topic Re: Feature Driven Pattern in using an iPart in Inventor Forum

Feature Driven Pattern in using an iPart

Anonymous — Tue, 13 Sep 2016 22:07:06 GMT

I know that we could only feature pattern in assembly environment off of pattern in part (rectangular, circular..) and not the Hole feature itself, but can we feature pattern, in an assembly if it is an iPart?

Please find the attached files. I have a base part with holes which is an iPart and I've inserted it in an assembly, now can I feature pattern a fastener using the holes?

Thanks,

Arjun

Re: Feature Driven Pattern in using an iPart

JoyceZhou — Thu, 27 Oct 2016 15:19:19 GMT

Hi Arjun,

We could not create feature driven pattern by using a ipart.
In assembly, if you switch to Modeling view, expand the ipart in browser, you could find there is no pattern feature in part browser.

When create Pattern component by referencing pattern features from part, there need be pattern feature available in part browser.

Thanks,

Re: Feature Driven Pattern in using an iPart

julorja — Sun, 05 May 2019 23:57:35 GMT

Is this feature available in newer releases of Inventor.

Tks

Re: Feature Driven Pattern in using an iPart

johnsonshiue — Mon, 06 May 2019 20:53:04 GMT

Hi! iPart is meant to create library component. It is not meant to be used as a skeletal model for other parts. Indeed, the workflow is still not available. One workflow we did enhance is to create feature/body pattern based on sketch points. You can create a sketch with points and then populate the feature based on the points. Would it work for you?

Many thanks!

Re: Feature Driven Pattern in using an iPart

SER4 — Wed, 25 Nov 2020 05:33:56 GMT

This is insanity.

I just went through all the work of changing some parts into iParts (to have selectable configurations in different assemblies--although I now realize my error in expecting too much from iParts), and now this is becoming a mess.

First all my relationships are broken, and now this.

The new "Model States" can't come fast enough...and then it sounds like I'll have to redo everything all over again.

I might as well rebuild my entire assembly from scratch.

Re: Feature Driven Pattern in using an iPart

johnsonshiue — Wed, 25 Nov 2020 21:35:53 GMT

Hi! Like I mentioned repeatedly iPart/iAssembly were designed to create library components (individual parts driven by a table). They are not meant to be configuration tools. In some simple cases, you can leverage iPart/iAssembly for configuration. But, for your purpose, I don't think they are suited.

I think you may want to look into iLogic. The power of iLogic is allowing you to control component parameters at all levels from the top-level assembly. You can easily drive changes and enforce design rules from the top. Once you are good with one variation, you can use iLogic Design Copy (or Place iLogic Comp) to spawn the data. The key here is that each variation is an independent (partially) dataset. At the moment, Inventor cannot represent multiple shapes, designs using one ipt or one iam file.

Many thanks!

Re: Feature Driven Pattern in using an iPart

danielvdeleito — Fri, 17 Jan 2025 16:03:05 GMT

Not matter what Iparts are meant to be, this should be something definitely to be included in future versions. I suggest turn the Ipart in a Content Center part, so it keep all the features.

Re: Feature Driven Pattern in using an iPart

johnsonshiue — Fri, 17 Jan 2025 20:03:36 GMT

Hi! The behavior you are looking for is available via Model States. If you convert the iPart to a regular part with Model States, the part feature pattern can drive the component pattern in the assembly.

Many thanks!

Re: Feature Driven Pattern in using an iPart

nick_panzarino — Mon, 17 Feb 2025 22:30:25 GMT

I have the same issue: created a series of library parts as iParts and am unable to pattern hardware/fittings based on feature patterns. Model states are not an ideal solution since they can't have "key" parameters like iParts can. Plus having unique files generated for each member can be helpful for searching in vault based on filename or iProperties unique to each child. Simply saving the feature patterns already present in the iPart Factory to the Children would still be a valuable addition/fix.

Someone created an idea for this exact issue back in 2020, but it has very few votes. If anyone else with the same issue finds this thread, please vote for the idea at the link below:

Feature Patterns in iParts and Derived Parts - Autodesk Community

Re: Feature Driven Pattern in using an iPart

Cris-Ideas — Wed, 19 Feb 2025 18:04:48 GMT

I myself tried using iParts once in my life only to found out that this was a big mistake.

I have made a library, like Johnson suggests, but it turned out to be a terrible choice.

I had a variety of problems (broken constrains, having to rebuild models, etc.)

in the end after using inventor for over 12 years I do not use:

iParts, iAssemblie, iFeatures
Frame genrator
Bolted connectons
flexibility

And in general reverted to core functions.

All of the above I tried and I found making more mess than help overall.

Sad reality.

Perhaps my workflows are not as "designed" but they are what I need them to be to get the results I want and avoid problems I do not want.

Cris.

Re: Feature Driven Pattern in using an iPart

bradeneuropeArthur — Wed, 19 Feb 2025 21:34:06 GMT

Good approach.

For those who take customization by means of programming seriously are possible steps beyond the others.

in special in these cases.

iParts, iAssemblie, iFeatures:
I have used them a lot.
With some good workflows it may work in a non Vault environment.
For what I now know and my skills and experience I would have programmed it and not using this feature.
In special I-features can really mess things up and are not preferred by me personally. better use excel driven parts....
Frame generator:
I have used it a lot. but we have decided to create out own template (Excel driven parts) that do things better and better to understand/change and reuse and restructure than anything else. Using adaptivity by the way is key here and works as a charm, if done with sense.
Bolted connections;
Same as above with FG
flexibility:
Be carefull with that. may give unexpected results.

Keep it simple and out of the box is key here.

and customization is possible also key for now and the future.