CoCreate User Forum - Better thread representation in Modeling

CoCreate User Forum (https://www.cocreateusers.org/forum/index.php)

- Enhancement Requests (https://www.cocreateusers.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=29)

- - Better thread representation in Modeling (https://www.cocreateusers.org/forum/showthread.php?t=7920)

Better thread representation in Modeling

The machining threaded hole tool could use some more graphical options. It seems plausible that the existing tool could be extended beyond showing just a blue face.

One option would be to use the fact that these features are already marked as threaded holes and just update how they are represented graphically. At the users option, it would be pretty impressive to show full helical threads - I imagine this could be done with less overhead/resouce than if the threads were actually cut using the Freeform Helix tool.*

The other option would be to extend the current blue face to a translucent blue volume, as shown below (ThreadZone.jpg). In a blind tapped hole, it would appear as if the pilot hole were drilled, a counterbore were added (whose od and depth matched that of thread od and tap depth), and a blue translucent cylinder were added to represent the area that would otherwise be helical. To me this is a good three dimensional equivalent to the standard simplified representation typically used in drafting.

One issue both of these options would aim to solve (outside of being visually cooler), would be when adding projected lines to a workplane from a face with threaded holes on it, the tapped hole od would be displayed rather than the pilot diameter. Even better would be if both the tapped hole od and the pilot diameter were projected, as in the end view of a standard simplified representation, so both circles would be available for reference.

A further added bonus would be if the blue volume of the thread were automatically not counted as clashing when doing a clash analysis.

Certainly I'd also love to see similar functionality for external threads as well.

It would also be great to see improved thread functionality extended into Annotator as well so that Annotator could show true thread form, as well as schematic, and simplified 2D thread representations. Often isometric views do not show threads which would be valuable to end users, while the primary views would likely remain simplified.

As long as I'm dreaming about improved thread tools, I would also love to see a better way to deal with thread definition than the tables in the ma_customize file. Not only should it be able to deal with standard thread definitions, but also custom thread sizes. One tool I use that I find very valuable is ME ThreadPal - perhaps a partnership could be hammered out with http://closetolerancesoftware.com

Many of these are concepts I've been advocating since at least 2003, but I couldn't find my past post(s). Forgive me if I just overlooked them.

*Most of my fasteners are downloaded from McMaster.com, and have full helical representations. Given todays computing capabilities, I rarely notice performance issues with regard to using lots of these fasteners on my three year old Dell M6300.

Re: Better thread representation in Modeling

I can also see that it would likely be valuable to have an additional field to capture incomplete threads/washout for partially threaded holes and for partially threaded shafts.

Re: Better thread representation in Modeling

Now (with version 18.1) that Creo Elements/Direct Modeling has added the ability to hatch (clipped) faces, I am reminded of some functionality that was available back in ME30 (for those that remember). ME30 had the ability to hatch faces. Some resourceful people used that to hatch faces that were threaded thereby providing a good representation of threads. They even had an interface that adjusted the hatch spacing to match the thread pitch.

Re: Better thread representation in Modeling

I've had some luck making things that look kind of like SolidWorks' "Cosmetic Threads" using the rendering module with the right kind of image for the material. It can be done as a decal also.

The real problem here is that functionality has incrementally and haphazardly grown like Topsy, and there are competing, overlapping and inconsistent methods for representing common feature types. Machining Module, Part Library, other tools... and users (especially if they came from SolidWorks) really want their nice little "Hole Wizard" functionality!

I think that whole area of functionality is in need of a radical overhaul and a complete re-thinking on PTC's part. The accumulated mess of functionality we now have is too much of a swamp.

Anyways, the rendering module is (yet another) option for thread display...