@Stocjon1985: Great question. We've noticed this as well, and we're adding a specific control for the number of displayed decimal places in both ReadOnly and Label widgets in an upcoming release of NX. Thanks for asking!

@@taylorandersonnxvideos Tks for replying.

If I understand your question correctly, it sounds like you're wanting to add an image to your dialog? You can use the "Label" widget in Template Studio Author to do this. This video shows some examples of this and shows the ability to swap this image dynamically if needed. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/pdJ9mMV00Nq-eIE.html Does this help?

Thank you so much!

Thank you, Stephen!

This other video should be helpful in this regard: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/htN9dM5-p97OnZc.html The key is choosing the centerline curve as the desired "input" for the deformation. Deformable Components can have either geometric or numerical inputs that guide their deformation. Does this help?

Thank you!

I think you're asking about the Pattern Circle Diameter? In newer versions of NX (starting with NX 2406) you could directly measure the pattern circle diameter using three points. In older versions, creating a circle using three points first, and then measuring the circle would likely be the fastest way. Does that help?

@@taylorandersonnxvideos thank you for the reply sir, yes it works in newer version.....

On the Teamcenter side, you'll first link the Requirements to the NX Item Revision. With this link in place, NX will find the Requirements when you open the part in NX, and automatically display them in the Requirements Validation tool in NX. You can then create the checkers in NX that relate the specific measurement expression to the requirement. Does that make sense?

Great question! Most of the parameter entry widgets have the ability to add limits (upper and/or lower) to each input. If one of these limits is exceeded, the OK and APPLY buttons will automatically be disabled, and warning messages about the out-of-range inputs will be displayed. Does that make sense?

You're very kind! Thank you!

Thanks, Michael! Yes, this should certainly be doable using a Parameter Table today. In fact, Parameter Tables and Feature Templates are a perfect combination for things like this. This video shows the ability to use Parameter Tables with a wide variety of expression types: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/es6IeMeLuq-cknU.html Does this help?

Hi, Michael! Yes, because we're using the common Template Studio Author environment now, this technique works the same for Product Templates, Feature Templates, and Deformable Components. :-)

My pleasure! Thanks for the feedback!

Heh heh... You're kind, Stephen! Thank you!

@hualiang178 -- Great question. The mass of the body is generally an *output* from a body, rather than an input, so getting from a mass input to an appropriate "size" is going to either involve: 1) a quick expression calculation (if the shape is canonical and we can easily invert the volume equation) 2) a set of pre-determined known values (like the first half of this video), or 3) an iterative approach to "finding" the right size that produces the desired mass. For this non-canonical shape, I used the third method in the second half of this video. As described, starting at about 1:55 in the video, I have a small optimization (Goal Seek, really) iterating on a size parameter to find the size that produces the desired mass. The "how to" details are in the last third of this video. Does that make sense?

Feel free to email me privately... First Name "dot" Last Name at Siemens.com. :-) I'm happy to share this model!

Thanks! That's a great idea. I'll put that one on my list. :-)

In the "Actions" group on the Parameter Tables dialog, you can use the "New Table from File" option to start a new table using an Excel spreadsheet or CSV file. The easiest way to understand the required format is to manually create a small Parameter Table and export it. (MB3 on the name of the Parameter Table after you've created it, and choose "Export".) Does that help?

Assembly Cut is certainly a useful feature!

You'll definitely need to understand Expressions, but the key will be the Pattern Increment described in this video. Best of luck!

Interesting question! We don't have the ability to directly specify alternate assembly constraints, but if the different mounting positions were spaced along a similar direction, you could certainly have one of the assembly constraints be a Distance constraint that could vary based on the selected component (and thus in your example, modify the position the swapped component into slot A or B based on a different distance value.) I suppose this could work for angular constraints as well, now that I think about it. Again, thanks for an interesting question!

Thank you! You're very kind!

You may be looking at the Pattern Feature dialog in the "Less" state. Look for a tiny arrow pointing downward at the bottom center of the dialog, just above the OK, APPLY, and CANCEL buttons. This should expand the dialog downward and reveal some extra options for you. Alternately, the "gear" icon in the upper left corner of the dialog should similarly have a "Pattern Feature (More)" option that will similarly reveal more options. Does that help?

Hi! One option would be to set up a CSV file selector for each of your curves. Would that make sense in your application?

@emanuelemarano8661-- Great question! No need for any new licenses here... If you already have User Defined Features (UDFs), we use that exact same license for Feature Templates. :-)

Thanks, Rick! Glad you noticed that we're trying to make this super-easy!

Thanks for the positive feedback! I always appreciate that. 🙂 Product Template Studio has actually been around since NX 5, so there's a lot of this that you can use today in NX 11. (Feature Templates are newer... NX 2206 was the first release.) Thanks again!

@@tbatba yep my work revolves around PTS in NX 11. I love it. But the feature templates ( pts ui for udfs) and FTs in PTS is just too good. P.s. oh also the Algorithmic modeling, have read about it on a forum.

Great! Thanks again. :-) And just so you know, you can totally include Algorithmic Modeling features inside a Feature Template!

@@taylorandersonnxvideos thats awesome. I need to start exploring and learning the algorithmic modelling. 😃

Great question. The little colored CG markers we show here in the Modeling environment are not persisted to where we could display them in Drafting at the moment. But you could certainly use the Measure feature to create an associative point entity at the Center of Mass and then use this in the drawing. Does that make sense?

Great question. Looks like that would be a two-step process today... You could measure the Center of Mass and create a point (either associatively or non-associatively) and then you could measure the location of the point with respect to the new CSYS. Does that make sense? (And yes, this sounds like a great Enhancement Request, if you'd like to submit it.) 🙂

Quite well. :-) You can certainly create an associative drawing describing the part or assembly in your Product Template, and then have this be associatively copied and updated as you instantiate your Template by dragging-and-dropping from the Reuse Library. Great question!

@@taylorandersonnxvideos Thanks Taylor. We use TC managed NX at my workplace with a master 3D and then a 2D manifestation file. Our current workflow is we open a reference part and "save-as" to create the new part, and then modify expressions and adjust 2D if necessary (eg adding rev note). What would be the workflow to create a new part based on the product template feature? Would you create a new part and then drag/drop from reuse library, which would then populate the features, and also create a 2D manifestation?

​@@taylorandersonnxvideos Hi Taylor, just saw your video on 2D drawings and it all makes sense, only question I had was whether it will work with TC managed NX.

@@espresso-shot Great question! The easy answer here is yes. The template interface is all self-contained within the drawing PRT file, so there is no additional complexity here from the Teamcenter perspective. Does that help?

We would recommend using "Replace Feature" in this case. This should maintain associativity with any downstream features, and provide the replacement mapping tool if there are geometric changes between the different Feature Templates. Additionally, Teamcenter can help you identify all of the parts in which you've used a particular Feature Template (or UDF) in case you want to go back and revisit them. Does that help?

Algorithmic Modeling features will always create new bodies -- they will not consume the previous input bodies. So in cases like this where the Algorithmic Modeling feature uses the original part solid as an input, you'll see that original body remain as construction geometry. You can either just remove this body from the MODEL reference set (which will remove any duplicate mass from the part), or use the "Delete Body" feature if you really don't want the body around anymore at all. Does this help?

I have found the issue. I don't know that the parts have to be in the same folder as the assembly. I thought I could choose them from another folder.

Thanks, Marvin! For reference, I believe that if you use full paths in the Visual Rule, you can reference parts from other folders as well. Thanks again!

Great question... Tell your friends! :-)

Glad it helped! Thank you!

@wg1159: I'd recommend making sure your template is saved in the "None" state to ensure that the widgets are not saved in a read-only state. Does that help?

Great question! My voiceover is usually recorded at the same time as the demonstration, so I honestly don't do a lot of detailed edits... I went back and tested this just now, and sure enough, the CTRL-Z "Undo" is undoing the "Hide" operation I'd previously performed on the Datum Coordinate System prior to the beginning of the video. So yes... that was just normal NX behavior, and not any editing trickery. 😀 Great eye!

Thank you for your kind comment!

As I mentioned in the video, assertions at the individual component level are going to roll up easiest. Fundamentally, assembly-level component assertions are local to that specific subassembly, and will not roll up to higher levels. As a rule of thumb, if you want to create a clean assertion that will roll up to higher levels, always make the part or assembly for which you are asserting a value the "Displayed Part" (not just the Work Part... Use "Open in Window" to make sure it is the top-level part in the Assembly Navigator when you make the assertion.) Assertions created in this way will roll up beautifully, just as you expect. Does that help?

