Nuts & Bolts interfere?

Now in reality they don´t... but in Pro/E they do.

In complex assemblies this makes the calculation
of global interference quite useless - lots of them,
always, so that a real one can easily be missed.

I wonder if - perhaps in WFx - Pro/E will ever let go
the bad habit of handling threads as "cosmetics" only.

Or do you WF1 and WF2 users still see interference
between nuts and bolts and their respective threads?
Any possibility of marking these as nonsense?

Just curious.

Walther

 

I've seen one major way of handling this apparent interference, a way that I
consider a kludge: the bolt libraries have an undercut in the area of the thread
to make this diameter smaller than the hole tap drill size.

Still, isn't the actual problem that you raise about the "normal" working of a
global interference check? Why doesn't it see threaded hole contiguous with
threaded fastener = ignore interference in that area? Must be Pro/GOOFY, the
internal joke module of Pro/E, only in this case it can't even tell it's kidding
itself. It takes the joke seriously. Not very sophisticated, huh? Time for Pro/e
to grow up!?!

 

I´ve been using this kind of simple´n´dirty workaround long enough,
but when drawings are handed out for machining things must be accurate.
Then it´s about time to undo all the patches.

Almost incredible that no one noticed that issue in eleven years.
Sigh.

<rant mode>
The "joy of engineering" (as some customer has put it) has become
manyfold through efforts of programmers coding CAD systems who are
neither pros nor engineers... all management, marketing and sales.
The new logo says it all - three misaligned and badly shaped holes.

Yup! I still wait for some programmer of Pro/E to finally invent the
intelligent "thread interference check" routine within it - all the data
required is already present! It could supply a warning if threads do not
match, i. e. an un-threaded section of my bolt is forced into a threaded
hole or vice versa - the real-world assemblycist´s nightmare.

Not to mention additional data - thread pitch etc., which Pro/E AFAIK
is totally unaware of unfortunately. Could Pro/E give me a warning if I
had built a M12x1 fine pitch zhreaded bolt into a M12x1.75 standard
thread hole? Or an imperial one into some metric hole (just dreaming)?.

I guess PTC would then make this a 1000$ Pro/THREAD software module...

 

Right, there is interference, bolt to hole, that you'd like an INTELLIGENT,
high-priced, professional piece of software to catch.

Another great use for some builtin intelligence. It's amazing all the information
you give the program that just sits there, passively, unused. Hey, I hear it's all
going to get fixed in WF3.

Oh, don't laugh. There just may be such a thing from a third-party vendor. Or
maybe this is one of those things you're supposed to buy Pro/TOOLKIT to fix. (I'm
still wondering what you can do with PTK.)

 

In WF2 it's still the same

The "hole feature", introduced in 2000i (or 20), is imho not fully
developed. For instance:
- Thread notes are not allowed in DIN/ISO style.
- Thread depth in DIN/ISO is to the drilling point, not at the beginning
of the shaft.
- Clearance holes aren't conform DIN/ISO screws (DIN 912)
- On drawings the cosmetics aren't displayed properly according DIN/ISO

And of coarse the points you mentioned...

I hate to say it but all these works fine with SW... (I don't know about
interference checks).

Personally I don't understand, what the programmers at PTC do with
feedback from customers. The hole feature hasn't changed in 4 to 5 proe
releases inspite these HUGE BUGS.

Gradje

 

Just to add one more, c'bore holes can only be used with tapped hole. This
should be with a drilled hole!
Also, would like to go back and change a tapped hole to a drilled hole and
vice/versa.

 

Another nasty thing: a threaded hole can't be "through next"

Gradje

 

the old fashioned way to create e. g. a blind threaded hole
(at least here in old europe) is this:

choose a point on any surface (not only plain ones!) which is
either dimensioned or aligned to something (point or axis),
then drill a hole with core diameter and depth, cut a thread
into that hole with diameter and depth (_and_ other values!).

Both drilled hole and thread normally are (but needn´t be)
cylindrical, but always have a conus at the end. At last
there´s a chamfer the size of the difference between
hole core and thread outer diameter.

The only way to get this straight in Pro/E is to define a UDF
family from which to chose diameter and depth etc.,
the "normal" process in Pro/E is lengthy and inadequate.

There has been no improvement to this in Pro/E for ten years...
so I still wonder:

Why doesn´t PTC hire an engineer to let programmers watch him
(or her) while he (she) makes real world usage of their product?
I´d suggest through some fracture-proof window to avoid injury.

Walther