is this possible with inventor?

[DB-TUNING]

Hello, Raf! !
I see you're still struggling with your brick problem...(if you used the lego maybe it was + easy...ihih... I'm kidding of course! )
In my opinion, as I said long ago the big problem is the management of such projects. if you are the only one who manages work with inv and without office support for ideas, tricks, tips etc. to solve the various problems you will encounter from time to time, it will be difficult to succeed in bringing to conclusion the work in decent times, always if then you will not be stuck on + beautiful or as told by others here on the forum, if the workstation at your disposal will manage everything.
You should put yourself there and start doing some evidence, but this may mean "push" a lot of hours....depends if it suits you! at the end once everything is realized with inv, what benefits would you have? and for future similar jobs would you be able to recover the old project or do you have to start up everything from scratch? In my opinion, you have to answer these questions before starting work to assess whether or not you should use the 3d.

 

[raf]

Thank you all for the passion you are putting us in helping me, thank you! But unfortunately I can't get out of it, I guarantee it's frustrating. . .
the biggest problem with inventor, in my opinion, is that you have to think real, drawings as you build, one by one, if not makes no sense. with autocad the thing is different, you can "shake" great, for this is suitable for my work. this has indubbi advantages in the phase of disdain, but huge disadvantages in the management of the project, the drawings are born and die there, they are clusters of lines without any "intelligence", all the phase of counting and control must be done by hand, in 2010...
in my office it's been like this forever and I'm fighting, fighting to get out of prehistory, I'm trying at least.

we come to your suggestions:

I press that I have never dealt with such articles and issues. I would like to ask, however, that the discussion has "louded" me: Are shaped bricks shaped in work? If yes, the interesting data to know is the total number of bricks and the number of shaped bricks in operation (because they would have a delta cost derived from manual shooting). in this case, what is the need to draw the many shaped bricks?

the bricks are obviously cut into the yard, I care to know the total quantity, you do not need to know how many they cut, the cut brick is for the purposes of the drawing, for the sections and the details listed. at the end of counting a cut brick or a whole brick will always be equal to one.

I saw the drawings, I realized the story of the three layers crossed.
I keep not seeing all these difficulties, it certainly takes some time, but you don't have to draw one to one shaped bricks.
on the sloping side those cut are identical, do one and then a series to repeat them, identical for those along the wall from 12188. By the way, in the other thread I told you that when you plan the job you have to determine where to start with the bricks. I would have left right from the wall of 12188 with the whole bricks then I would be back towards the two walls from 3566; you would have almost half brick to be cut longitudinally than your design.
in the worst of the hypotheses you would have a type of brick cut for each wall, so in the example placed would be 14, but placing them intelligently so that the longer and straight walls receive the whole bricks would certainly decrease.
you would then have 10-12 types of brick for the side walls and the rest are filled bricks in a unique part. the number contained in that part calculates it from the filling surface itself. working on the properties of the part I am convinced that in the material directory you can automate the calculation of the number from the area.
the axieme would therefore consist of 12-13 unique components and some repetition; this for each of the three different layers nothing transcendental, but certainly a mortal boredom to do so. . .
of course you have to know how to use well inventor, to adapt his tools to your needs by echoing the appropriate stratagems (inventing the central area that represents the big brick and the surface calculates the number, for example... ).
I mean, planning the job, I don't see any difficulties.

Unfortunately the bricks on the tilted side are not equal, they change of a few mm one compared to the other and, you know, in inventor the things must be drawn precise if not they are not mounted.
I agree with you that I have to invent something, because so I can't, of course, work.
Perhaps my problem is precisely this, wanting to "copy" an autocad design in inventor, this cannot be done, I must change approach, and this puts me enormously in difficulty.
I also searched on the internet but I find nothing and nobody doing similar things in 3d, what is not possible?

Hello, Raf! !
I see you're still struggling with your brick problem...(if you used the lego maybe it was + easy...ihih... I'm kidding of course! )
In my opinion, as I said long ago the big problem is the management of such projects. if you are the only one who manages work with inv and without office support for ideas, tricks, tips etc. to solve the various problems you will encounter from time to time, it will be difficult to succeed in bringing to conclusion the work in decent times, always if then you will not be stuck on + beautiful or as told by others here on the forum, if the workstation at your disposal will manage everything.
You should put yourself there and start doing some evidence, but this may mean "push" a lot of hours....depends if it suits you! at the end once everything is realized with inv, what benefits would you have? and for future similar jobs would you be able to recover the old project or do you have to start up everything from scratch? In my opinion, you have to answer these questions before starting work to assess whether or not you should use the 3d.

