use and abuse of inventor aids

[Ilario]

ahi ahi ahi:biggrin::redface::tongue:
It's for this and other similar reasons that I model the trees completely in ipt environment....probably I can't stand doing it together.

What they agree, certain "helps" should be ignored, they do more damage than anything.
however there is worse, nothing beats the " generator of frames ".

I am more than agreeing on the "mast generator" and on the "key connections", as well as on the generating holes directly to the " bolted connections", but dissenting on the "motor frames", I find it a tool that I could no longer do without... I would like to understand why you don't like it, so to know

 

[Tarkus]

What they agree, certain "helps" should be ignored, they do more damage than anything.
however there is worse, nothing beats the " generator of frames ".

and instead the fg I remain sympathetic.
I find it useful and fast, of course better, but now we know the actual improvements on what really serves for modeling in inventor, are made every 3 or 4 years. )
year by year only minks are improved....(see 2017)
p.s. I am also curious as ilario

 

[batstar]

What they agree, certain "helps" should be ignored, they do more damage than anything.
however there is worse, nothing beats the " generator of frames ".

Maybe the gear generator beats him.

 

[stefanobruno]

p.s. I am also curious as ilario

I don't have a real justification, I don't use it and I don't miss it.
But I had to change a group made by those who use it systematically and one thing that could be solved in two minutes with my usual system, committed me for at least 10 times so.
You'll say, you don't use it and you don't know it, so...
"It is very convenient, of course, when you have to make changes you lose more time."
Stop, I have nothing to do with further motivation.

For the rest:
the bolted connection makes me the effect of the laxative :biggrin:
the insertion of elements of the center contained with the imate and other automatisms, idem.
standard use to mount axioms, idem.
the mirror to make symmetrical elements or groups, idem.
the derived elements I use them the minimum indispensable.
I will use them a lot when the masses on the table will take the references of the original piece without having to remake them completely, perhaps to rel. 2025.
I love, but I use little, all part of transmissions, belt, chain and gears.
I am aware that they are not geometrically correct gears, but the system is definitely useful (not use it to calculate ).
I don't know, and I don't miss, the tree generator.

I am a Taliban, but I challenge anyone to do things faster than I can.
Am I presumptuous? No, I see what's around, and I'm happy with what I see.:biggrin:

 

[Tarkus]

I don't have a real justification, I don't use it and I don't miss it.
................................. ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .
I am a Taliban, but I challenge anyone to do things faster than I can.
Am I presumptuous? No, I see what's around, and I'm happy with what I see.:biggrin:

:36_1_15::36_1_18:
As far as the last part is concerned, I am a little Taliban, even if I use the fg.

 

[costeel]

I'm in the first place, but you want to tell me that all the aids complicate your life?

 

[stefanobruno]

I'm in the first place, but you want to tell me that all the aids complicate your life?

the answer lies in the question that generated this discussion
with a unified size chart, a sketch of a sunshade and an extrusion would have solved everything.
I don't want to do a test, when you put that detail on the table, do you see the work or not? if you have to do it in the environment together, I expect that in the ipt there is not, with everything that involves.

repetitive, probably you see, I am now doing a groove, which you can generate only in the assembly and, in the table of the tree, the working of the groove is displayed.

 

[Ilario]

I don't have a real justification, I don't use it and I don't miss it.
But I had to change a group made by those who use it systematically and one thing that could be solved in two minutes with my usual system, committed me for at least 10 times so.
You'll say, you don't use it and you don't know it, so...
"It is very convenient, of course, when you have to make changes you lose more time."
Stop, I have nothing to do with further motivation.
....

I keep curious.... :
I can't honestly figure out how a change to a frame can be made in less time than fg...
The only chance I see is in mirroring an initero frame, which maybe (maybe) could be solved in less time... but for other things I don't understand. . .
Would you give me an example of how you work?
my curiosity is pure... if I see a positive feedback I am also willing to change method

ps.: I know that you are o.t. if you want to move fg discussions to a new one, well come

 

[stefanobruno]

it is nothing special, switch from the original frame to the modified one, it requires a click to open the interested iron, a click to change the quota and another to close everything.
I don't know how to do it with the gt, if you explain it to me, I try and then I leave the sentence.

