back old parts or if the part must be used by other operators.
Bye.

 

[The_Matrix]

zivago, ser.cad,
vote!!! is up on this page.. .

 

[IPdesign]

layer in a massive way.
if use is standardized they also optimize assembly management.
beyond obvious to the excellent reference sets etc..

so yes, I wouldn't be able to do it without

 

[beppino]

layer massively associated with category and reference set.
without the layers for me would be like having to change cad.

 

[Sagoma]

we also in the company operate in a massive way the layers... already from v17 versions had been prepared a grip that once opened a new file automatically set the color of the background and divided the various layers into specific categories that were equal to all the subsidiaries. This allowed you to find the references you were looking for when you interacted with other foreign colleagues. I have to say that I am very well and I can't help it...:3559::36_1_11:

 

[Utente NX]

I use them little. I prefer a hide, unhide or exploit the ctrl+w.
I would love not to use reference sets... which force you to create them before using the part in the environment together.
I would like the features of the part to be visible in the environment together, so that I can show and hide what I want according to the needs, as other cads do.
I am not a proponent of layers and reference sets.

 

[stef_design]

I would like the features of the part to be visible in the environment together, so that I can show and hide what I want according to the needs, as other cads do.

Excuse me, but now how do you hide the various work?

 

[matfio]

I used various methods depending on the customer or project, nx is phenomenal in managing everything you want to do so I have no suggestions in particular.
However if I have to give a working method to a company one of these is to use the layers to have a 'order of entities where everyone knows where they are.

 

[ceschi1959]

......
I prefer to group geometries into feature gruop and turn them on/off/select them from the model tree.

I also tend to use a similar method combined with the layers (visible alongside the feature in the model tree), I find the layers useful together.
Then it depends also on the client I find myself, I must necessarily follow his specifications.

 

[procatug]

I just can't imagine a part without layer and its category layer....:smile:
Many times I use a unique association 1 layer for each category layer since I often turn on/off items directly from.
hate those cads that do not allow layer cataloguing or force you to create disequations to see a layer range

 

[Utente NX]

Excuse me, but now how do you hide the various work?

of reference set...that is a priori in the part you have to decide what could be useful to see together.
then create these reference sets to be used in the environment together.
I'll give you an example:
I design a part and create plans that could be useful to place it in the environment together.
then I create a reference set with the part and plans I will use in the environment together.
then in the environment together, I realize that I also need to display a sketch to better place or design a flange.
within the part and I create this reference set.

 

[stef_design]

of reference set...that is a priori in the part you have to decide what could be useful to see together.
then create these reference sets to be used in the environment together.
I'll give you an example:
I design a part and create plans that could be useful to place it in the environment together.
then I create a reference set with the part and plans I will use in the environment together.
then in the environment together, I realize that I also need to display a sketch to better place or design a flange.
within the part and I create this reference set.

cabbage... to the face of simplicity.
1-if I understand well, I have to predict which geom entities or features to see in the environment together.
2-if they are together, to view a sketch or plan, I have to return to the part and insert them into a reference set.
Do I understand? but sorry, can't you, in the environment together "support" directly to the various parts for modeling without inserting the various entities in reference sets?

 

[beppino]

cabbage... to the face of simplicity.
1-if I understand well, I have to predict which geom entities or features to see in the environment together.
2-if they are together, to view a sketch or plan, I have to return to the part and insert them into a reference set.
Do I understand? but sorry, can't you, in the environment together "support" directly to the various parts for modeling without inserting the various entities in reference sets?

to create new reference set, just (in the environment together) go to write in the part (make work part).
In the end it is not so uncomfortable.

 

[Utente NX]

to create new reference set, just (in the environment together) go to write in the part (make work part).
In the end it is not so uncomfortable.

is not the speech make work part or display part.
a click for both one and the other and two clicks to return to the environment together either being in display part or in work part.
My clarification is that I must think it a priori reference set or if I have to create a new one only to display a sketch cabbage, I don't think it is convenient.
you are then the file is released....cases yours.....and I am talking about visualization of convenient entities, whether it is to design, to place or else.

 

[beppino]

is not the speech make work part or display part.
a click for both one and the other and two clicks to return to the environment together either being in display part or in work part.
My clarification is that I must think it a priori reference set or if I have to create a new one only to display a sketch cabbage, I don't think it is convenient.
you are then the file is released....cases yours.....and I am talking about visualization of convenient entities, whether it is to design, to place or else.

You're right about that.
you could manage everything from assembly, and especially in need, and not a priori, it would be much better, this is out of every doubt.
a beautiful thing would be to be able to activate/disactivate the display of the various layers / category, of the various components, at level together.

 

[beppino]

returning "in-tope"
we try to imagine the import of an iges file from another system, with inside many geometries on various layers.
If we didn't have them in nx, you know what a mess?