Continue to Site

Welcome to MCAD Central

Join our MCAD Central community forums, the largest resource for MCAD (Mechanical Computer-Aided Design) professionals, including files, forums, jobs, articles, calendar, and more.

Register Log in

Complicated model u have ever faced

I can ususlly make it work eventually. typical fix for "can't create draft feature" is to revolve or sweep the bosswith the draft angle included in the sketch. often as surfaces an then solidify under them.


and don't wait to draft at the end.


I have faked many a round value with @O


Different design groups within Caterpillar work to very different standard levels of detail. some want draft, some don't. that level also keeps rising.
 
dsergison



as I understand You do not matter with details because Your model is
not used to create cast in Pro\e, so supplier of rough body use drawing
for casting?



In this case, it is much easier to make old drawings in Pro\e, but i
can not image if it is possible to do model with all needed rounds and
drafts



other case - you said you put drafts early in model. My question is
what about right sequence of features, drafts, rounds on the end?
 
It's a huge company, but the work flow can be divided into three typical categories. I would estimate currently 1/3 of total work for each.


#1 parts are created from the print drawings. the suppliers re-model them.


#2parts are made from the simplemodels, the suppliers import our geometry and add the draft (if we did not) using other software.


#3 the models are almost perfect and the tool path can be generated directly from it with little intervention.


I work with all three levels. the trend is of course to move to #3


---correctsequence of features? HA HA HA


The corect sequence is #1 the one that WORKS. #2the one that is the most FLEXIBLE to changes.#3 cast geometry complete BEFORE MACHIME FEATURES (if applicable)#4 the one that is most LOGICAL.


many prople mis-undersand that conceptt. the blanket statement that rounds and drafts belong last is aterrible handicap. It is a carry over from novice level modeling and has no place in a complex world.
 
It sounds very familiar to me



Do You make also casting and machinig?



What feature\way You use to create machined part - Merge with other
model.., copy geom from other model ..., instance in Family table?



I ask because I found out that merge brings some problems, and I prefer copy geom to make machined body from rough body



Ok, sequence of feature - I agree that for simple models it is
efficient method, but for complex ones not always. What is good in
rounds, drafts in the end, is that that You are not worried about wrong
references(rounds, drafts), and that round won`t be a parent for other
feature than round. That is plus.



What about geometry check? Do You try to solved them or You do not borred them at all?
 
we rarely make seperate cast and machined models.Our released prints are almost always of finished parts.Typically we model the parts as cast, place a marker in the model tree (just an annotation saying Begin_Machine_Feat) then create all the machine features after it. This way the pattern makers can suppress all the machine features and export the cast geometry to be processed for CNC machining of molds.


we try to reference surfaces of features rther than edges to avoid dependency to rounds. -or we reference datum planes, axis, or curves. (better yet)


to make the machined features easy to see we set the color of "surfaces, (querry to select all) solid surfaces" to a dark color when we finish the cast geometry.Then set the "part" color lighter. Then as you make machine cuts the new cut surfaces appear in the lighter color.


of course we try to fix geom checks. but I don't live by it.
 
you said you make a machined part in the same model as rough part, correrct?



so I can imagine there is a lot features and your regenerating time is not short

Did you have any problem with handle the models in this way.

I suppose when you make an assembly with parts like this, plus family tables it could take a bit of time while opening asm



I am close to opinion that maybe things made by copy geom could be a
good choise to go, while in assembly there is no so big number of
features to regenerate



does anybody truly take care of geometry check? it sometimes happened in so stupid areas I am wonder of
 
Yes, we do a very poor job of managing file size in upper level assemblys. ofusing simplified reps, etc....... that isa big issue.
 
there is one thing I am curious about



how You handle rounds? Do You have any special approach, do You use advanced funcionality, transitions?



or you do whatever is possible not matter how, but to make it works(I sometimes do that)
 
You should look at Geometry Checks in the context of how you are going to be using the Pro/Engineer file.



I always review what geometry checks exist in my model, but that
doesn't mean I do something about all of them. In some cases, all we
need is a drawing (like #1 above) and as long as the drawing shows
correctly, geom checks usually aren't an issue.



In other cases, we need to develop tool paths directly from the Pro/E
geometry or export to another NC package, so I pay a little more
attention to geometry checks. But I don't necessarily take care of all
of them, since (from experience) some issues that Pro/E flags can be
fixed using another NC package. If I tried to deal with each and every
geom check in a model, nothing would get done.



Also, geometry checks may affect the quality of your model for
Mechanica analysis. Again, from experience, you tend to learn what is
bad and what is worse.



As for rounds, learn everything (transisitons, etc) and use whatever
works. The only time I implement "special approaches" is to maintain a
consistent appearance for a product (i.e. Spherical tranisitons of a
specific radius).
 
hiii there everybody


Nice to hear from u guys abt ur experiences and dsergison u were abt to send me those drawings of the engine i hope u still remember i am waitin for it keep doing good work guys


bye
 
to markthemech



do You have any special group of geom check You keep on eye on them



what are the most dangerous - geom check to rounds, drafts, surfaces, or for features that add/cut the material



In my opinion the geom check for rounds are not important.
 
It's a good question.



Again, my answer really depends on what is to be done with the model.



Geom checks for rounds *can* be significant, especially if the rounds
are on show surfaces of the product. What has happened in the past is a
model with problems at its rounds was exported to a tooling supplier,
and they had problems developing tool paths in the same areas where
some geometry checks occurred. We worked to fix the geom check (changed
some dimensions) re-exported it, and the problem was solved.



Features that cut the material can cause a problem too. There is a geom
check warning that goes something like "Feature cuts tiny pieces of the
highlighted edge". This can cause problems again in manufacturing, when
the CAM software reads in these surfaces (especially if it is exported
as a third party format).



What I try to do is look at the geom checks themselves and the features
they relate to. I don't have any universal rules for them, instead, I
have to rely on my past experiences and the expertise of the people I
work with to determine if a problem is worth pulling my hair out over
or not.
 
skwasim_smile said:
hiii there everybody


Nice to hear from u guys abt ur experiences and dsergison
u were abt to send me those drawings of the engine i hope u still
remember i am waitin for it keep doing good work guys


bye
Click to expand...



I really don't think dsergison was about [sp] to send you drawings of a
Cat engine, unless he likes the idea of never working again. In fact,
he blatantly laughed at the suggestion. Like I said in a previous post,
it is really unprofessional to ask someone for their models from work
just so you can learn Pro/E, and even more unprofessional to keep
insisting on it.



If you want engine drawings, go to http://www.dbbp.com , find the
Webshop link, and PURCHASE 2D drawings of various motorcycle engines.
 
well, honestly I love the idea of never working again:) If they would just keep paying me that would be sweet!


thanks markthemech. -I could not think of a reply (that was appropriate for the board).
 
hiiii markthemech


Sorry for tht post i just been carried by tht model anyway u guy's doing out gr8 job my appoligies to dsergison also for the thing i have done it was very unhealthy and unprofessional agaian sorry guy's


bye
 
The issue (if you read the posts) is that one poster put up a picture
of his work (a large Engine by Caterpillar) and was asked for drawings
of the model.



I don't even know why that silly little cube was put up, since it's not
that complicated anyways. You can build a part like that with less than
30 features total. Dsergison's CAT engine, however, is an excellent
example of a very complicated Pro/E model, since it requires teamwork,
engineering (it does more than just look pretty) and planning.



Zaki I don't know where (or if) you work but if I asked you to just
give me drawings and models of what your company makes , how
would you react? How would your boss react if you actually did?



My original issue was that as soon as someone posts a picture of
something they did, it is inevitable that the same people on this forum
will ask them for a copy of the model. This is why my participation
here is so limited, as opposed to other Pro/E forums.



If you'd like to make the part, go ahead. Remember though, you won't be
doing the original poster any favours by doing this for him.
 
My biggest model was variant model of Stator core, some statistic about it:
It got over 3500 lines of code (relations, Pro/Program)
Over 200 Parameters
It have over 100 000 parts and assembly's
Max number of single part use in assembly is over 70 000 (actually when you have over 50 000 number of single part it crash Pro/E while doing drawing with bill of materials - BUG).
And I cannot post pictures, or sharing models so don't ask.


I agree with makthemech about constantly asking people around of giving them model. We all working for someone, and those models we are making are their property, and we CANNOT give some ones property to others (it would be like I give you my neighbors car), or if we translate this it would be steeling!
 
hey chill ,


hay dis is good model , send to me dis drawings , iwil try for that ,nothing is impossible right , so send me this drawing ,
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Sponsor

Articles From 3DCAD World

Back
Top