Specific surfaces in shells

Here's another one that really bugs me.

You have, say, a neutral plane draft. Several surfaces in the feature,
you redefine one of the parents and you lose a surface out of your
draft feature. You regen, get to the draft and you get the message
"confirm to remove deleted references" or something like that. You
confirm, your other surfaces are fine, away you go. Same thing for
rounds. But when you have a shell with specific thickness surfaces,
and some of those go, what do you do? It won't let you reset to
default thickness, because you have to pick the surface to do that,
and it isn't there any more. But it won't solve the shell and let me
move on. I have about 20 features hanging off this shell, as well as
child parts that reference some of the surfaces. Is there any way I
can get the shell to forget about these surfaces? I should add I don't
even know what they are - everything still seems to be there.

 

: On 5 Apr 2004 10:54:08 -0700, (Gra-gra) wrote:
:
: >Here's another one that really bugs me.
: >
: >You have, say, a neutral plane draft. Several surfaces in the feature,
: >you redefine one of the parents and you lose a surface out of your
: >draft feature. You regen, get to the draft and you get the message
: >"confirm to remove deleted references" or something like that. You
: >confirm, your other surfaces are fine, away you go. Same thing for
: >rounds. But when you have a shell with specific thickness surfaces,
: >and some of those go, what do you do? It won't let you reset to
: >default thickness, because you have to pick the surface to do that,
: >and it isn't there any more. But it won't solve the shell and let me
: >move on. I have about 20 features hanging off this shell, as well as
: >child parts that reference some of the surfaces. Is there any way I
: >can get the shell to forget about these surfaces? I should add I don't
: >even know what they are - everything still seems to be there.
:
: Actually I sorted it out by using reroute, which I rarely use. Just
: went through every surface and picked an alternate.

Ouch! Yeah, you're right. In those situations, Pro/e is not very helpful. And the
fit really hits the shan if you enter 'Resolve mode' which should be marked as the
ancient Hades, 'Abandon hope, all ye who enter here' ~ the Abyss, the bottomless
pit, the endless tunnel. WF has not reformed its 'resolve mode' and other things
remain as klunky as before. It gets better, but oh, so slowly and painfully and
partially and hesitantly. Hey, anyone seen SW 2005? I hear that's out, so WF 2
shouldn't be too far behind.

David Janes

 

I don't think SW2005 is out?? If anything it was a alpha release shown
or very early beta?

WF2 beta is, imho, definitly on the buggy side. (yeah, I know, it's
beta)

...

 

: I don't think SW2005 is out?? If anything it was a alpha release shown
: or very early beta?

Just something I picked up from a 'usually reliable source'. But I don't want to
start unfounded rumors. Especially not one that would fuel pressure on PTC to
release WF 2 prematurely: it should survive on being a quality product, not being
the first junk into the market.
:
: WF2 beta is, imho, definitly on the buggy side. (yeah, I know, it's
: beta)
:
It was supposed to be out in March, so hopefully it's delayed by a check up and
some needed surgery. We can wait.

DJ