|
Ambrose Burnside posted:sorry i mean “cam” not “CAM”, as in like, profiled cams and followers, the cams that control poppet valve timing, the snail cam you use to raise and then drop a treadle hammer, etc. I want to simulate the action of a fairly involved edge cam design with dual followers mounted on a single bellcrank and the kinematics/clearances at the highs and dwells aren’t immediately obvious and can’t be fully simulated with simple mates. Oh. Hit the search bar within Solidworks and type "CAM Mate" and check the videos and tutorials. Or check here. https://help.solidworks.com/2020/English/SolidWorks/sldworks/c_Mechanical_Mates.htm
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 21:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 23:53 |
|
|
idk how i missed cams in mechanical mates  thanks
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 21:19
|
|
|
Machinery's Handbook is rich in cam & follower design guidance
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 21:33
|
|
|
shame on an IGA posted:Machinery's Handbook is rich in cam & follower design guidance Honestly, anybody that wants to be involved in design or manufacturing on pretty much any level ought to have a copy of that book that they look through every now and then to learn something new.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 21:36
|
|
|
i should probably make clear that this isn't a *real* cam design task; i'm doing a close trace of a couple of artobolevsky's pre-worked mechanisms to make little kinematic desktop toys as christmas gifts, this isn't an actual scrollsaw linkage or w/e, all that's important is that It Goes. thankfully, i do not have to design a cam for any sort of engineering purpose with real-life stakes beyond "the engineering nerds in my life might get a lame christmas gift this year" machinery's handbook is probably the ticket for checking the alterations i made to the followers tho without having to rig the entire model up for simulation, yeah good call Ambrose Burnside fucked around with this message at 21:44 on Nov 15, 2021 |
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 21:39
|
|
|
This one is also handy, has much better presentation, and as of a couple years ago hard copies were readily provided for free out of the marketing budget. Not sure if that is still the case with it labeled "Print on Demand" but the PDF is free for all. https://www.schaeffler.de/content.s...erencetyp-pub:0
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 21:47
|
|
|
Another trick for doing cams (from before the cam mate existed) is to draw your cam, then create a sketch and offset the profile by the radius of the follower, then do a path mate with a single sketch point at the center of your cam follower. Then just hide the sketches. it also does fewer goofy mate reversals than the cam motion does when dragging it around.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 22:04
|
|
|
shame on an IGA posted:This one is also handy, has much better presentation, and as of a couple years ago hard copies were readily provided for free out of the marketing budget. Not sure if that is still the case with it labeled "Print on Demand" but the PDF is free for all. drat I'm getting old, no wonder I'd never heard of this (my copy of the Machinery's Handbook is from 1989 holy loving  ).
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 22:12
|
|
|
shame on an IGA posted:This one is also handy, has much better presentation, and as of a couple years ago hard copies were readily provided for free out of the marketing budget. Not sure if that is still the case with it labeled "Print on Demand" but the PDF is free for all. i've never scored a hard copy but the scaeffler app is just great
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2021 23:26
|
|
|
biracial bear for uncut posted:drat I'm getting old, no wonder I'd never heard of this (my copy of the Machinery's Handbook is from 1989 holy loving I've inherited an SKF catalogue of a similar age that has "Printed in West Germany" emblazoned on page 1. It's just a few months older than I am.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2021 13:49
|
|
|
of probable interest to this thread: i'm on an analog computer designing kick in solidworks, two different flavours- a ball-and-disc integrator model, representing a mainstay component of the final generation of mechanical computers, especially analog guidance/gunlaying/bombsight devices through and after ww2; the second is an exotic and unusual water displacement-based square root extractor described in a journal article from 1901. crosspostin from 3dprint thread b/c i'm starting to prototype the assembliesAmbrose Burnside posted:in other news i'm designing and printing a mechanical computer. or part of one, anyways, specifically a functioning ball-and-disc integrator. one of these guys: Ambrose Burnside posted:thanks much. i'm actually working on a few different mechanical computers atm, the ball-and-disc is the only one i'm physically prototyping at this point.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2021 04:42
|
|
|
Ambrose, you have substantially cooler projects than I do, and you inspire me to be better at completing mine. Finally got a license to the 3DX SW Makers Offer, so I'm throwing that on a virtual machine. Turns out 3DX SOLIDWORKS and standalone don't get along on the same machine, so hopefully this will work out. For some fun background, it looks like they're actually serious about this program. I'm getting my BattleBots team set up on it before converting my makerspace over from the now defunct SOLIDWORKS for Makerspaces program. Pop in some questions if you're curious about it, I'll poke around when I can.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2021 22:03
|
|
|
I'm doing some weldment design in SW and I've got a question on how you add weldnuts and stuff to the weldment. I'm doing the main frame as a multi-body part and that's all fine, no issues there. I'd like to add weldnuts and weld them in before welding tubes together, but I currently have them in the model as an assembly that's weldment + weldnuts + rivnuts. This isn't going to confuse me or anything during fabrication, but it does bug me I have components that will be welded to the frame and they aren't in my weldment file. I'd rather have them in my cut list and reflected on that drawing instead of in an assembly drawing that's half welding and half riveting, and doesn't reflect fabrication intent either.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2021 18:38
|
|
|
meowmeowmeowmeow posted:I'm doing some weldment design in SW and I've got a question on how you add weldnuts and stuff to the weldment. Do your weldment cut list and also do a Bill of Materials list, put both of them on the print and edit one list or the other to use different designations so that when you drop balloons on the drawing you get references to each list that make sense?
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2021 19:41
|
|
|
The mashup of BOM and cut list does yeah, but would I do my whole weldment drawing of the assembly instead of the part? How you do drawings for each tube in the weldment seems like it would transfer to an assembly, assuming the bodies are still selectable under model view scope. Thinking about it I might be able to import the weld nuts as bodies in the part file, I'll have to try that first. E: yeah it imports fine and under the move/copy tool you can use mates type constraints to define the move, and then sketch based patterns to add to all the holes in my hole wizard feature. This is the way to do it I think. Related, is there a way to rename or reorder a cut list table? Every time I try it breaks the associativity between model and drawing in a weird way, but the cut list is clearly a little buggy in SW2018. Sometimes the wrong profile gets associated with a tube or names disappear and I have to edit the structural member feature to get it to rebuild instead of just hitting the rebuild button. meowmeowmeowmeow fucked around with this message at 20:00 on Nov 19, 2021 |
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2021 19:55
|
|
|
meowmeowmeowmeow posted:The mashup of BOM and cut list does yeah, but would I do my whole weldment drawing of the assembly instead of the part? How you do drawings for each tube in the weldment seems like it would transfer to an assembly, assuming the bodies are still selectable under model view scope. If you format your cut list correctly it will have the relevant info for how each piece should be cut in the columns in the table (as long as you aren't doing anything super-complicated).
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2021 19:59
|
|
|
There's a lot of compound miters and holes in tubes so I need per tube drawings anyways, and cut list formatting was enough of a pain that I kinda have up on it except for overall length and quantity of each tube needed. I'll throw my drawing set up here for feedback once I've got the weldnut update done, I'm pretty happy with it so far but always good to get other opinions.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2021 20:06
|
|
|
The other option is to break your assembly up into sub-assemblies as you would assemble it in real life, then have a drawing for each sub-assembly and the only thing the final drawing has on it is the final assembly steps. The way you would do it if you were having someone else build it. This would also be good practice for large design projects where you have to consider how something is going to be built, not just it's final shape.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2021 22:21
|
|
|
Ya our machine bases are weldments and we organize them into several assemblies- table top on frame/complete frame of basic tubes welded to each other and more complicated subassys/each unique upright with foot pad orientation and offsets and other complicated subs. Powder coating is called out at the highest weldments. The whole machine is organized into assemblies based on how it will be made. Like a heavy indexer would be lifted and installed on the table before the dial is installed. Or the electrical enclosure is attached before the panel is inserted. The assemblers are meant work to the drawings and sign off as they complete. We get issues when they try to work ahead before all the parts are in.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2021 23:11
|
|
|
Yeah that's always how I've done machine tool design for work but I don't usually use weldments, and when we do they're pretty simple - guards and frames and they've never had weld nuts in them, so having the weldment as a single part hasn't been a problem, and its pretty easy to break up weldment parts for the drawing without making it an assembly. I've also never felt the need to tell our fab shops what order to make things in, tube details in the drawing and inspection measurements for the finished frame and let them do what they think is best to get it done. When you break up a weldment into multiple part files, do you still use the weldment utility in SW to draw the tubes? Do you just lay out each member in a 3D sketch with planes for trim/extend instead of the mating members? Thinking as I type, I could also do it as an assembly with a bunch of virtual parts where theres a lot of connected references between members so they all match. I could also draw it as a single part, export the bodies to parts, then combine in an assembly but that seems like a pain. Doing a bit of googling it also looks like SW supports a 'sub-weldment' feature where you can group portions of a weldment into their own part file and then do drawings for that. Not quite clear if this then treats the subweldment as a subassembly on the BOM/drawing or what, I'll have to play with it. Discovering that you can use mates to move bodies in a single part and do exploded views in a part file has removed a lot of the issues I was having with working in a part instead of an assembly. With that and multiple exploded views it went together pretty quickly. I'd like to add a sheet in between the current sheet 1 and 2 that has each of the tubes + weldnuts shown and theres a couple more things in the drawing and model to fix but here's where I'm at as of tonight: https://www.scribd.com/document/541018008/Weldment-Cap-Space-Frame-Rev-A?secret_password=rhy8WTcWsXczOUuuBUUh I've got no idea why it won't group the weldnuts, one of the groups is just some of the other ones mirrored so ???
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2021 03:00
|
|
|
How would I add surface decorations like this  I've done block letter surface em/debossing before, but that has a fixed "height", these are three dimensonal decorations with some sort of.... height map applied? Is there a procedural plugin where I can paint surfaces I want to get like, a knurled or, like these, a flowery victorian finish, or how would I do this The fusion 360 embossed text tool is nice but really limited compared to how this guy is applying these decorative finishes Is this best applied in something like blender, then imported to F360? For example I made a personalized champagne bottle coozy, but it's just basically a cylinder with some debossed text, some decoration like this would really amp up a personalized gift, but I need a specific internal diamter, which blender sucks at edit: thingverse link https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:5028132 Hadlock fucked around with this message at 22:30 on Nov 20, 2021 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2021 22:28
|
|
|
Zbrush has a tool that does this. In most 'art' based modelers (Maya, Houdini, etc), you can also take a texture map and use it to drive deformation, although your resolution would need to be stupidly high to get this level of detail.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2021 22:37
|
|
|
in solidworks that’s what 3d textures are, you provide it greyscale raster images and it generates a 3d mesh by dividing the model up into a mesh and assigning shade-based heights for each mesh point. it’s very easy to generate very detailed meshes this way provided you have/can create a suitable heightmap image, you end up being able to control the resultant contours pretty effectively just by how you apply gradients in your chosen vector image software. that said, getting finely-detailed yet crisp meshes of that sort can be *extremely* resource-intensive and result in enormous file sizes if you’re not judicious about how fine a mesh you use and where. from a mechanical cad perspective, the cleanest and most desirable approach is gonna be to stay away from meshes to the greatest degree possible, altogether if you can- model each decorative element individually and gradually build out the overall design to suit aesthetic preference, using copying+alteration, patterning, mirroring etc to get the most mileage from every feature you model from scratch, and then doing lots of fussy tweaking as you go so it looks right. It’s slow and a huge pain in the rear end, but can be worth doing if you’re likely to be doing a whole run of designs using the same technique and same ornamental elements, as is the case with those filigreed pokemon. that said, the best software i’m aware of for the specific use-case of creating high-detail “natural-looking” artistic 3d models intended for CAM/CAD physical production is Vectric Aspire, it’s very good for rapidly creating organic/natural-feeling embossed forms from 2d vector art, the sort of thing where the geometry has to be *right* but where you don’t care about the individual dimensions except for overall shape and size. it can one-click process an entire model in the time Solidworks takes to crunch one or two computationally-intense Draft operations. That said, it’s tailored heavily towards conventional CNC milling/router work, if your workpiece doesn’t have clearly-defined ‘front’ and ‘back’ faces Aspire probably won’t help much. But it’s above and beyond the easiest way to add a bunch of lush, ornate, yet clean-looking and low-file size detail to flat pieces, medallions/coins, etc.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2021 01:07
|
|
|
you have a supremely dense writing style, but very informative, thank you!
