project with guided quotas

[DANI-3D]

Good morning to all my colleagues.

I've been thinking about it for a while and for a few days I've set up the project of a new complex beautiful machine by parameterizing all the various assemblies, details, plans, axes, etc., through relationships and parameters that refer to guided quotas inserted in the main set. see image attached, in fact the odds and details are many more, but for obvious reasons of privacy I left only a few objects as an example. I had already used this method in small studies with excellent results, but it is the first time I extend it to an entire project.

in practice I create in the together all the guided quotas that serve to manage the project and to the change of these everything is updated with some regenerates, the first results are satisfactory, it is simple and intuitive to identify the quota that you want to change... but what will happen by going on and here I need your help and some advice. First I would like to know if you ever used this method. I also tried to "disease" the odds by moving them from one floor to another, changing the attacks and nothing happened, but the doubts remain, and before moving forward I would like to talk to you.

an early thanks to those who want to participate in this discussion.

 

[mamobono]

Hi.
I use the skeleton (or you can make a prt file with all references plan /points /assi and amounts it with inheritance )
the projects made so I have always been stable to vary the quotas of reference

Hi.

 

[DANI-3D]

Hi.
I use the skeleton (or you can make a prt file with all references plan /points /assi and amounts it with inheritance )
the projects made so I have always been stable to vary the quotas of reference

Hi.

Hi.

It's the system I use too, what I'm trying to do is to update, simulate, change the project simply by changing the main quotas, without having to enter the individual assemblies or details.

 

[calacc]

Hi.
I think this is a nice top-down design job. if it is effective or not or reliable over time you can only say it with your experience. I don't think anyone can tell you more without getting into the merits of this project. . .

in practice I create in the assieme all the guided quotas that serve to manage the project and to the vary of these everything is updated with some regenerates.. .

from what I understand (correct me if I'm wrong) you parameterized the whole axieme based on 3d annotations. Well, if I can afford, that's not the function for which they were created. I personally prefer to use the skeleton because in my experience I consider it a more robust and reliable system. 3d annotations use only to put test tolerances, manufacturing annotations, roughness, geometric tolerances etc. but only at the end of the project when we are going to production. This is because I don't think it is robust at all because they are anchored to edges, points etc... that it is easy to jump. have the advantage that maybe they are more intuitive as they can be viewed all instantly, but even there if they are too many... help

 

[DANI-3D]

. from what I understand (correct me if I'm wrong) you parameterized the whole axieme based on 3d annotations. :

Hi.

no 3d annotations, are guided quotas in the model and are anchored to planes, axes, main surfaces, so, in theory, stable.

 

[calacc]

I think we're saying the same thing. if they are the quotas in yellow in your previous photo I call them 3d annotations and use them to put only the testing quotas to finished project... I've never parameterized anything over those. If you think they're stable, better, it means you're working.

are guided odds in the model and are anchored on floors.. .

I did a test and couldn't put a guided share between two floors, for example... :frown:

p.s. I call them 3d annotations because in I create those functions there are in the ribbon under the tab bored and I'm the analogue of the drawing environment if you make a case (only you're in 3d environment); from here you can put guided quotas, notes, geometric tolerances, roughness etc...
but (repeat), I am not suitable for this specific purpose. were introduced because the intent is to gradually abandon the table to work only in 3d

 

[DANI-3D]

Yes. Okay, they say the same thing.
I attach a piece treated with this method, try to change the yellow quotas and regenerate. Of course, if there are no contraindications, the beautiful is that this system is easily extensible to a big set.

My purpose is to solve a problem of not little account:
I try to parameterize, for obvious reasons, as much as possible a project, this complicates things a little bit when taking over an old set for changes, it is not always immediate to trace back to the method, parameters and relationships used for construction. using the odds of the model would be all simpler because they are immediately visible and available at the beginning of the model tree.

 

[cacciatorino]

Yes. Okay, they say the same thing.
I attach a piece treated with this method, try to change the yellow quotas and regenerate. Of course, if there are no contraindications, the beautiful is that this system is easily extensible to a big set.

My purpose is to solve a problem of not little account:
I try to parameterize, for obvious reasons, as much as possible a project, this complicates things a little bit when taking over an old set for changes, it is not always immediate to trace back to the method, parameters and relationships used for construction. using the odds of the model would be all simpler because they are immediately visible and available at the beginning of the model tree.

I also made a car two years ago with this method, made in solid edge. everything perfect, stable connections, with two clicks I modified the master and propagated the changes to all the filgi, a huge time saving, but....:

This year they tell me to make a car like that two years ago. Well, I could make a total copy of the assembly and bring new references to the new skeleton, but I can't because I need to reuse existing codes and I won't change. Then I decide to create new parts once at a time, every time it becomes necessary, and here comes the hippo: I open the file of the part, except with the new name, but she unfortunately keeps the links with the machine of two ani ago. The solution is that I have to rebuild the links one at a time, reconnecting them to the new machine set, I'm getting crazy.... :frown:

 

[painaz]

Hi, I see we're all looking for the final method.

I do this: I always use the skeletons and put them on the table. the main advantage is that I create all the views that I want and exploit the bidirectional association of quotas. I also learned to use motion skeleton, but another trick I use recently (on normal skeleton) to simulate motions is to associate or drive quotas from the datum graph.

an example you find here:
https://grabcad.com/library/4-stroke-50cc-engine-1The nice thing is that you can do things that seem impossible in appearance.

in the proposed example the skeleton (normal, I did not use motion scheleton) has a parameter called phase, which pilots the rotation of the shaft. if I change the phase the segments that represent the lobes of the cams vary in simulant length the rise of the lobe of the cam and moving the joint that pilots the valves these change position.

However, recapitulating, I highly recommend the table of the skeleton.

 

[DANI-3D]

I also made a car two years ago with this method, made in solid edge. everything perfect, stable connections, with two clicks I modified the master and propagated the changes to all the filgi, a huge time saving, but....:

This year they tell me to make a car like that two years ago. Well, I could make a total copy of the assembly and bring new references to the new skeleton, but I can't because I need to reuse existing codes and I won't change. Then I decide to create new parts once at a time, every time it becomes necessary, and here comes the hippo: I open the file of the part, except with the new name, but she unfortunately keeps the links with the machine of two ani ago. The solution is that I have to rebuild the links one at a time, reconnecting them to the new machine set, I'm getting crazy.... :frown:

I deal with this problem every time I make a new car, because fortunately or unfortunately, it is never a completely new car, there is always a similar one to start from. But I have to say that with the rename in session I feel great, it is a somewhat long method, but they update all the references and links of the project.

 

[DANI-3D]

Hi, I see we're all looking for the final method.

that we will never find.
for the rest I didn't understand much that, but as soon as I have a little free time I will deepen it.

 

[cacciatorino]

I deal with this problem every time I make a new car, because fortunately or unfortunately, it is never a completely new car, there is always a similar one to start from. But I have to say that with the rename in session I feel great, it is a somewhat long method, but they update all the references and links of the project.

But if you have a code that won't be changed in the middle of another ten that will become new, how do you handle it?

 

[painaz]

It's been 15 minutes, so I'm gonna add here.

I said,

If you want to use the notes, there is a discussion here:
http://www.cad3d.it/forum1/threads/5308-quote-guidate-da-noteBut in the end it depends a lot on the type of product we design. an example is who designs cylinders: it is the typical set that is really worth parameterizing because to pull out a family of products after it is really a moment. If the project is a prototype it is useless to push the parameterization thoroughly.

another thing I have seen that it is useful is to strive to organize the asses before even pulling a single line: to understand what to put in the main skeleton, to understand if in addition to the axioms it is best to make "subscheleters". the fault of this methodology is that if the boss ("el paron") does not know a blessed bat of how to use a parametric and does not see you draw "tochi" sooner or later the line ("poche saws and drills the blind drawings") you hunt it because it does not understand that the half day you lose to understand how to organize the aid in reality is not lost, it is something that makes you earn with interest and makes the project possible.

 

[painaz]

Hi, I see we're all looking for the final method.

I do this: I always use the skeletons and put them on the table. the main advantage is that I create all the views that I want and exploit the bidirectional association of quotas. I also learned to use motion skeleton, but another trick I use recently (on normal skeleton) to simulate motions is to associate or drive quotas from the datum graph.

an example you find here:
https://grabcad.com/library/4-stroke-50cc-engine-1The nice thing is that you can do things that seem impossible in appearance.

in the proposed example the skeleton (normal, I did not use motion scheleton) has a parameter called phase, which pilots the rotation of the shaft. if I change the phase the segments that represent the lobes of the cams vary in simulant length the rise of the lobe of the cam and moving the joint that pilots the valves these change position.

However, recapitulating, I highly recommend the table of the skeleton.
View attachment 42456

 

[calacc]

Of course I say... Interesting! i.e. you overturned the concept of modeling quotas and annotation quotas with this system.
Notable :biggrin:
now seen on a small tubular does not make the idea well... I'd be curious to see it applied to a group of your parents to see what happens. maybe it's a little long to set because every part of modeling you have to put a guided quota and a relationship (only to write it hurts me... ). then after if the parameterized quotas are many you will have to work with sunglasses.
ahahahahah:redface:

 

[DANI-3D]

But if you have a code that won't be changed in the middle of another ten that will become new, how do you handle it?

Therefore, to duplicate a project I do so: I press that it is a method not very fast, but ... seen also the age not younger, minimizes errors.

I make a rename in session of all those codes, including drw, which I'm sure they change, but I don't give him a new definitive code, add a suffix, e.g. aa to the old code, in this way I immediately see the new pieces and I also know the old code. going on with the work, even at a distance of days, as soon as I see that a piece I have to change it I immediately make a rename in session with suffix aa both of the part and of the assembly that recalls it. when the new project is finished, or it is good, I arm myself with holy patience is renouncing the details that begin by aa with the code I defined. I prefer to lose some time in rename the pieces that lose relationships, links and various references.

 

[DANI-3D]

Of course I say... Interesting! i.e. you overturned the concept of modeling quotas and annotation quotas with this system.
Notable :biggrin:
now seen on a small tubular does not make the idea well... I'd be curious to see it applied to a group of your parents to see what happens. maybe it's a little long to set because every part of modeling you have to put a guided quota and a relationship (only to write it hurts me... ). then after if the parameterized quotas are many you will have to work with sunglasses.
ahahahahah:redface:

in the assemblies it is very comfortable, and the preparation is not very long, you piss in the together go in the relationships and selection those of the various parts, a little click and away, however it is not necessary to parameterize them all, just check plans and axes the rest comes from itself.

 

[DANI-3D]

Hi.

small update to the method of guided quotas:
are about 3 months that I use this method, both in quite complex projects and on small assemblies. And... I have to say I'm very good at it. I also tried to "disengage" the various components by adding, moving and eliminating the driving quotas with the result that the corrections are very intuitive and simple to carry out.
Moreover, when needed, it is very easy to unleash a piece from references created in a set and make it independent, or to connect to another group, just remove or change one or more lines of relationships. less simple thing if you use external references like public and copy geometry, union inheritance etc.

I would like to know your opinion.

 

[BFausto]

ciao

Mice:
https://youtu.be/6jidsmk4rdehttps://youtu.be/qxbgshiujt4

 

[DANI-3D]

ciao

Mice:
https://youtu.be/6jidsmk4rdehttps://youtu.be/qxbgshiujt4

Sadly, for now, a little fast. Can you describe in two lines the method used with pros and cons?