cutting distinct in multibody parts

[reb_bl]

Bye to all,
I find myself "lightly" in difficulty, so I am here to ask you an opinion or a straight one.
I find myself in the situation of having a welded made of multiple simple elements inserted in a multibody part, to understand better: we imagine the classic frame made by multiple laser cut plates.
I have to save the individual bodies and make a single table in such a way that I can reuse in the future the sngola part cut to the laser (with the already made table) for a possible new frame.
My problem becomes the separate cut, how can I recall the part code inserted by the cutout?
it is not possible to create a welded set, they want it to be all in one part.
I hope to have explained quite well:redface:
♪

 

[meccanicamg]

hi reb_bl I reread 4 times your post but it is in my opinion contradictory. I try to tell you how the various things work and you give me an answer.

the multibody part is the one that in swx allows to create more bodies, sheets and welded profiles. the cut distinction allows the ball of all the bodies and it is possible to put on the table every single body without having to save it as a separate part also in the same file with the multifoil (from the table, choose insert view...relative to the model.. .High quality, switch to 3d model, choose 2 perpendicular faces, follow the instructions, choose only selected body and click in white sheet). the reuse of geometry is not so immediate if you want to create a new "carpentery".

the problem is as follows: or do the multibody and is born and dies there or do the assembling with the individual parts (then you recycle the parts in the new assemblies, make the distinct base and not the cutting one).

I wait for your news

 

[re_solidworks]

you can also create the table of the individual body with its view and insert it into a sheet itself. if you reuse it in the future you must remember that it is a sheet made in top down and if you change the welded that contains changes also that sheet. in this there is no difference from traditional assemblies.
another alternative is to export the body to an external part and manage it as you want. at this point (if you want and take into account) you can block external references.. .

 

[reb_bl]

Thank you both!

@meccanicamg unfortunately is not contradictory, let's say that the method is exactly what I have described, a multibody managed as a welded assembly (as with distinct cut) and with the various parts exported (practically on the welded part you make a body save) my problem is to recall the names of the parts exported in the cutting tables or if you prefer bo classicalm that I have to create in the table.
Let's say that I have to create a support with a piece of frame tube, a worked plate and 2 handkerchiefs.
I designed it as a normal part, multibody.
I saved the bodies, so that I will have 1 file for the pipe(hippo), 1 for the plate (pluto) and 1 for the handkerchiefs (paper) .
I have to go to make a new support (file part, not together) that uses the same plate (pluto) and that does not have the handkerchiefs, I make a new file with a new piece of pipe (topolino) and insert pluto.
I want it to appear as a description that the plate is pluto.

@re_solidworks you have fully centered the way it has to be done, the system I use now is just that, remains the speech of the distinct.

I hope I have clarified better:redface:

 

[re_solidworks]

the distinct must be compiled in the folders of the welded and in the same way in the external parts. This equality is to be managed by hand, I manage it via pdm and everything for me is transparent.

 

[reb_bl]

the distinct must be compiled in the folders of the welded and in the same way in the external parts. This equality is to be managed by hand, I manage it via pdm and everything for me is transparent.

can't you just recall the various properties already assigned to the individual pieces in the "material list" -> properties without remaking the work by hand? (excluding pdm)

 

[meccanicamg]

can't you just recall the various properties already assigned to the individual pieces in the "material list" -> properties without remaking the work by hand? (excluding pdm)

we see in the next service pack or in the 2011 release if we can integrate the derived features:finger:

I am seeing with sw2010 that it is possible to insert in the multibody file an external grip and use it as body inside the part and 2 minutes check if you drag the info of the separate cut.

 

[meccanicamg]

the info if you drag them only at the moment of insertion and do not automatically update if I change the original external part. However, the geometry is updated and I can even insert the external body subform using the system constraints provided for the assemblies.

I would say it could be worth doing like this:
- multibody the first time.
- save individual bodies
- put individual bodies on the table.
- for a new piece amounts in part the saved bodies and create new ones
- save the individual new bodies
- put individual bodies on the table.

in the various files/frames you will need to have a field that identifies the piece code that will be dragged into the whole cutting system. so doing it works

 

[re_solidworks]

It is a hard mechanism to operate with the pdm, without saying that I would not do it and use traditional assemblies.

 

[re_solidworks]

I am seeing with sw2010 that it is possible to insert in the multibody file an external grip and use it as body inside the part and 2 minutes check if you drag the info of the separate cut.

was also feasible with 2009, I think already since 2008...

 

[meccanicamg]

It is a hard mechanism to operate with the pdm, without saying that I would not do it and use traditional assemblies.

without pdm, you also do this without rigidity of management. undoubtedly even in my opinion it is useless to use the multibody part if you want to recycle the components. :finger:

 

[reb_bl]

thanks to both of the answers!

 

[re_solidworks]

without pdm, you also do this without rigidity of management. undoubtedly even in my opinion it is useless to use the multibody part if you want to recycle the components. :finger:

how do you keep the properties updated in case of change? to say that a pdm is rigid you have one configured according to your needs? if yes, what?
this of "rigidity" is a common place, believe me. the truth is that you do before and you do better than who does not.....

 

[meccanicamg]

the truth is that you do before and you do better than who does not.....

...you can always try! sure without pdm hand update the properties unless you decide to put automatic update between embedded files.