pesi proe vs catia

[mar_cel_lo]

Bye to all,
work in the mold industry and whenever "weight" the axioms with catia and with proe the differences are enormous and I must say that the weight of proe is always the most realistic! ! !
Who could help me with that? ? is it not that in catia you have to give specific settings? ? ?
help me,pleaseee!! !
Have a good day!

 

[mrwolverine]

Are volumes consistent with each other?

 

[mar_cel_lo]

Hi, mr.
volumes are consistent!
I have as the impression that in the calculation of the catia volumes take into account the reference geometry and therefore the value is altered! !

 

[mrwolverine]

Well, if the volumes are consistent between pro-e and catia, I'd say that the problem is... it's a division. . You should understand where the material applies. . .

 

[mar_cel_lo]

the material, or rather the density, stick it at the end of the calculation of the volume not on the particular and therefore is not here the error.
As for the volumes of course they are different between proes and cascade...excuse me but I did not understand the question I thought you were referring to the detail on which I evaluated the volume not to the result. I think the error could be in the calculation of "empty".
Thank you for your help and excuse me for the chases. :

 

[mrwolverine]

That sounds weird. but do you have volumes or is it a multibody object?
If you want to pass me the file and let's see how it goes out...

 

[falonef]

I've been curious, but at this point, we have to go through the catalogue with the material.

 

[mar_cel_lo]

Bye to all,
with regard to the material I insert a generic steel (density 7860 kg/m3), while with regard to the project I have volumes... .

 

[mrwolverine]

So let me understand:
besides the body do you have geometrical sets?
is the weight measurement taken on the whole part equal to that taken directly on the body?

 

[mar_cel_lo]

There are no volumes!
the measurements coincide and in both cases do not coincide with proe! I will tell you that the file I open with proe is the original file catia! ! !
Mah!

 

[mrwolverine]

try posting the file.

 

[robcrac]

I don't know proe, but I've had the same caty problems. I have found on past versions problems in the management of multibody parts, both at different density level, and due to the fact that catia also counts hidden body. Therefore, for those who use mold tooling design modules, the various tapholes and drillholes are counted.
I solved with the generation of catpart from catproduct and applying the analysis to the feature root. Of course, unless you have done so before, the density will be 1.

 

[mar_cel_lo]

Therefore, for those who use mold tooling design modules, the various tapholes and drillholes are counted.
I solved with the generation of catpart from catproduct and applying the analysis to the feature root.

bye robcrac,
First of all thank you for the answer, then I wanted to tell you that I did not understand what you mean by the phrases I mentioned... thank you again!

 

[robcrac]

Therefore, for those who use mold tooling design modules, the various tapholes and drillholes are counted.

to generate drilling, the components that drill have two leotards containing the drilling itself. For example, a screw will have a body "drillhole" that contains the seat of the screw, and a "taphole" that contains the thread.

I solved with the generation of catpart from catproduct and applying the analysis to the feature root.

tools>generate catpart from catproduct

 

[mar_cel_lo]

Perfect!
Now it's all clear. infinite thanks for availability. :biggrin: