one of the selected pulleys is already fixed

[MassiVonWeizen]

Step 203 is fine. in options (button in the save screen) put only solid/surface geometry
when the main axieme is already included all parts within it. become parts without history of functions, but that does not seve.

 

[HuddSyd]

https://www.dropbox.com/s/hf5iyfdfgrq2i9a/assieme1.step?dl=0

 

[MassiVonWeizen]

I opened your step now and...
-contains only one more motere, pulleys and ring support and other things. all the rest is missing
- Tell me that he's loaded it wrong and you didn't do the fit together but as a multibody part... It's an abomination. welded parts should be made with multibody method
- engines, if they do not need rendering, do not use those downloaded full of details such as fins, wineries, logos... because they weigh a lot at the processing level in the assemblies and even more at the design level. a cylinder is made to represent the body, a cylinder to represent the tree and a rectangle to represent the box.

If you haven't done the multibody parts I can't help you at this point because managing the project, which doesn't seem complicated to me, to show you how to do the couplings would take too long.
as I imagine that remake the details, and above all the tutorials of the prograama (the ones inside and not the ones randomly caught on youtube) is deleterious for you you should take the assemblies of the welded and save them as part. In this way you have many less constraints to manage and if you are wrong and you have to reassemble you don't take days.

 

[HuddSyd]

the fact that the mount is a set I was recommended by the prof, in my folder I already have a set with the assembler so every time I use that
the internal tutorials I made them, but about the couplings do not come down so in detail as I need
about the step file, I put you only the essential, missing arms and links but I'm pretty sure that once solved the problem on that step is solved
in any way does nothing, today I go to reception from the prof and I hope that this thing can be resolved

 

[MassiVonWeizen]

Your teacher obviously doesn't know the program.
if you did the tutorials you must have also done the module for multibody parts. using a file rather than a set is definitely better.

 

[HuddSyd]

sincerely I don't think it's fair to be so declining a good engineer, if the mountaineer is used in this way there are basic reasons you don't know, that I don't even want to explain since you would definitely go off topic
Whether right or not I care first of all to understand how to solve the error written in the thread title

 

[MassiVonWeizen]

I don't say he's a good engineer, I say he can't use the software.

I care first of all how to solve the error written in the thread title

let us know where the error was and how you solved it

 

[HuddSyd]

unfortunately I could not go to reception cause snow?

 

[MassiVonWeizen]

I wrote wrong... rewrite the first sentence
I don't say non He's a good engineer, I say he can't use the software.

However it is a speech of method and optimization of the project.
if you do a welded part as you did you carry you behind dozens of files (which must have unique names otherwise overwriting risks), dozens of constraints that repercussion at the level of processing and general management, to model it you put hours; if you do it in one part you have only one file, 0 constraints and models in an hour (I try to consider the times of a mole)
Supposing you have to draw every single body you can do it in various manners.

made in speed your working set. obviously cannot be taken literally because there are other missing parts, but I hope it can help you equally

the attached file is not good... Sorry. I'll do it again.

 

[MassiVonWeizen]

here is the correct file

 

[HuddSyd]

When I put my belt on, here's to buy again.

 

[MassiVonWeizen]

When you create the strap, you can pick it up with rotations

 

[HuddSyd]

but then they don't turn together anymore
missing the pigeon that has a screw-type coupling

 

[MassiVonWeizen]

without belt the pulleys turn? no if you kept the ass as I did
If you want me to roar then you have to review the constraints of the two pulleys that must have freedom of rotation.

What do they need to turn? you're not doing an animation with a real pigeon life that turns the rotary motion into a translatory.

 

[HuddSyd]

no they do not turn, but to take a good vote at the exam should do so

 

[MassiVonWeizen]

Then, speaking of my group, the pulleys should not be inserted into sub-axioms.
before you can stop the belt
No pulley motor from the aid engine and put it in the general one
No Axial bearing support from2 and put it in the general one
in pulley conduct you find the parallel parallel parallel link2 that blocks rotation, eliminate it. (Now the pulley and the tree must be able to rotate)
binds the drive pulley leaving it free to rotate
Ultimately the only movements of the axieme must be rotational qurelli of the two pulleys and the race of the support.
reactivate the belt

While I was doing this, I noticed design errors that are much more serious than not seeing two things running in synchronous.

 

[HuddSyd]

so doing, however, the pulleys rotate and the support transla but they do it for fact not coupled

 

[MassiVonWeizen]

Forget the support, suspend it and focus on the pulleys.
verify that without strap each moves only in rotation.
activate the belt, verify that there is the option binds rotations and try to move
could happen, as in the video, that reactivating the belt gives error in the couplings; in that case just suspend and reactivate the coupling highlighted in yellow
watch the video

 

[HuddSyd]

done, but until the support is suspended everything works without errors
when reactivating support and reactivating limit distance bond returns error
if I try to suspend only the minimum/maximum distance coupling works without errors but the support penetrates in my set

 

[MassiVonWeizen]

explains this concept of compendium with some images.
the support has nothing to do with the pulleys, it cannot have any constraint with them and therefore cannot determine its functioning. and however it is called limit distance mating.
the couplings of that support are:
concentricity with the rod, parallelism with the column because it does not roar on itself, limit distance with the face of the upper plate (even if I would choose the face of the column so much to minimize the affected components)
but are you doing evidence on my set or yours? on my work all right