Hi, db!
Good to hear you every now and then!
You're right, I'm alone, and this is already a big disadvantage.
of time now I have some, but I have already "pumped" so much to realize the carpenters, but that is a "easy" job, long but easy.
What I have to do is not facebook, this is the problem... and then, as you say, the problem is that I certainly could not recycle the 3d model for future jobs, the variables would be too much and would have to reassemble everything from scratch but, moreover, with autocad we now do the same, imagined biblical times. . .
the 3d, well done, would be for us however an advantage!

 

[raf]

I hope not to go against the forum regulation by posting This linkLook at these drawings!
are 3d real, not texture, you see clearly all the bricks! manage to know what software they use.. .

 

[marcof]

Unfortunately the bricks on the tilted side are not equal, change of a few mm one compared to the other

changes little, I would have some unique extra components. I repeat, you can do it without problems. At this point, I'm making a personal statement: between you saying you can't and I say otherwise. If I have time tonight, I'll try on what you posted. If you put a dwg in the plant I'd do before.

 

[raf]

happy to be denied by you! :smile:

 

[raf]

Here I am again.
in addition to the various design problems faced above, I have arisen another. I have my good brick from 100mm, I arrive at the end of the wall, I cut a brick in two and I put a part from 50mm to finish the wall, in the row above I leave with the remaining 50mm. problem: in the material count for inventor the two half of the same brick equal to two separate bricks. That's obviously not good. How do I solve it?
I think I'm going to have to focus on building software, where these issues are on the agenda.
In this regard I have also written in the section cad architecture, let's see what comes out, in the meantime I document on revit.

 

[Messerschmitt]

I'm not an inventor expert, but I think you could use 3 types of bricks:
type 1 - whole bricks
type 2 - brick divided into two parts, both used
type 3 - brick divided into two parts, but of which only one part is used
each of these bricks is a different part.
When you make the distinction, the three types of bricks will appear. making the material requirements you will know that the total brick you need is:
(n° brick type 1) + (n° brick type 2)/2 + (n° brick type 3).
if you have 2 bricks of type 3 cut differently, but you want to count as if they were equal, you have to set on iproperties of the part, project the same number of part (which is actually the name of the part that is used to generate the distinct).

 

[Avoplus]

first of all, thinking of working on thousands of parts (bricks), however honorable and Moroccan, is acceptable; thinking of doing so within the system shown in the first post is pure utopia (regardless of the 3d software used. ..
Therefore the first suggestion I feel to give is this: to separate the realization of the plant (carpenteries, plants, etc.) from the refractory part. if necessary for aesthetic reasons, use the textures in the main axieme.

passing to the problem of bricks, the solution is as follows:
1. get the plant on a sketch. the important thing is that this sketch contains, ultimately, the external encumbrance of the bricks (so without fiber).
2. report (in the ways you prefer) this sketch in a new set and enclose the profile/s closed within a fictitious profile (e.g. a larger rectangle).
3. in the same together, place all the bricks, so that, let's say with a view from above, the surface they occupied exceeds the encumbrance outlined by the sketch. (I recommend using more than one series, depending on the complexity of the plant)
4. at this point the most boring part: select all the bricks that remain completely external to the encumbrance (you have two alternatives: or select them in the browser and suppress them within the series; or select them in the window and change the structure distinct components in "reference". in both cases, they will disappear from the "normal" distinct. finished this job you will have the edge of the bricks that intersect the profile of the encumbrance.
5. go to the sketch of the encumbrance and give it an extrusion everything (it is in default subtraction) and you will get the brick wall shaped with the correct distinct. :finger:

theoretically, you could put this together in the plant but, personally, I would advise you to weigh down the general axieme (unless you agree to insert the derivative or realize a light detail). I hope I've been clear.

Hi.

 

[raf]

Thank you for your suggestions, very precise and detailed. for now I have passed to another part of the oven, where the bricks are less present and more manageable, I will then study in the future again the case taking into account your valid suggestions.
for now you can see in this discussion qui Where did I get here?
thanks again to all, I will return to the attack also on this front! :smile: