| Author |
Message |
Guest
|
Posted:
Mon Sep 12, 2005 8:10 pm Post subject:
Simplified Reps Filtered by Rule |
|
|
I have a LARGE assembly (1000<)and I am trying to create a simplified
representation of it. I have the part names that I wish to add into
the simp rep and I have been having trouble getting the By Rule tab in
simp reps window to work. What is the syntax? More importantly, how
can I indicate a part name and then create a simp rep of that part (all
instances of it). I really dont want to click on every part to
include/exclued it if possible. Thanks! Pro/E Wildfire M180
-Timothy
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Jeff Howard
Guest
|
Posted:
Mon Sep 12, 2005 8:10 pm Post subject:
Re: Simplified Reps Filtered by Rule |
|
|
| Quote: | .. use Find to select the parts ...
|
Not relevant to "rules", but...
Which "Find" tool are you trying to use; Model Tree [Tree / Find] or
[Edit / Find, <CTRL+F>]?
I think you'll want to use the latter. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Guest
|
Posted:
Mon Sep 12, 2005 8:10 pm Post subject:
Re: Simplified Reps Filtered by Rule |
|
|
Is there a way to search for multiple parts at one time in the find
feature of Pro/E?
I have found that i can open up a simp rep, redefine it and use Find to
select the parts that I want Included/Excluded which solves my question
above. Now i want to know the syntax for finding mulitple parts with
the Find function. i.e. want to find PartA and PartB ive tried
Name--> Is equal to ---> PartA, PartB
PartA AND PartB,
PartA OR PartB,
PartA & PartB,
None of these seemed to work
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Guest
|
Posted:
Tue Sep 13, 2005 12:10 am Post subject:
Re: Simplified Reps Filtered by Rule |
|
|
edit/find is the find function used. I have found the query function
within the find function but I still have to perform alot of cutting
and pasting from my parts database into the query. I hoping to be able
to generate a string i.e. PartA & PartB....&PartAAA that i could just
paste into the find prompt... is there a level or programming language
in Pro/E were you can actually program macros a-la VB script in excel? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Jeff Howard
Guest
|
Posted:
Tue Sep 13, 2005 12:10 am Post subject:
Re: Simplified Reps Filtered by Rule |
|
|
mmmm ... maybe someone that really knows something can help with that.
I
Build Query,
in "Value" type AN3* (you can use wildcards),
click Add New (accept "or"),
type the first few characters of some other name identifier,
click the drop down arrow and scroll for the particular item,
Add New,
etc. ...
I don't know how the real guys might go about it, have only recently gotten
familiar with the Find function myself (and found it to be pretty quick once you
get the hang of it).
One of a kind (one or two instances) I'll <ctrl> pick in the graphics screen or
model tree on another pass, Menu: View / Representation / Exclude. Update the
rep.
Flushing excluded entities from memory now and than will speed up the process if
things are doggin.
HTH a bit til something better comes along. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Guest
|
Posted:
Wed Sep 14, 2005 4:10 pm Post subject:
Re: Simplified Reps Filtered by Rule |
|
|
Thanks! Yup I have been using the wildcard in the build query
function. Pro/e was definately lagging around with all of those
excluded entities and crashing with memory errors as often as it could.
thanks for the tip. Is there a better software for working with large
assemblies... say over 3000 small parts? Of course I could split up
what Im working on but still to do that, i need to open the large
assembly. Catia? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Jeff Howard
Guest
|
Posted:
Wed Sep 14, 2005 8:10 pm Post subject:
Re: Simplified Reps Filtered by Rule |
|
|
I'm not the guy to ask, but since ... `;^) ... neither of us have anything
better to do...
I don't have the background or scope to know, but I'd guess that for working on
a PC that Pro/E is about as good as it gets for working large data sets,
especially if you are talking about working with a "foundation" type package in
the $5K US price range.
What sort of hardware are you working with? 3000 parts (and I imagine your
talking "instances"?) doesn't qualify for "large" (all things being relative). |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
|
|