sub-assistances in separate base

[erlele]

Hello, everyone. .
I took a look around and I feel like I didn't find a compelling argument for this kind of problem, namely:

I have a product with parts and sub-assiemi, I reorder my tree well, I generate a numbering and finally get on drawing my distinct base, I observe that all parts are numbered correctly, but:

1- subaxis are not numbered
2- the parts inside the sub-assiemi are numbered consistently with those that are directly under the product, but the quantities are not added between them!!!

Besides, there is no pro-e style mode to decode which sub-axis are to be numbered and what to see only as containers?

I hope I've explained well.... .

thanks to all in advance......

 

[ferrezio]

no subaxioms are not numbered unless you create a partner.
the details are all numbered unless through the property panel indicate which parts do not remove the check on "view parts in separate base" in the product panel.

Hi.

 

[erlele]

ok, this I managed to do it without problems, but remains the serious problem that at quantity level does not sum the same parts contained in different sub-axis.... the numbering attributes it correctly, that is the same number for the same part, but the quantities counts them separately for each sub-axieme

However I had heard around that there is a software apposite (I always think dassoult) able to control these anomalies of the distinct base.... but maybe I remember badly......

Hi.
Thank you.

 

[mastro.alle]

If I don't understand what you need, you should solve it like this:
- in the product environment go into analysis - distinct base
- click on define formats
- change the "recapulation properties".
at this point in the generation of the drawing table will appear 2 tables, a sub-axis uniform and one with the summary that sums the equal parts present in different assemblies.

 

[erlele]

ok, you are perfectly right, but in truth what would serve me is a mix of the two results, that is, in the distinct subdivided for below assiemi these are not numbered, in the distinct of the summary are not even displayed, the ideal would be to have the same function of pro-and for which in a set you can choose which sub-assiemi consider only as containers of parts and which instead consider as single objects from number,
I'm understanding that with catia there's no way out of this problem!

thanks the same
Hi.

 

[ferrezio]

ok, you are perfectly right, but in truth what would serve me is a mix of the two results, that is, in the distinct subdivided for below assiemi these are not numbered, in the distinct of the summary are not even displayed, the ideal would be to have the same function of pro-and for which in a set you can choose which sub-assiemi consider only as containers of parts and which instead consider as single objects from number,
I'm understanding that with catia there's no way out of this problem!

thanks the same
Hi.

I have already responded to you by talking about the associated part.
I don't know if you've ever seen the multi body modeling of catia (it would match the individual parts of proe), while if you create a product file is a file where there are a series of parts (the proe container).
Now it can derive the single part from a set through the "association" command, so you can insert this derived file into a secondary set and see it as part (typical example of a welded).

Hi.

 

[erlele]

Okay, I'm sorry, but I didn't catch the term "associated part", I thought you'd convert the assemblies into parts with the command "genera catpart da catproduct".
I am looking for the "association" command, I have never used this function....

 

[ferrezio]

Okay, I'm sorry, but I didn't catch the term "associated part", I thought you'd convert the assemblies into parts with the command "genera catpart da catproduct".
I am looking for the "association" command, I have never used this function....

no need at all to apologize, however the command finds it in the assembly feature menu bar

Hi.

 

[bandy]

Excuse me, if I didn't want the recapitulation?

 

[ferrezio]

Excuse me, if I didn't want the recapitulation?

explain yourself better.

Hi.

 

[bandy]

Bye. I also asked another question about the advanced distinction.
I would like to understand why if I have a set with under-axioms, in the separate table there will numera me also the children of under-axioms (what inutule and strange). Moreover it is possible to eliminate the recapitulation of the codes that it proposes after the separate?

 

[bandy]

Bye. I also asked another question about the advanced distinction.
I would like to understand why if I have a set with under-axioms, in the separate table there will numera me also the children of under-axioms (what inutule and strange). Moreover it is possible to eliminate the recapitulation of the codes that it proposes after the separate?

 

[ferrezio]

Bye. I also asked another question about the advanced distinction.
I would like to understand why if I have a set with under-axioms, in the separate table there will numera me also the children of under-axioms (what inutule and strange). Moreover it is possible to eliminate the recapitulation of the codes that it proposes after the separate?

see the answer herehttp://www.cad3d.it/forum1/showthread.php?39790-distinta-base-avanzata&p=339661#post339661

ciao