use the content center as a basis for custom components

[andrmollo]

Good morning to all,
in the company where we work we produce internally components starting from raw material in round bars, squares, tubulars, tubes etc... It follows that in our separate base, for each component we report its number of parts and the code of raw material (e.g. laminated round bar c45). the latter information is inserted manually at the time of creation of the separate.

my idea is to use creating new ipts from a personalized element of the center contained instead of an empty model. In this way I would inherit from the contained center the custom properties including the identification of raw material starting.

arrival to the question: Does anyone use this workflow? do you see advantages or disadvantages in this method?

thank you in advance to those who will want to answer.

 

[Matteo Cappelli dis.CAD]

cation

proof to vedere questo video:

 

[Catafratto]

keep in mind that you can create as many models as you want in addition to standard.ipt and sheet metal.ipt: Maybe you can just have a " rectangular tube" model (and similar) where you will already have a rectangular tubular with pre-compiled iproperties (using formulas to automate code creation/description) for what you use most often.

 

[andrmollo]

Hi.
thanks to both for the answers.

I clearly have the procedure to achieve what I have in mind.

my doubt is more than anything about the advantages and disadvantages that can start modeling a component from the content center.

• an advantage is definitely to have a table that tells me the properties of the model to vary the size
• a disadvantage is to be bound to the command "change the size" to change part of the geometry of the piece.

What do you think?

 

[Matteo Cappelli dis.CAD]

Hi.
In my opinion, there are advantages for table management, "change size" etc., but the disadvantage is that you are a little less flexible in "heavy" changes.
clearly depends also on the number of models you should prepare

 

[andrmollo]

I agree,
At the moment I would create "only" three custom cc families: rounds, tubes and blades.

from these, when I create a new component as a custom cc member, I could choose (in the case of a round):

• the sub-type: laminate, drawn, chromed.. .
• the material: c45, s355, 42crmo4
• the outer diameter
• length
• ...

the family table will go to fill out: the code of raw material, its description etc

the created component will only be a circular extrusion with an empty sketch ready to accommodate the processing of turning any form it takes.

in the case of changes to the starting rough I would use the command "change size".
in case of changes to the geometry of the piece, I would go to change the features within the model as for any other.

it would be interesting to know if others follow this approach or if they are the white fly that is complicating life to solve a problem that has a simpler solution.

 

[Zac69]

Hi.
In my opinion, there are advantages for table management, "change size" etc., but the disadvantage is that you are a little less flexible in "heavy" changes.
clearly depends also on the number of models you should prepare

I work for a company that uses profiles to make protections. I created in a few hours 483 sections of already extruded profiles put in the templates. each has an ilogic rule from which I collect custom lengths and properties that I then use in the table and also to make the quote directly. seems a long procedure, but it's just boring.. .

 

[andrmollo]

I work for a company that uses profiles to make protections. I created in a few hours 483 sections of already extruded profiles put in the templates. each has an ilogic rule from which I collect custom lengths and properties that I then use in the table and also to make the quote directly. seems a long procedure, but it's just boring.. .

Hi.
Thank you for the answer. It's quite similar to what I want to do.

then the aa profile will have its model file different from the bb profile.

I can ask you some questions:

• Why did you prefer to use models rather than the center contained? I was orientated on the cc to take advantage of the table management to quickly fill out (even with excel) the properties.
• slightly offtopic: did ilogic rules insert them as external or internal? How do you find yourself with your choice?

thanks in advance

 

[Zac69]

Hi.
Thank you for the answer. It's quite similar to what I want to do.

then the aa profile will have its model file different from the bb profile.

I can ask you some questions:

• Why did you prefer to use models rather than the center contained? I was orientated on the cc to take advantage of the table management to quickly fill out (even with excel) the properties.
• slightly offtopic: did ilogic rules insert them as external or internal? How do you find yourself with your choice?

thanks in advance

1) the profiles, when the matrix is at the end, must be remade and therefore the starting model must be remade. We also design new matrices and then once I designed the matrix I also have the extruded ready to be saved as a template.
2) I actually managed to create a single ilogic rule that compiles everything I need. I preferred to insert it internally because in this way I can pass the template also to customers or suppliers who use inventor and also they benefit from it. Of course some iproprierties are pre-compiled directly in the template (e.g. the material or profile name)

 

[andrmollo]

1) the profiles, when the matrix is at the end, must be remade and therefore the starting model must be remade. We also design new matrices and then once I designed the matrix I also have the extruded ready to be saved as a template.
2) I actually managed to create a single ilogic rule that compiles everything I need. I preferred to insert it internally because in this way I can pass the template also to customers or suppliers who use inventor and also they benefit from it. Of course some iproprierties are pre-compiled directly in the template (e.g. the material or profile name)

Thank you very much, very clear in the answers.