series linked to relationship

[ringhio82]

Hi, everyone, I think it's the first time I write even if I've been following you for a long time.
My problem is as follows:

I am drawing a roe (it is not my field therefore the difficulty for me is even greater) and to avoid inserting all the beams (to l) individually I wanted to insert the first beam and then make a series (to speak of the vertical beams of the roe). Obviously, given the slope of the roof, the beams have a decreasing length. I did the report (which by the way seems to work well) that regulates the length of this beam but if I make the series the length does not vary, it varies only if I insert the pieces individually, one at a time. Is there a way to make the automatic process so that by changing the series, you change the length of the beams automatically? ?

thanks for the attention and good evening to all.

:wink:

 

[maxopus]

the series cannot work this way.
The concept is that if you have a part and make a series you will have so many equal parts.
mathematically it is feasible, so much so that in pro/e in modeling parts you have the table series.
But if you make a series on the components you will have in distinct many components with the same code... and it is fart to have the same code for different components.

you can use different escamotages:
1) in these cases the best form is the one dedicated to carpenters;
2) create the longest element and then cut it together (it works geometrically but you have the same problem as above, same code for different elements).
3) use the flexibility of the components but, the same problem as above is repeated.

4) I have to try with a fdu, it could do to your case.

 

[DANI-3D]

Hi.

Give me an eye here, it's not exactly your case, but I hope you find interesting news.
http://www.cad3d.it/forum1/showthread.php?t=27952&highlight=codice=*

 

[ringhio82]

the series cannot work this way.
The concept is that if you have a part and make a series you will have so many equal parts.
mathematically it is feasible, so much so that in pro/e in modeling parts you have the table series.
But if you make a series on the components you will have in distinct many components with the same code... and it is fart to have the same code for different components.

you can use different escamotages:
1) in these cases the best form is the one dedicated to carpenters;
2) create the longest element and then cut it together (it works geometrically but you have the same problem as above, same code for different elements).
3) use the flexibility of the components but, the same problem as above is repeated.

4) I have to try with a fdu, it could do to your case.

but therefore if each piece has to have a different code (as it is right that it is at the end) it means that I have to insert so many pieces, each with its measure, thus making useless the relationship that seemed a very comfortable solution. In fact in this way every piece will have a different code for the "quota length" which is what I wanted to change with the use of relationships. Now I read a bit of the discussion posted by dani-3d because it seems to be interesting, although from what I read it is quite complex things (I never used the family table).. Even it would be nice to create a set that at the opening asks me how many vertical crosses I want to insert so that alone the proe generates the whim with all the elements in the right place.

more "dozzinal" solutions but equally effective do not exist?? :36_1_13:

 

[maxopus]

but therefore if each piece has to have a different code (as it is right that it is at the end) it means that I have to insert so many pieces, each with its measure, thus making useless the relationship that seemed a very comfortable solution. In fact in this way every piece will have a different code for the "quota length" which is what I wanted to change with the use of relationships. Now I read a bit of the discussion posted by dani-3d because it seems to be interesting, although from what I read it is quite complex things (I never used the family table).. Even it would be nice to create a set that at the opening asks me how many vertical crosses I want to insert so that alone the proe generates the whim with all the elements in the right place.

more "dozzinal" solutions but equally effective do not exist?? :36_1_13:

Can you post something that makes me better understand the structure of the goat and what are the variable elements?
Let's see if I think of anything...

 

[Parametric_Ozzy]

Even it would be nice to create a set that at the opening asks me how many vertical crosses I want to insert so that alone the proe generates the whim with all the elements in the right place.

more "dozzinal" solutions but equally effective do not exist?? :36_1_13:

Sincerely with proes you can do everything and more, but you have to know him thoroughly to make him do what we want.
what you ask is feasible, but you have to program it ad hoc, unfortunately it is not yet able to read in people's thought....:smile:

 

[ringhio82]

as you can see from the image I have to insert the beams to l in the roe but wanting to make everything easily editable I wanted to make the series and leave the proe the task to modify the various lengths. I had tried to create a relationship based on the angle of the goat and the distance from the longer beam.
without considering that I was hoping to make the series and mirror the whole figure with respect to the long beam so as to create the figure of the roof but at this point it is best to do a unique operation that creates the elements in the two directions (if possible). thanks for the help:finger: