problems with work together

[Catafratto]

I often do axiemi (saldati and no) that lend themselves particularly well to work together, for example drums for conveyor rollers where I first create the welded "grick" and then do the various processing (to be able to have the separate tables). problems arise when I go to change the "grezzo" also apparently innocently, for example by stretching or shortening the drum tube: sometimes the sketches of the workmanship do not update, the edges that should move do not follow the parts and everything jumps. I couldn't identify a way of working more resistant to variations so I don't even have a clear idea of how to proceed or what advice to ask.
I ask you if the work together is a little unstable for everyone (and so I put it away) or if someone uses it with satisfaction thanks to a workflow that guarantees stability even in case of variations.

I hope I've been properly explained. . .

 

[Zac69]

I usually create the raw part and derive it in another part that I work. In this way I have never encountered problems, unless I change the crude in such a way that the derivative can no longer recognize projections or holes that disappear. but this I think is normal, whether you work with axioms, or with derivatives.

 

[batstar]

I also use the same method of zac, but many after a change to the source axieme, the derived part gives strange inconsistencies and you have to activate the voice "creates independent bodies in case of unsuccessful bolean operation" and thus goes to create a multibody part with the consequence of having to pass one to one all the works done previously to indicate on which body to act. inventor does not handle the weldings that are caused by most errors.

 

[Catafratto]

Thanks for the answers.
the technique is certainly valid but... Why do you use it? have you started so years ago and have you not changed or have you problems with the work together? in theoretical line do not dislike me, especially to have only one model during the table; However these jams are annoying (it is pieces that I use a lot, it only changes a size like length and also manage the derivative would make everything more slender).

 

[batstar]

I generally have to do a lot of work and I prefer to create a derivative, on simple pieces I also use mechanical processes in welded assemblies, question of habit.

 

[Tarkus]

If they are "solded" pieces where normalized profiles are not used, it is the case of your conveyor roller, I create the crude in multibody part files, (including welds), then it comes to another file where I create the subsequent processing.
this since they have implemented the multibody.
I always found myself well.

 

[Catafratto]

As everyone uses alternative methods, I would say that joint processing does not enjoy a great :tongue: ...

 

[Ilario]

I allow myself to disagree, I have waited to answer to see the development of the discussion, but I have never had problems with the work of assemblies. thick use and also in welded assemblies. the only thing that has always been missing is the male thread (not threaded hole, but external) which is something that I never understood why they don't implement it. . .
very thick design rollers for conveyor belts and all processing are post-welding in welded assemblies. never had a problem of updates, I think it is to understand why of this not update rather.

I ask a question: for internal logic of interface with the management, I have to extract the distinct. How do you do with derivatives or multibody to automatically extract the distinct?

 

[Zac69]

I allow myself to disagree, I have waited to answer to see the development of the discussion, but I have never had problems with the work of assemblies. thick use and also in welded assemblies. the only thing that has always been missing is the male thread (not threaded hole, but external) which is something that I never understood why they don't implement it. . .
very thick design rollers for conveyor belts and all processing are post-welding in welded assemblies. never had a problem of updates, I think it is to understand why of this not update rather.

I ask a question: for internal logic of interface with the management, I have to extract the distinct. How do you do with derivatives or multibody to automatically extract the distinct?

joint processing is by definition only works that allow to subtract material and not add it (try with the extrusion command and see what options are available in the axieme).
in total I put the particular derived and it is he who makes faith in distinct.

 

[Ilario]

you place a very simple roller example with different assemblies

 

[Ilario]

joint processing is by definition only works that allow to subtract material and not add it (try with the extrusion command and see what options are available in the axieme).
in total I put the particular derived and it is he who makes faith in distinct.

threading is a chip removal processing, I know it is correct to do only removal, but I happen to diver file something after welding it for reasons of concentricity and in reality it is possible to do it, so I think it should be implemented the function.

the derivative on drawing can fit me well, but if the finished welded detail is composed of more drawing details, to be realized separately, before welding them should be drawn, encoded, and ordered. if I have a derivative, to the management it turns out as components of purchase and not of production.

