Detail Views

[Anonymous]

Hi,

I have detailed a cut-out on a part I have modelled. Now this cut-out has moved to the other side of the part. This means the detail is now on a different projected view.

I have tried just dragging the detail marker to the new view but doesn't work as the base view for the detail view remains connected to when I first created the detail.

I have tried dragging the detail view in the browser into the new projected view but this is not working.

Is there a way to move the detail from one base view to another?

[Anonymous]

Hi,

I have detailed a cut-out on a part I have modelled. Now this cut-out has moved to the other side of the part. This means the detail is now on a different projected view.

I have tried just dragging the detail marker to the new view but doesn't work as the base view for the detail view remains connected to when I first created the detail.

I have tried dragging the detail view in the browser into the new projected view but this is not working.

Is there a way to move the detail from one base view to another?

[johnsonshiue · Accepted solution]

Hi! Unfortunately, it is not supported. The detail view is a dependent view of a selected base view. When you need to associate it with a new base view, you will need to delete it and recreate it.

Many thanks!

[johnsonshiue · Accepted solution]

Hi! Unfortunately, it is not supported. The detail view is a dependent view of a selected base view. When you need to associate it with a new base view, you will need to delete it and recreate it.

Many thanks!

[Anonymous]

Bugger,

Is there any way I can transfer all the dimensioning to the new detail prior to deleting the origonal? Would save me a lot of work.

Thanks

[Anonymous]

Bugger,

Is there any way I can transfer all the dimensioning to the new detail prior to deleting the origonal? Would save me a lot of work.

Thanks

[johnsonshiue]

Hi! You may want to try this workflow instead. You can change the drawing source. Copy the sheet from one idw and paste it to another idw. Next, go to Manage -> Replace Model Reference -> select a new model file. Some of the annotations will survive.

Many thanks!

[johnsonshiue]

Hi! You may want to try this workflow instead. You can change the drawing source. Copy the sheet from one idw and paste it to another idw. Next, go to Manage -> Replace Model Reference -> select a new model file. Some of the annotations will survive.

Many thanks!

[cadman777 · Accepted solution]

I do basically what Johnson says, except the old way (older Inventor version).

But it never works well, NEVER.

The more complex the dimensioning, the worse the effect.

The best way I found to 'cheat' is to dimension the HIDDEN LINES of that feature or part, and then make 1 clarifying view to show it's on the other side of the part/assembly.

Otherwise, I make a paper print of the original view, and put it in front of me and make a whole new set of views and use the paper print as a reference to quickly reproduce the annotations.

Never found an easy way to do this.

[cadman777 · Accepted solution]

I do basically what Johnson says, except the old way (older Inventor version).

But it never works well, NEVER.

The more complex the dimensioning, the worse the effect.

The best way I found to 'cheat' is to dimension the HIDDEN LINES of that feature or part, and then make 1 clarifying view to show it's on the other side of the part/assembly.

Otherwise, I make a paper print of the original view, and put it in front of me and make a whole new set of views and use the paper print as a reference to quickly reproduce the annotations.

Never found an easy way to do this.

[johnsonshiue]

Hi Chris,

The drawing view annotations survive better if the new model source and the old model source share the same document ID. This means the new source is like a saved copy of the old one. I believe this workflow will not work well with iPart/iAssembly members. Because all member files, though belonging to the same factory, do not share the document IDs. Also, they are derived parts of the factory (iPart), which carry different geometry IDs.

But, if the new source is saved from the old source, it should work well, as long as the annotated geometry still exists.

Many thanks!

[johnsonshiue]

Hi Chris,

The drawing view annotations survive better if the new model source and the old model source share the same document ID. This means the new source is like a saved copy of the old one. I believe this workflow will not work well with iPart/iAssembly members. Because all member files, though belonging to the same factory, do not share the document IDs. Also, they are derived parts of the factory (iPart), which carry different geometry IDs.

But, if the new source is saved from the old source, it should work well, as long as the annotated geometry still exists.

Many thanks!

[cadman777]

Thanx for the intel on this.

I agree from experience.

One job I did had about 60 gates that were identical except they differed only in length.

So after completing one gate assembly with drg, I copied it and reused it (the hard way w/the DA renaming files).

Then I opened up the Skeletal part and changed a few dimensions and that was it.

Only had to scrub the ID info on all the assemblies, parts and drgs, and make sure the dimensions weren't crowded and the Parts Lists were all correctly sized. Each new gate took about 1/5 of the time it took to do the first gate. Quite a savings.

So there's an example of what you're talking about.

Oh, and one more thing: I made sure all Detail views were Anchored and all Section views were similarly anchored (using Edit, etc.). That way, nearly no views 'broke' when the model size changed.

That was also a mega savings of time and labor.

