motion study + video recording

[re_solidworks]

I'm full of commitments at this time, too, and I can't follow the forum as I wish, so I haven't put myself on trial yet.
apart from this I wanted to emphasize that the approach that reggio has with solidworks is in my opinion incorrect and I explain better.
you bought a good cad and are using a "basic" tool to create videos. in the first versions animator did not practically make a bat and year after year is still improving. I understand that the movement is banal, but I make you think that often "banal" things are more complex than they seem to check.
I could bring you an example of a whim with all triangular lights that you can solve even by hand without too many problems, but as long as the customer tells you "the diagonals do not like me, try to remove them" and by hand it becomes difficult and you have to resort to a fem.
At that point, a person who doesn't understand it would tell you: "How, there are less profiles to check and it takes more time? "

to return to the study of movement, 3 years ago I decided to start doing it and bought a premium which contains motion (based on msc adams) which is made specifically to calculate movements.
I am not very prepared on these analyses, but in more than one occasion I managed to verify idarulic cylinders of complex folds, motor powers, brake forces, etc...
apart from these checks that I do only in a preliminary way because I'm not the one making final calculations, I often create videos of attractions for amusement park where motorized motions and free motions and without motion would do nothing.
Basically if you want to make decent videos, in my opinion, you have to take motion or you have to make them do to those with dedicated software (such as motion).
regarding the basins.... all the software have and I would say that 2011 is more than satisfactory from the point of view of stability (finally!!!). Just a short time ago I collaborated with a client who had to set up a studio with adams based on models prepared by me and occasionally took strange turns to avoid known but still unresolved basins. I was amazed also because adams is considered the number 1 in the world in its field and has very different costs from an average cad...

 

[reggio]

Look, I don't want to get behind learning the study movement. .

Don't joke, you have to! absolutely you have to!!! :wink:

I think it's wrong to apply the linear motor if you put it in the elbow block. . .

uhmmm then, in my example that is then the copy of the gupta tutorial, you don't use the linear motor, why you throw it in? Did you want to make a different test?
In fact, I had tried too, to me it is planted at the first bend because it continues to "turn straight" instead of following the path... tea seems to work. . .
Oh be careful, though, I ask: why did you not make the full round but only a first curve?
I ask why your file also escapes to me and does not plant because it continues to pull straight, but if I go to change the function of the linear motion (from 10mm/sec to 100mm/sec) nothing good happens...[youtube]d5ds_mw8[/youtube]and tea instead? You want to give us an eye and make him 360 °?

about applying to elbow or other, it may be you right, it is a source of inspiration, initially I would have wanted to replicate the reality to verify the goodness of the idea/ mechanism: chain or belt that drags, so the bike I wanted to apply it to the cursors... now... let's see what I can do.. .

 

[reggio]

I'm sorry if I'm answering

and of what, we would miss:wink:

I uploaded your set and noticed that the couple you used create problems.
you can't place the second path a bit compared to the other and some objects that will have to follow the two paths.
use the path coupling and not the cam.
avoids mating 'width' on such cases. Why?
because it must always be in the middle of changing the position of objects.
the advice is always the same, couple as it would happen to the assembly.
a linear sequence.

from here 15 I should have done it. . .
I'm still here and I'm trying to understand. .

I attach the video to make you understand that there is something wrong with your matings.

I see the video, I see it's spinning, but I can't figure out how you did it. . .
cmq continues to follow me if you can, I am trying to start from scratch, I would like to stop at every single problem and show it to you, see if so I jump out :biggrin:

 

[SolidUser]

and of what, we would miss:wink:


from here 15 I should have done it. . .
I'm still here and I'm trying to understand. .


I see the video, I see it's spinning, but I can't figure out how you did it. . .
cmq continues to follow me if you can, I am trying to start from scratch, I would like to stop at every single problem and show it to you, see if so I jump out :biggrin:

the coupling width is still there.
I don't know the project, but do you explain the need for two more couplings?
Two are not enough, and the other part is moving in synchronous with simple couplings?

 

[reggio]

I'm full of commitments at this time, too, and I can't follow the forum as I wish, so I haven't put myself on trial yet.

I am really grateful because despite all my troubles, I always devote ample space and support myself very thick:tongue:

I think it's not fair. . .

...I have not been able to understand why, in what sense it is not correct, why do I mistake "commands" or do you refer to expectations (high) not corresponding to my abilities (objectively low)?

... per video creation...

only for clarity: do you refer to the creation of video with "visualize/capture screen/record video" of swx which I complained about in opening or project?

 

[re_solidworks]

hi reggio, for wrong approciation I mean that when you put yourself in the head of doing something with swx you do it "turning your head" and when you realize that the pool was greedy you vent a bit on swx.
Basically the animation you can do with the base is something without too much pretense, otherwise why would they introduce the module motion in the premium? the fact that you can't use engines and forces restricts you much work.
then the model I analyzed was not the maximum: there were, for example, the sketches of the paths not completely defined.
I worked a little up there yesterday, and I made the starting model again. It seems more stable as I did, but there are still problems.
the problem is due (in my opinion) to the fact that when entering the curve there are 2 possible solutions with existing couplings one of which has the non-horizontal blade. in this swx is right and "scroll" moving from one solution to another.
it would be resolved by putting a parallelism of the shovel or by binding between them the speed of movement of the two blocks. in the end without "movement analysis" (motion) you are not yet able to properly verify cinematism and you have to settle for making a video that makes the idea without too many pretensions.

 

[reggio]

hello to all, come back after a "short" pause to resume the speech, and, hopefully, to finish it positively:

Hello, Reggio...
Basically the animation you can do with the base is something without too much pretense, otherwise why would they introduce the module motion in the premium? the fact that you can't use engines and forces restricts you much work.

Okay, I get it, maybe you're also right sometimes, I just say that if in my car the air conditioner isn't there, I can't expect fresh, but if there is (read motion study) I demand that it works when I want and not when and if it seems...

then the model I analyzed was not the maximum: there were for example sketches of the paths not completely defined... .

...of models I made 10,000 emi are lost, now, that attachment should go well conceptually, let's see how to improve it. . .

... you have to settle for a video that makes the idea.. .

That's...

...without too many claims.

This is not:wink:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Okay, and now, if you're with me, I'd say show you what I did and where I stopped, so I'll attach the files and the video
[youtube]ljwrc0ipkom[/youtube]
the question to answer is: why by mating also the 2nd cursor, does the study of movement work badly?