pattern table dimensions

Is there any way I can change a pattern table so the dimensions come from a different face? Please don't sayt have to delete it, and all the ref patterns, and start again!

Reply to
dakeb
Loading thread data ...

: "dakeb" wrote : Is there any way I can change a pattern table so the dimensions come from a : different face? Please don't sayt have to delete it, and all the ref : patterns, and start again! : A 'different' face! How different? A parallel face would still use the same datum references for pattern locations and just switch the starting face of the lead pattern reference. I don't think the table would be involved or would care, if you could get the lead element rerouted. But rerouting the start surface AND two datum references could be an awful lot trickier, possibly causing funny relationships with red/yellow (positive/negative) sides of datums which means your numbers could get flipped off the part. Sounds like it could get hairy enough that you'd end up wishing you'd started from scratch. But maybe rerouting the first feature of the reference pattern will work okay, always hard to predict with Proe.

David Janes

Reply to
David Janes

I want to dimension from the lhs instead of the rhs, whilst keeping the bottom face and placement plane as is. Basically I'm asking proe to recalculate the dimensions in the pattern table to the values they would be if taken from the lhs, and then reference the first feature from the lhs.

I tried reroutiong the first feature to the lhs, and this worked, but then my pattern kept the correct orientation and appeared outside the model to the lhs. So I changed the dimension of the lead feature to negative. This placed the pattern inside the model, but mirrored it, not an effect I want as the pattern is assymetrical.

I don't think it can be done.

Reply to
dakeb

: "dakeb" wrote : > "David Janes" wrote : > : "dakeb" wrote : > : Is there any way I can change a pattern table so the dimensions come : from a : > : different face? Please don't sayt have to delete it, and all the ref : > : patterns, and start again! : > : : > A 'different' face! How different? A parallel face would still use the : same datum : > references for pattern locations and just switch the starting face of the : lead : > pattern reference. I don't think the table would be involved or would : care, if you : > could get the lead element rerouted. But rerouting the start surface AND : two datum : > references could be an awful lot trickier, possibly causing funny : relationships : > with red/yellow (positive/negative) sides of datums which means your : numbers could : > get flipped off the part. Sounds like it could get hairy enough that you'd : end up : > wishing you'd started from scratch. But maybe rerouting the first feature : of the : > reference pattern will work okay, always hard to predict with Proe. : >

: : I want to dimension from the lhs instead of the rhs, whilst keeping the : bottom face and placement plane as is. Basically I'm asking proe to : recalculate the dimensions in the pattern table to the values they would be : if taken from the lhs, and then reference the first feature from the lhs. : Well, yes and no. On a ten cm block, your eight holes measured from the left reference are Cartesian plus for the first feature and plus for the pattern increment. From the right, assuming plus/minus (red/yellow) sides of datum are the same, your positive numbers just moved to the right of the datum (or off the part). Maybe if you just redefined the new datum on the right of the part so that positive pointed into the part instead of away from it, you wouldn't have to positive numbers negative.

The problem then becomes that the feature at 1cm now becomes 9cm. So, to pattern in a rightward direction with the reference to the right, the pattern increment needs to be negative so that incrementing moves rightward or lower, from 9 down to

  1. There will be no mirroring in that case. Don't know if the table can be made to reflect this, but, if this were a linear pattern, the above would accomplish what you want (and possibly make its way into a table).

David Janes

Reply to
David Janes

The first feature is an axis referencing a placement plane and two edges. A Proe limitation of axis redefinition means I cannot redefine the first feature to reference two planes instead of two edges. This means I don't have red and yellow sides of the reference planes. So I guess I'm snookered.

Reply to
dakeb

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.