[cadman777]

Thanx for the intel on this.

I agree from experience.

One job I did had about 60 gates that were identical except they differed only in length.

So after completing one gate assembly with drg, I copied it and reused it (the hard way w/the DA renaming files).

Then I opened up the Skeletal part and changed a few dimensions and that was it.

Only had to scrub the ID info on all the assemblies, parts and drgs, and make sure the dimensions weren't crowded and the Parts Lists were all correctly sized. Each new gate took about 1/5 of the time it took to do the first gate. Quite a savings.

So there's an example of what you're talking about.

Oh, and one more thing: I made sure all Detail views were Anchored and all Section views were similarly anchored (using Edit, etc.). That way, nearly no views 'broke' when the model size changed.

That was also a mega savings of time and labor.

[johnsonshiue]

Hi Chris,

This is another reason why I keep telling our users that iPart/iAssembly was meant for creating library components. You don't create drawing views for reusable library components. The best bet for configuration workflows is to use iLogic at the moment. For each variation, you use iLogic Design Copy to spawn the files. Because of the copies, the doc IDs will be the same, which allows you to swap drawing model source easily.

Many thanks!

[johnsonshiue]

Hi Chris,

This is another reason why I keep telling our users that iPart/iAssembly was meant for creating library components. You don't create drawing views for reusable library components. The best bet for configuration workflows is to use iLogic at the moment. For each variation, you use iLogic Design Copy to spawn the files. Because of the copies, the doc IDs will be the same, which allows you to swap drawing model source easily.

Many thanks!

[cadman777]

Unfortunately, I can't use iLogic Design Copy b/c it's too new for my version of Inventor.

But when I investigated the possibility of using it, I noticed serious limitations for file renaming.

If I could use it, that would be a deal-breaker for me b/c it would cause more work in the process.

[cadman777]

Unfortunately, I can't use iLogic Design Copy b/c it's too new for my version of Inventor.

But when I investigated the possibility of using it, I noticed serious limitations for file renaming.

If I could use it, that would be a deal-breaker for me b/c it would cause more work in the process.

[johnsonshiue]

Hi Chris,

Do you mind elaborating the "file naming limitation"? There are two workflows spawning iLogic design. You can use iLogic Design Copy to generate an identical copy from the source. Or, you can simply place iLogic components into an assembly and you can name it however you like.

I personally think iLogic unleashes a lot of power. It helps automate many workflows relatively easily. It is worth looking into. We have quite a few iLogic experts on Inventor forum and Inventor Customization forum. Please feel free to post any question. The experts can help. I am also learning it as we speak.

Many thanks!

[johnsonshiue]

Hi Chris,

Do you mind elaborating the "file naming limitation"? There are two workflows spawning iLogic design. You can use iLogic Design Copy to generate an identical copy from the source. Or, you can simply place iLogic components into an assembly and you can name it however you like.

I personally think iLogic unleashes a lot of power. It helps automate many workflows relatively easily. It is worth looking into. We have quite a few iLogic experts on Inventor forum and Inventor Customization forum. Please feel free to post any question. The experts can help. I am also learning it as we speak.

Many thanks!

[cadman777]

Hey Johnson, give me a day or two, b/c I don't have time to dig out the html files I saved on this. Thing is, I haven't used iCopy, so I'm only going by what I read about it. It may be I'm thinking about another method that a foreigner created using a VBA app and an Excel spreadsheet to do the renaming, but I can't recall, b/c I use the ancient method with the DA, and that was a lotta water under the bridge.

[cadman777]

Hey Johnson, give me a day or two, b/c I don't have time to dig out the html files I saved on this. Thing is, I haven't used iCopy, so I'm only going by what I read about it. It may be I'm thinking about another method that a foreigner created using a VBA app and an Excel spreadsheet to do the renaming, but I can't recall, b/c I use the ancient method with the DA, and that was a lotta water under the bridge.

[cadman777]

Hey Johnson,

I did a cursory search to try to jog my memory, b/c I don't have time to dig deeper into this subject.

Here's one of the links I read about iLogic Design Copy in the past:

https://www.synergis.com/2014/09/23/copy-files-easily-with-ilogic-design-copy-even-without-ilogic-ru....

As you can see in the pic of the main dialogue box, under the "File Naming", you can only add Prefixes or Suffixes.

When I copy files, I almost always need to change a letter or two in a set position of the filename.

So, unless I can do that, this utility would be too limiting, which makes it a 'deal-breaker'.

An example of a good renaming utility that I've used for many years to rename pics, html files, etc. is called "Name it Your Own Way" (NIYOW). Unfortunately this renaming utility can't be used successfully w/Inventor!

But if Autodesk could 'find it in their heart' to make a utility that would do this sort of thing (that is, rename files by rules) it would be awesome. Unfortunately it would no be of any use to me, since I'm at the tail end of my career and have no plans of going on subscription slavery. But I bet it would be of benefit to people who do big projects, and who want to automate copy-rename projects to save time and cut costs (like I've wanted over the past decade+).

I can't find the other tool I mentioned (which was of no use to me b/c it won't work on my version of Inventor), but did find a handful of Inventor forum posts on the subject of BATCH RENAME and BATCH COPY & RENAME. IMO, the problem here is nobody is willing to step up to the plate and write an app in C# (or some such other version of it) that can do what should be done. How sad, b/c iLogic is too weak to get the job done, and so is VBA. MegaJerk has proven that w/some of his apps (written by a programmer by trade).

Hope this clarifies...

[cadman777]

Hey Johnson,

I did a cursory search to try to jog my memory, b/c I don't have time to dig deeper into this subject.

Here's one of the links I read about iLogic Design Copy in the past:

https://www.synergis.com/2014/09/23/copy-files-easily-with-ilogic-design-copy-even-without-ilogic-ru....

As you can see in the pic of the main dialogue box, under the "File Naming", you can only add Prefixes or Suffixes.

When I copy files, I almost always need to change a letter or two in a set position of the filename.

So, unless I can do that, this utility would be too limiting, which makes it a 'deal-breaker'.

An example of a good renaming utility that I've used for many years to rename pics, html files, etc. is called "Name it Your Own Way" (NIYOW). Unfortunately this renaming utility can't be used successfully w/Inventor!

But if Autodesk could 'find it in their heart' to make a utility that would do this sort of thing (that is, rename files by rules) it would be awesome. Unfortunately it would no be of any use to me, since I'm at the tail end of my career and have no plans of going on subscription slavery. But I bet it would be of benefit to people who do big projects, and who want to automate copy-rename projects to save time and cut costs (like I've wanted over the past decade+).

I can't find the other tool I mentioned (which was of no use to me b/c it won't work on my version of Inventor), but did find a handful of Inventor forum posts on the subject of BATCH RENAME and BATCH COPY & RENAME. IMO, the problem here is nobody is willing to step up to the plate and write an app in C# (or some such other version of it) that can do what should be done. How sad, b/c iLogic is too weak to get the job done, and so is VBA. MegaJerk has proven that w/some of his apps (written by a programmer by trade).

Hope this clarifies...

[SBix26]

@cadman777  The tool already exists (and did in 2010, too), but it's a part of Autodesk Vault (better in the paid versions than in the free one, at least it was in 2018).  The Copy Design tool does all that you might want, but you have to implement Vault in order to use it.

---

Sam B
Inventor Pro 2021.1.2 | Windows 10 Home 2004
LinkedIn

[SBix26]

@cadman777  The tool already exists (and did in 2010, too), but it's a part of Autodesk Vault (better in the paid versions than in the free one, at least it was in 2018).  The Copy Design tool does all that you might want, but you have to implement Vault in order to use it.

---

Sam B
Inventor Pro 2021.1.2 | Windows 10 Home 2004
LinkedIn

[cadman777]

Thanx for the info Sam.

I never used Vault b/c of its complexity and overhead.

Never needed it either.

Too bad I won't be upgrading to any newer version any time soon.

No need at this point in my life.

It's morally corrupt for Autodesk to have developed Vault but totally neglected non-Vault Inventor in the same functions. There's no excuse for that. I'm sure it was a 'strategic decision' by the greedy criminals who benefit financially from said decisions. As they say, 'money talks and bulls**t walks!'

Oh well, 'live and learn'!

[cadman777]

Thanx for the info Sam.

I never used Vault b/c of its complexity and overhead.

Never needed it either.

Too bad I won't be upgrading to any newer version any time soon.

No need at this point in my life.

It's morally corrupt for Autodesk to have developed Vault but totally neglected non-Vault Inventor in the same functions. There's no excuse for that. I'm sure it was a 'strategic decision' by the greedy criminals who benefit financially from said decisions. As they say, 'money talks and bulls**t walks!'

Oh well, 'live and learn'!

[johnsonshiue]

Hi Chris,

Another workflow (without Vault) is to use Design Assistant, available in all Inventor releases. It gives you flexibility on naming the new files. But, it can be tedious.

Many thanks!

[johnsonshiue]

Hi Chris,

Another workflow (without Vault) is to use Design Assistant, available in all Inventor releases. It gives you flexibility on naming the new files. But, it can be tedious.

Many thanks!

[cadman777]

Hi Johnson,

Yes, that's the method I've always used.

Tedious isn't the word for it!

Cheers ...

[cadman777]

Hi Johnson,

Yes, that's the method I've always used.

Tedious isn't the word for it!

Cheers ...