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2021 02:32
|
|
|
50% off packages to WORLD here: https://3dexperienceworld.com/?utm_...&utm_term=event If anyone is in the maker scene and wants to go, the folks in the Makers division have a lot of passes to give out for free. No idea if it includes the certification discounts, though. DM me if you're interested in that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2021 16:24
|
|
|
NewFatMike posted:50% off packages to WORLD here: I am definitely interested if I can get days off work approved for it. Mostly just as a "something to do and get out of the loving office for a few days" thing but also because I missed last year's event even after getting passes because of loving work (and LOL gently caress me if they were going to reimburse me for that--though to be fair they were virtual passes and they don't see anything that doesn't require a physical presence as being of any worth whatsoever).
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2021 17:15
|
|
|
i'm applying to CAD design jobs right now; yesterday I tossed an application at a position I didn't think I had any chance at, they wanted an 'autoCAD drafter' and ive never even used autocad, but it turns out that they're using 'autocad' as a genericization a la popcicle, kleenex etc to mean 'CAD software in general' and they *actually* use inventor in-house, which i've got fair professional experience with 1) what the gently caress, how common can this be 2) god dammit i wonder how many applicable roles ive skipped over needlessly b/c whoever wrote their ad was just lazy and nonspecific in wording
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2021 15:39
|
|
|
Hiring managers in technology often don't know what the gently caress they need or their teams actually use.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2021 15:50
|
|
|
I've had to explain to many people that CAD is not a synonym for AutoCAD, and AutoCAD is not a generic term for 3D modeling software, and I work in a university program that teaches this stuff
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2021 17:30
|
|
|
Ambrose Burnside posted:i'm applying to CAD design jobs right now; yesterday I tossed an application at a position I didn't think I had any chance at, they wanted an 'autoCAD drafter' and ive never even used autocad, but it turns out that they're using 'autocad' as a genericization a la popcicle, kleenex etc to mean 'CAD software in general' and they *actually* use inventor in-house, which i've got fair professional experience with Join us in the VAR channel 
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2021 21:38
|
|
|
NewFatMike posted:Join us in the VAR channel wots this then
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2021 01:36
|
|
|
Resellers hire and fire folks all the time, it's the SOLIDWORKS value added reseller channel. We do the deployments, sales, training, all that for end users. You're Canadian, I think? Your reseller is probably Javelin Tech. You're insanely smart and know how to do lots of advanced SW techniques and are enormously resourceful. I think any reseller would jump at the chance to have you on the technical team for mentoring and design assistance. Frankly, half your posts in this thread are the kind of content that folks would drool all over. I'm having a blast - my job is to be really goddamn good at SW, and it's really great not building the same better product every day. Free software, you're incentivized to learn whatever in the vast suite of tools you want and to learn them well, free WORLD tickets if you submit a talk. Honestly I think the job could only be better if I got to do it while training kids to machine in the woods.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2021 03:21
|
|
|
I have a pretty deep and esoteric resume but my CAD-specific resume is thin/largely "outside industry" b/c I've only recently shifted my career goals from manufacturing/fabrication-geared jobs towards design. I have a shitload of personal work but don't currently share them anywhere. IDK how best to leverage this all into paid work, esp freelance/independent work I can do remotely, but I wanna try making it work if i can. do you mind if I PM you with a few questions? I don't wanna post in much more detail on a semipublic platform like the thread
