How do you know if an assembly is fully mated?

Discussion in 'SolidWorks' started by Flynt, Aug 30, 2007.

  1. Flynt

    Flynt Guest

    Forgive me if this is asking something obvious but is it possible to
    see if all parts within an assembly are fully mated?

    With an assembly of say 30 parts (which isn't really many), I
    sometimes come across a part that's not mated when I had expected it
    to be. This especially occurs if there has been some changes and part
    substitutions along the way.

    Short of working through the model selecting and trying to drag parts
    out, what other method exists?

    F
     
    Flynt, Aug 30, 2007
    #1
  2. Flynt

    FlowerPot Guest

    Flynt wrote:
    ....
    Look into its eyes and see if you sense a feeling of deep satisfaction.
    Often accompanied by breathlessness, perspiration, smoking, or snoring.

    Out of curiosity, exactly which parts are you planning to drag out?

    Daisy
     
    FlowerPot, Aug 30, 2007
    #2
  3. Look at the feature tree ahead of the name of the part, if there is (f) the
    part is fixed, If there is a (-) the part is not fully constrained(mated),
    (+) over constained, nothing ( ) the part is fully constained(mated)


    Mike
     
    Michael Eckstein, Aug 31, 2007
    #3
  4. Flynt

    TOP Guest

    One thing you can say about SW is that it is pretty good about giving
    feedback to the user.

    Besides the convention just mentioned there are some other things to
    look for. --> means an in context reference. -->? means an out of
    context reference. -->* means a locked reference. -->x means a broken
    reference. In addition you want to peruse the mate tree for InPlace
    mates. These are associated with the above symbols most of the time
    and will remain even if the external references are removed. They
    serve to fix one part to the other temporarily while creating in
    context features. I prefer to use the in context method to locate
    features and then remove them and the In-Place mate and replace it
    with normal mates. Just a little more robust in the long run IMHO.

    The feature tree contains a wealth of information if you know how to
    read it's language.

    TOP
     
    TOP, Aug 31, 2007
    #4
  5. One technique I like is to FIX the first component in the assembly,
    and mate all others to that. But you HAVE to choose that first
    component well - it must be one that ain't gonna change, hopefully at
    the center of the assembly so you can take advatage of its planes if
    there is symmetry, etc, etc - the bottom line is it isn't always
    applicable, but it is an opportunity to look for

    The advantage is that at any time you can FLOAT that component and
    move it around and see if all the other components move appropriatly
    with it. The under-constrained components will fall like a trail of
    bread crumbs. You cannot do this every time, but when the function of
    your product allows it, take advatantage of it.

    (sidebar - this technique also has a parallel with sketches. I fix a
    point, fully define the sketch, unfix the point, then make that point
    coincident with the external thing that makes functional sense - ONLY
    when the entire process makes sense. Even the lowest grade firebrand
    can come up with an acception to this approach, and that is why you,
    as a smart person, only use it in those cases where it serves your
    design)

    The minus-signs next to component names, mentioned by others, is
    another good tip, but it only goes so far - it is common practice NOT
    to rotationally constrain screws (they are concentric to the screw
    boss and coincident to the meat they meet with at the screw head, so
    why keep them from spinnning just to get a plus next to them?) Same
    goes with shafts in many situations.
    Hope this helps in your situation,
    Ed
     
    Edward T Eaton, Sep 2, 2007
    #5
  6. Flynt

    TOP Guest

    I used to reorder the assembly feature tree so that my part numbers
    would be in nice sequential order. That turned out to be a mistake for
    the reasons you mentioned. Unfortunately the ability to easily read
    the BOM and the feature tree had to take a back seat to getting SW to
    work efficiently. And it is interesting that feature tree order can
    have a big effect on performance. Much more so than you would have
    ever thought.

    TOP
     
    TOP, Sep 3, 2007
    #6
  7. And it is interesting that feature tree order can

    No kidding? I've never thought to test this in assemblies. Any
    chance you could share what you know (in a new thread, I guess, to
    avoid hijacking this one)?
    I am intrigued
    Ed
     
    Edward T Eaton, Sep 3, 2007
    #7
Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.