Bobo75
Guest
I've tried to search here on the forum, but I didn't find an answer, or better, I don't know if the thing I'm going to do with catia is correct.
I have two parts that are first assembled in production and then processed.
this with the previous cad would have meant creating a set, duplicating an identical child and doing the processing of the case and saving it with the new code.
I can't do this here. I have seen that there are features of together (size, hole, pocket, add and remove) that would do exactly to my case, but unfortunately I go to change the standard part and that I do not want it because that the processing does not have it.
I tried to make a multi body part but does not create the distinct components in dft so discarded.
I then came to the conclusion that I have to create a "finta" part without code (because in fact this does not exist, in which I cover with connection my raw piece to work, I do the processing of the case and insert it into the product.
It is not what really happens but in theory so it should work.
Can you tell me if it's the correct procedure or if there's any alternative that obviously ignore?
Thank you.
I have two parts that are first assembled in production and then processed.
this with the previous cad would have meant creating a set, duplicating an identical child and doing the processing of the case and saving it with the new code.
I can't do this here. I have seen that there are features of together (size, hole, pocket, add and remove) that would do exactly to my case, but unfortunately I go to change the standard part and that I do not want it because that the processing does not have it.
I tried to make a multi body part but does not create the distinct components in dft so discarded.
I then came to the conclusion that I have to create a "finta" part without code (because in fact this does not exist, in which I cover with connection my raw piece to work, I do the processing of the case and insert it into the product.
It is not what really happens but in theory so it should work.
Can you tell me if it's the correct procedure or if there's any alternative that obviously ignore?
Thank you.