I also add that with a derivative I should manage two different files, which I personally prefer not to do.

 

[Catafratto]

Here, my case is exactly that of the Ilario: with a piece practically equal I had my problems, if I notice it/along I remain "lost" the projected edges. However if Ilario uses the work together with continuity I have my answer, the system works and I use it badly; for my management of things the derived part would create problems.

Thanks to everyone, I'll do more experiments.

p.s.
Ilario, if you reuse a set and make a copy of a part (e.g. the longest roller) the whole thing holds well?

 

[Ilario]

when I have to make a roller like this, but longer or with different diameters, I do this way:
- except by name the base roller and give it a different name
- assuming that it is the outer tube, that the central pin, for me, are commercials generated by the cc, I make a "change size" or "replace component" if I have to change "norma". If I change only the size everything remains to me (wins, projected edges, etc...), except of course the odds if they are not consistent (e.g. I have an external ø100 tube and I turn it back to ø95; I change the dimensions in an external ø80 tube, it is obvious that the turning quota ø95 gives me the error of not generating a valid workmanship, but it is enough to make "place everything back". If I change the norm of the pipe, it depends on how the model of the new legislation was created, if when I created it was the copy of the one to which I go to replace it, no problem, otherwise yes, it gives me some problem, but this would do it in every environment, not only in the assemblies with work.
- if I have drawing parts that I have to replace and change that are not cc, I save them and replace them with the appropriate comnads (save and replace them before and if they are more than one, with replace everything for others). I open the basic component and make changes.

It is obvious that for "big" changes certain things are lost, but as in every environment, as mentioned before, but for simple changes, like the variation of a diameter or a length, I never have problems.

I hope I have been clear in the explanation, if you have any doubts tell me as well.

If I can tell you something about it, I can't tell you.

 

[Catafratto]

when I have to make a roller like this, but longer or with different diameters, I do this way:
- except by name the base roller and give it a different name
- assuming that it is the outer tube, that the central pin, for me, are commercials generated by the cc, I make a "change size" or "replace component" if I have to change "norma". If I change only the size everything remains to me (wins, projected edges, etc...), except of course the odds if they are not consistent (e.g. I have an external ø100 tube and I turn it back to ø95; I change the dimensions in an external ø80 tube, it is obvious that the turning quota ø95 gives me the error of not generating a valid workmanship, but it is enough to make "place everything back". If I change the norm of the pipe, it depends on how the model of the new legislation was created, if when I created it was the copy of the one to which I go to replace it, no problem, otherwise yes, it gives me some problem, but this would do it in every environment, not only in the assemblies with work.
- if I have drawing parts that I have to replace and change that are not cc, I save them and replace them with the appropriate comnads (save and replace them before and if they are more than one, with replace everything for others). I open the basic component and make changes.

It is obvious that for "big" changes certain things are lost, but as in every environment, as mentioned before, but for simple changes, like the variation of a diameter or a length, I never have problems.

I hope I have been clear in the explanation, if you have any doubts tell me as well.

If I can tell you something about it, I can't tell you.

Thank you very much, I do as you do... I've probably chosen some wrong references. I set them up, the next mistake I'll turn you off!

 

[Catafratto]

If the discussion interests someone else.

Ilario, I did other experiments after studying better how you built your own and now it seems to me that things are more stable, who knows what mess I had done.

thanks to all for advice

 

[PIETRO2002]

I when I have to make carpentry structures machine tool use this method:

I make welded crude axieme, example n° design a.

I create a new set where I insert the axieme a, this together will have for example the design n° b.
on this set I realize all the processes of the case, until now I have never had problems changing the starting rough as long as I do not remove or add parts that were not included as project edges on the work together.