mating: nothing moves, but the parts are not completely bound "(-)"

[Atreiou]

work with piping assemblies, valves, pipes, fittings, installed on skid

Jumpingly, during the modification of the assemblies, I happen that parts that are not dragged and that sw, in an attempt to move them, alerts me to be completely bound, actually show in the feature manager the sign (-)

Have you ever happened?

the ctrl-q does not solve.

 

[Dum]

may be due to the fact that you left the free concentric bond, so, on its axis can turn freely.

try to block rotation.

sent by my clt-l09 using tapatalk

 

[Atreiou]

it was so simple.. in a set of 60 pieces 90% has the symbol (-) but none of them moves, on the contrary the hint shows that the piece is totally bound.

 

[skia51]

it was so simple.. in a set of 60 pieces 90% has the symbol (-) but none of them moves, on the contrary the hint shows that the piece is totally bound.

Hi.
I remember once I worked with the 2013 version if I don't erro,
in a combination with so many details, many of which were not fully bound because they had the concentric bond and distance from a surface, so they could still rotate around their axis. If I entered another detail as soon as I entered a single bond, for example concentricity, the detail was blocked as if it was totally bound. In fact, if I tried to insert another bond, solid told me that this bond overshadowed the axieme. I came to the conclusion that maybe solid fails to manage too many details not totally defined and if you try to insert another one, this to avoid problems, it is stuck in the position where it is inserted.
try to define every detail well, for example by blocking rotations in concentric constraints.
hello good work

 

[Atreiou]

work mainly with concentric couplings, I never let them free to rotate, in fact often in place of concentric use "center profile" that has the option "block rotation" and allows me to use a couple less

 

[MassiVonWeizen]

also concentric coupling has rotation lock option

 

[Atreiou]

You're right, but concentric doesn't save me a couple.

 

[MassiVonWeizen]

Excuse me, don't you have to put at least two pairs? concentric and axial positioning? with less than two seems to me it is not possible to define a part

 

[Atreiou]

Imagine two cylinders to be coupled, imagine them as two pipe sections that you have to weld one to another, one is totally bound, the other not.
you have three possibilities:

1 - concentric (with rotation lock) + matching faces

2 - coincidence of the edges of the circumferences + parallelism of a plane to block the rotation

3 - "center profile" (with rotation lock)

in option 3 save a bond, option 2 becomes interesting if I have to orientate the second cylinder in a particular way, because to the other two possibilities to obtain a orientation you must add also a parallelism,
option 2 I don't like to use it because if I have to move one face to the tube after binding, for some reason the selected edge for the bond does not believe it more valid (not always) instead with "center profile" keeps me the bond even after moving face.