Broke link to external component early in design--now need an updated version

Broke link to external component early in design--now need an updated version

davethomaspilot9V8SL
Advocate Advocate
680 Views
14 Replies
Message 1 of 15

Broke link to external component early in design--now need an updated version

davethomaspilot9V8SL
Advocate
Advocate

Big mistake, I think.

 

The external components I've been using have child components.  So, (after bringing them into a new design) the sub-components don't move when I join the top level component.

 

So, I made them a "rigid group".  I had to break the link to do that.  What should I have done instead?

 

Now, days later, I have many joins to/from than component and referenced sketches to it.  I think if I delete the component and insert a new version, I'll get lots of errors.

 

Is there something I can do short of starting over?

 

 

0 Likes
Accepted solutions (2)
681 Views
14 Replies
Replies (14)
Message 2 of 15

etfrench
Mentor
Mentor

Remove keeps the references to the old part, but it may be better to roll the timeline back to the insertion point, replace the part, then fix errors.

ETFrench

EESignature

0 Likes
Message 3 of 15

davethomaspilot9V8SL
Advocate
Advocate
I'll try removing--rolling back to the insertion point is pretty much starting over.

What's the downside of remove? I don't care about what's in the timeline, as long as I get the end design I want. Maybe I should just turn off capture history too?
0 Likes
Message 4 of 15

davethomaspilot9V8SL
Advocate
Advocate

Also, what's the best practice for using an external component that's an assembly?   Is there something I can do besides making it a rigid group so I can join it and have it's subcomponents "come along"?

0 Likes
Message 5 of 15

jeff_strater
Community Manager
Community Manager
Accepted solution

"So, I made them a "rigid group".  I had to break the link to do that.  What should I have done instead?"

 

You should not have to Break Link to the external component to add a rigid group:

 

As to what you can do now, I'm afraid there is not much.  You will likely have to re-do that part of your design


Jeff Strater
Engineering Director
Message 6 of 15

davebYYPCU
Consultant
Consultant

I would be looking into why the children will not follow.  

Did the inserted file have its own Joints?  

You should be able to Joint the parent of the incoming Assembly and the children honour their own Joint.

 

Break the link, and you will likely start over.

 

Might help....

Message 7 of 15

davethomaspilot9V8SL
Advocate
Advocate

Ok, I'll try again.

 

Don't know what I was doing wrong, but I don't think the "rigid group" option was in the menu until I broke the link.

 

Not the first time I've broken the link just do do that.  Revisiting now...

 

Thanks!

0 Likes
Message 8 of 15

davethomaspilot9V8SL
Advocate
Advocate

No, the inserted design did not have its own joints.  The design was from an imported step file that was converted by uploading.

 

I do this a lot--I've never been able to join the external component and have it bring all the children along.  Starting a simple test case now...

0 Likes
Message 9 of 15

davebYYPCU
Consultant
Consultant

Expecting Fusion to behave nicely with imported data.  All bets off.

 

 

0 Likes
Message 10 of 15

davethomaspilot9V8SL
Advocate
Advocate

OK, I've been doing it a lot--WRONG!

 

I can't reproduce why I thought I needed to break the link to make sub-components a rigid group.

 

And, it's actually not going to be that much work to "start over", it's much, much faster the second time!

 

Thanks and sorry for the dumb question.  

0 Likes
Message 11 of 15

davethomaspilot9V8SL
Advocate
Advocate

Actually, it was probably opacity control that drove me to break the link.

 

At least that's where I'm am on the redo.  Need semi-transparent body of the linked component.

 

A little research says that's an existing feature request (don't link opacity)

 

 

0 Likes
Message 12 of 15

davebYYPCU
Consultant
Consultant

Edit the original, the link will bring in the changes, a reason to maintain the link.

 

Might help.....

0 Likes
Message 13 of 15

davethomaspilot9V8SL
Advocate
Advocate

Yes, that's what I'm doing.

 

I change from 100% to 60% and back a lot during the design so I can quickly check for interferences of things internal to an enclosure (with the section analysis tool too).

 

Not a big deal--I'll definitely keep everything linked now that I understand the potential impact.  In my case, the component I wanted to replace is a custom pcb I'm designing.  It's likely to have more iterations so I'm hoping "replace component" will work well.

 

Though, I'm not sure how it could maintain joints....

0 Likes
Message 14 of 15

davebYYPCU
Consultant
Consultant
Accepted solution

Inserting an Assembly with its own Joints, those Joints are intact.

You need a new Joint for this Assembly to the new file.

Should maintain stability for you.

 

Edit original file, there is an option for Get latest to update the new file.

You would need to convert bodies to components in the original file for Joints to work in that file.

 

Might help...

 

 

 

Message 15 of 15

davethomaspilot9V8SL
Advocate
Advocate

Thanks

 

0 Likes