Okay, thanks, I will look at those...
edit: the second link has a lot of good example... Thanks!!
it's not so much a "modeling challenge" as much as it is a "process challenge. We are in beginnings of really changing "how" we model our parts / assemblies to be more future proof and less "dumb geo."
I've been challenging the team to consider when applying dim's and features to think of how this part or feature might be used by someone else for a different purpose or even next year.
Example, I did a contract at a company here in Houston where all I did for 1.5 yrs was set up Content Center parts. Thins such as complete iPart families of Swagelok connectors, Parker Fittings, etc. iLogic driven weldments, Excel driven weldments, all sorts of stuff. One thing we encountered was that is a piping spool required a welded elbow (45 or 90), to start with, but then also would require that elbow to be modified to a custom angle prior to welded that we had that "library" part, without having to do any "post weldment features" to correct the angle.
So I set up my own family of welded elbows (LR, SR) Tee's, Crosses, Reducers, etc that had variation built in... such as placing a 45 but then being able to "choose" what angle between 1 deg and 45 deg the elbow would be, and similar for the 90 but going between 46 and 90... stuff like that.
I'm really trying to get these guys to think about "tomorrow" instead of just modeling dumb geometry. Linking parameters instead of adaptability, iLogic driven "template parts" instead of copy save as, things like that.
Hopefully the incentive of a gift card and/or lunch will urge them to participate...?