@TrueScaffold: I don't disagree at all! But not everyone does this, hence the other options. :-) Thanks!

@user-ux5gs4dy7o: Great question, actually. You will need to use the Product Template UI to do this swap. It's not a general function that can be used outside the context of a Product Template interface. You *can* of course use "Component Suppression by Expression" techniques without a Product Template interface, if suppressed components are acceptable in your assemblies. Hope that helps!

Not sure what your question is... The new Measure tool was introduced in NX 12.0.1... Are you perhaps looking at one of the older Measure commands (that were not yet retired in NX 12.0.1)?

The new Measure command came out in NX 12.0.2. It should be visible in any version newer than this!

@jozehrovat3719 -- The optional Advanced Assemblies license, most easily accessible with Value-based Licensing (Design Tokens), lights up the Mass Properties Panel in the Assembly Navigator and Part Navigator, with tons of functionality including multiple assertion options, scaled inertial values when masses are asserted (so inertial properties are closer to reality), Center of Mass visualization options, immediate update without save for mass and inertial properties, mass reference set overrides, maturity-driven assembly rollup options, and much more. And with VBL, you can easily share the license as needed. Hope that helps!

Good point! Thank you!

Definitely! You can certainly include WAVE Link features in a Product Template interface, enabling you to associatively select geometry (points, datums, sheets, bodies, etc.) in nearby parts to use in your construction. Your question is a great one, and it's made me realize that I don't have any videos up about using WAVE with Product Templates. I'll add that to my list! Thanks!

@@taylorandersonnxvideos ooh i will try wave. Although i dont know how to bring them into product template interface. 🙂 the actual root for my question was i discovered pts as an alternative to udfs. But udfs have reference object concept which pts doesnt have. Since udf is a feature. Pts a whole prt. So was wondering how can i implement udf reference concept into pts. If you can answer this it would be a huge help. 🙂

@@taylorandersonnxvideos also i was able to make points user selectable. By craeting a point expression and adding that to template. In the ui it will ask user to select point. The users selection will be the new point and that data is stored in my expression. A makeshift user selection of geometries(only point so far) 😅

@@saratchandramv1886 As for WAVE features, in the Author tool just drag the WAVE feature into the UI... We'll automatically create the right UI to reparent the specific linked objects in the feature. 🙂 And if you're coming from UDFs, then take a look at "Feature Templates" in NX, starting with NX 2206. These are the next-generation UDF, based on a common authoring framework with Product Templates. Here are some videos about those (including a WAVE example): kzfaq.info/get/bejne/jseRn6pom5OlYqc.html&pp=iAQB

@@taylorandersonnxvideos ooh will give a try with wave features like u directed. And yep! I learned about feature templates from one of your posts on a forum. Unfortunately for us we need to work on nx 11 😅 I am eagerly waiting for my company to upgrade to a new version so i cn try feature templates. Will definitely check out the videos on it. Thanks alot.

Great question! Certainly when a group is working together on an assembly, an individual component may be owned (and open for editing) by one designer, while also being viewed (in read-only mode) by others at the same time. And yes, if the mass and inertial properties have not yet been stored with the saved part, the read-only "others" can certainly generate mass properties data if needed in the context of their work. Their changes will not be saved when they close the read-only parts, but they can certainly calculate mass rollups, for instance, without the need for full read/write access to all components at the same time. Hope that answers your question!

Thanks. Your answer confirm that collaboration work is not there yet.

Heh heh... That's an interesting conclusion to draw from what I said... We certainly have thousands of large-scale customers collaborating around weight and balance today worldwide. :-) Thanks for stopping by!

Sorry I used the word collaboration but maybe that's not the exact word I need to use to explain my thoughts. Here's what I was thinking when I used the words "collaboration work". I was thinking more of a continuous improvement and live sharing system like those used in software development (Example: Visual Studio and the Github platform). This type of functionality implemented in CAD software could allow mass property updates by a manager or line manager through an automatic notification and automatic update process after approval by the 3D model owner.

@@lebeluet NX certainly does a lot of real-time change notification in the context of assemblies these days. Here's a good video to start you down that road: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/qaqfo7Olm7i1Zas.html

Definitely! Sounds like a great application for using a Parameter Table to capture those standard configurations. Great question!