Peppe
Guest
I've done some tests and I'll work you out.
on tree 2 tries to animate the bond "animate"
on tree 2 tries to animate the bond "animate"
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
giorgioc73
Guest
It's wrong.
As you can see, the two wheels always maintain the same orientation as the axieme reference. this is evidently in contrast with the laws that regulate the coupling of the rotisms.
As you can see, the two wheels always maintain the same orientation as the axieme reference. this is evidently in contrast with the laws that regulate the coupling of the rotisms.
giorgioc73
Guest
mir
Guest
try to erase all constraints and only remake that with the wheel more inside
giorgioc73
Guest
done.
both leaving wheel 2, and eliminating it from the axieme.
No difference.
both leaving wheel 2, and eliminating it from the axieme.
No difference.
giorgioc73
Guest
I don't have a solution, but I think I found a reading key, not encouraging at all:
When you have multiple elements dynamically bound, cinematism responds correctly only for those to whom the movement is directly impressed or to those directly bound to them. when the movement is the result of other constraints, dynamic ones are ignored or misinterpreted.
in the case of the mechanism with single wheel and barrel stuck, if you impose rotation to the wheel, everything works regularly (including the disk that rotates as it should). if instead it imposes rotation to the disk, the dynamic bond between wheel and rod is ignored.
if things are actually in this way and this malfunction is not the result of an incorrect use of the dynamic bond function, then inventor is not a tool at the height of its diffusion and its use can be dangerous for the security implications related to these problems.
for a company that chose it as a reference, it is certainly not a beautiful discovery.
When you have multiple elements dynamically bound, cinematism responds correctly only for those to whom the movement is directly impressed or to those directly bound to them. when the movement is the result of other constraints, dynamic ones are ignored or misinterpreted.
in the case of the mechanism with single wheel and barrel stuck, if you impose rotation to the wheel, everything works regularly (including the disk that rotates as it should). if instead it imposes rotation to the disk, the dynamic bond between wheel and rod is ignored.
if things are actually in this way and this malfunction is not the result of an incorrect use of the dynamic bond function, then inventor is not a tool at the height of its diffusion and its use can be dangerous for the security implications related to these problems.
for a company that chose it as a reference, it is certainly not a beautiful discovery.