Bye.

 

[Ilario]

If that's all, then even those who used it and told you that it wanted us who knows what, used it terrible.
a click to open the skeleton, one to change the quota, one to update. . . .
with the fg you create a "skeleton" in a file hidden in separate, but part of the axieme where the frame is inserted. create the "skeleton" generated by 2d and/or 3d sketches to create the profile with the necessary and useful odds, then place the commercial profiles on the skeleton. made this with two clicks create an angle joint that can be at the degrees you want, a click if you need to shorten or shape shapes.. .
I think it's harder to explain than to do.. .
as I say I couldn't help it.... then it is probably habits.

 

[stefanobruno]

then it is probably habits.

Yes, and also of type of work and how it is organized from time to time.
then there is always to learn.

 

[Tarkus]

in fact, if to shorten or stretch if they do it at the same time, to create junctions at 45° or joints in between one profile and the other,
with the generator continues to suffice a click, with methods antes generator: sketches, extrusions, plans, various cuts...
I believe that in gain speed you talk about factor 10

 

[Ilario]

all created with fg, in different details, such as balustrades, scale structure, columns, parapets, etc...
I have already modified it 3 times because of the spaces to be respected in the shed, all with the method I told you before without going crazy more than much.
obviously move the fixing holes requires you to open and update other files, but that definitely the same way as your...
I suggest you try and deepen... It will take a while to optimize the work system, but I think you'll find yourself well, even if I imagine that leaving the certain for the uncertain can be "painting"

 

[stefanobruno]

So you can handle it?

 

[Ilario]

It's 20 times bigger than mine, but I'd say yes, the same way...
Before you venture to do something like that, though, it takes a little experience with smaller structures to understand how to organize.. .
I would say that they are identical... those of the fg no longer puts us to open them than other assemblies.

 

[Catafratto]

the only problem I couldn't solve with the fg (but I think it's just my inability) is to create a new frame starting from a base, i.e.: I have the frame a, I want to create a new frame b almost equal to: I haven't yet managed to find the way to copy and change the axieme. said this, for some frames I do first to do to and b with the fg that only with "class" techniques so I also recommend experiments with the fg. personally before choosing whether to use the fg or not "look in the face" what I have to do, for so many things it is not worth me, for others it is worth it.
the observation of the Ilario is sacred: you have to look at how to organize the frames and the base skeleton, it takes a while and the false departure is always around the corner.

 

[Ilario]

the only problem I couldn't solve with the fg (but I think it's just my inability) is to create a new frame starting from a base, i.e.: I have the frame a, I want to create a new frame b almost equal to: I haven't yet managed to find the way to copy and change the axieme.
...

I, fortunately, work with a third-party application (paying) that solves this and other rhinestones due to the copy of axioms and associated tables that, if I didn't, I would have a lot of swine. the application solves 90% of the problems related to this kind of thing, such as copying parts, assemblies, tables, derived parts etc...
I believe that the "design assistant" or "vault" can come to your help to do this, but as I said, having this application, they are tools that I have never used and do not feel the need....

 

[Catafratto]

vault not use it, experiments with design assistant are until now gone wrong... I think there are very strict folder hierarchy to follow to get the copy successfully, I have to decide to study it better.

 

[Tarkus]

the only problem I couldn't solve with the fg (but I think it's just my inability) is to create a new frame starting from a base, i.e.: I have the frame a, I want to create a new frame b almost equal to: I haven't yet managed to find the way to copy and change the axieme. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

You'll know already, but it's a pretty pale thing to do anyway with the design assistant:
copy together, basic sketch and ahimè rename each blindfold connected to the axieme:36_1_4::36_3_4::36_1_4:

 

[Catafratto]

I thought I tried something like that, failing: obviously I lost pieces on the street, I will try again. . .