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2021 07:12
|
|
|
Please do! I'm working with a second VAR in the USA right now, so I may not have 1:1, but I'm happy to share anything I can
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2021 07:26
|
|
|
NewFatMike posted:I think the job could only be better if I got to do it while training kids to machine in the woods. This reads a lot darker/creepier than you probably intended I used to think about applying to work for a VAR until my current employer sent me to a Reseller's training course for Solidworks (Trimech? We had course credits to use up and they sent me in to take the courses) and I spent the entire week bored out of my loving mind because the instructor had to spend the entire course teaching over half the class basic "this is how Windows works" stuff before even touching the overview stuff for the course I was actually there for. I'm usually ok helping someone figure something out if they're stuck on how to model something or if there is some basic common background to work from, but teaching someone how to do something from no prior knowledge at all of how a computer works or basic math is something I'm terrible at. The instructor took pity and let me read/work through books he had for their other courses while he was working with everyone else, so it wasn't like money wasted but the whole thing about how you can't normally buy those books without taking the related courses sucked. Damnit I need to make time to finish taking my certifications and get the Expert cert done; other poo poo keeps coming up though. Some Pinko Commie fucked around with this message at 12:13 on Nov 30, 2021 |
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2021 12:11
|
|
|
Ha! Yeah, SOLIDWORKS Camp Counselor was a tough needle to thread verbally last night I guess. Absolutely the worst part of training is having The Codger Whose AutoCAD was Just Taken From Him or the Late Career Executive Being Forced to Actually Look at the Engineers' CAD. I had to holler several times a day for one guy to right click. No, right click. There's two mouse buttons you can click, click the one on the right. Made much worse by the fact that at my old employer the training coordinator actively told people not to do the prerequisites for Essentials. I do really love the work even if the last place was... operationally problematic.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2021 15:11
|
|
|
Oh, Right-Click? One of the guys in the class couldn't wrap his head around 3d modelling at all. "I just want to make 2d drawings in Solidworks, why do I need to model the part first?" Instructor kept his cool but I would've been like "Get out. This class is for covering the essentials of modelling and then making a drawing from that model. If you just want to make 2d drawings you're in the wrong class." and then I'd have been fired. EDIT: Yes I know it's possible to start in the Drawing part of Solidworks and just draw whatever (and eventually take that data and make a model later if you want to) but that's a whole different course and a much clunkier way to do poo poo than learning how to model.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2021 16:10
|
|
|
biracial bear for uncut posted:EDIT: Yes I know it's possible to start in the Drawing part of Solidworks and just draw whatever (and eventually take that data and make a model later if you want to) but that's a whole different course and a much clunkier way to do poo poo than learning how to model.  Excuse me sir, the drafting class is down the hall. My grandfather was at an auction 10 years ago and called me saying he bought me a blueprint plotter. So I'm thinking a digital "plotter", instead he arrives with gallon jugs of chemicals, light boxes, large trays, and then I realized it was actually for making "blue" prints.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2021 16:30
|
|
|
Yooper posted:
There was literally a class for actual AutoCAD across the hall!
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2021 16:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 23:53 |
|
|
Anyone teaching AutoCAD in 2021 for any purpose other than converting old dwg files into a modern format is committing a crime against humanity.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2021 17:55
|
|