strategy put at the table

[lavap]

Hello, everyone.

I've been in the forum for a while and I've been following the vs.
discussions with great interest and great advantage.
I take advantage of x compliments.

This is my first post. I hope in the future
to help the community.

bando to cheeks. Here's the problem.

use swx for about two months for designing
average carpentry. mine is more a problem
general mechanical design than software use.
I tried with the search function of the forum but
I didn't find anything like mine.

I have to put on the table a welded structure constituted
from about 40 details. it is cmq of an object a little
complex because each detail consists of sheets
bent and punched especially tormented. I'll give you the
Welding is really numerous.

in the company the approach is to model each part
with corresponding table, then assemble the whole
and indicate on the table of the assembly and the assembly quotas
welding symbols. I have to say that my previous experiences
consisted of relatively simple pieces and is the first
when I face such complex structures.

What to do:

- a single board together with many sections, views of detail, etc.
Of course on several sheets?

- subassembly and create a table of each subaxis?
In this last case, subassiems would not have their own functionality
independent and between the other very prob the disposition in subassiemi
does not correspond to the real production process of the structure.
However, this last approach attracts me more.

What do you think?
Thank you in advance.

 

[Mike1967]

Hello, everyone.

What to do:

- a single board together with many sections, views of detail, etc.
Of course on several sheets?

- subassembly and create a table of each subaxis?
In this last case, subassiems would not have their own functionality
independent and between the other very prob the disposition in subassiemi
does not correspond to the real production process of the structure.
However, this last approach attracts me more.

What do you think?
Thank you in advance.

Welcome.

I'm in your own condition and I've settled like your second
question.
Of course, managing the project is perhaps more laborious but if you assemble the whole in a unique set (which will bring the name of the finished object) it is enough to select open drawing on the affected subaxieme and the game is done.
However, when you put the complete object on the table, you will cure
the notes that refer to what design depends on that particular one.
if you want to distribute the work at the counter you can do it quietly because
each operator will have a design copy independent from others.
for simple assemblies instead a single table is plausible.

 

[re_solidworks]

I normally follow the production process equal and normally decide also in production to break in several sub-assistances, otherwise the processing phases would become complex even for those who must realize the particular.