Making the 2nd plate match the hole locations of the 1st plate

[Matt Smith]

The 1st plate has a hole wizard feature with a bunch of arbitrary hole locations.

I'd like to make a hole wizard feature on the second plate that matches the holes of the 1st without me having to place a bunch of points and make them concentric to the axis of the holes on the 1st plate.

I'd done the above many times thinking there had to be a better way. Anyone know? (This is all 2D sketching by the way)

 

[Dale Dunn]

The 1st plate has a hole wizard feature with a bunch of arbitrary hole locations.

I'd like to make a hole wizard feature on the second plate that matches the holes of the 1st without me having to place a bunch of points and make them concentric to the axis of the holes on the 1st plate.

I'd done the above many times thinking there had to be a better way. Anyone know? (This is all 2D sketching by the way)

Have you looked into using a hole series? Recent versions can create a series based on an existing hole.

 

[Matt Smith]

Have you looked into using a hole series? Recent versions can create a series based on an existing hole.

Thanks for the tip. It appears the hole series feature requires that all the holes are done at once through all parts. In my case, I've already done the holes in one part and would like to relate holes in another to them. Doesn't look like it's possible as far as I can tell which is surprising seeing how common the situation is.

-Matt

 

[Jeff]

Matt,

You can edit the second plate in the assembly, add the holes either by sketching them or hole wizard. If you use the hole wizard you can simply create a coincident mate between the sketch points of the new ones and the sketch points on the first plate. I would also advise looking into the functionality of the hole series feature.

Jeff

 

[Matt Smith]

Matt,

You can edit the second plate in the assembly, add the holes either by sketching them or hole wizard. If you use the hole wizard you can simply create a coincident mate between the sketch points of the new ones and the sketch points on the first plate. I would also advise looking into the functionality of the hole series feature.

Jeff

Jeff,

Thanks for the comment. Your suggested method is how I do it now. The obvious drawbacks are that it takes time if there are a lot of holes and if I change the number of holes in the 1st plate, it doesn't change in the 2nd resulting in dangling dimensions or missing holes.

It appears the hole series feature is the solution. You just have to remember to do this in the assembly from the beginning. There doesn't appear to be an easy solution for when the hole wizard has already been used on a part and you want to copy the locations of those holes to another part parametrically (allowing for adding and removing holes)

-Matt

 

[TOP]

Matt,

No need for assemblies. It is fairly easy to match features in one part with features in a second using insert part. Here is the trick. In the part that has the pre-existing holes in it create an axis on each hole centerline. Alternatively using surface tools use delete face to create a surface that looks like your solid part. Do this in a configuration. Now, insert that part into the part in which you wish to match the holes. Use the "mates" to position the inserted part and pick the config with the hollow surface in it. You can not match the holes in your new part quite easily. If you change the first part the second will change unless you lock external references.

TOP

P.S. This part can also be inserted into an assembly as an envelope to locate other things without appearing in the BOM.

 

[jon_banquer]

So did the question of "which features will be deleted if I delete this parent?" posted and asked by the only remaining Amigo ever get answered or did this whole thing die in cyberspace.

I don't understand why SolidWorks 2008 appears to do nothing in this regard. This reminds me of how long it took to get Multi-Body / Disjoint Solid support in Solidworks... way too many fucking years.

I'm not going to have to move this one up to Level One of my Jihad list am I? I resent the concept of having to pay extra for basic functionality that should be in SolidWorks.

Jon Banquer
San Diego, CA
http://worldcadaccess.typepad.com/blog/2007/07/spend-a-littleo.html#comment-76366100

 

[Joe788]

On Sep 20, 4:13 pm, jon_banquer wrote:

So did the question of "which features will be deleted if I delete this parent?" posted and asked by the only remaining Amigo ever get answered or did this whole thing die in cyberspace.

I don't understand why SolidWorks 2008 appears to do nothing in this regard. This reminds me of how long it took to get Multi-Body / Disjoint Solid support in Solidworks... way too many fucking years.

I'm not going to have to move this one up to Level One of my Jihad list am I? I resent the concept of having to pay extra for basic functionality that should be in SolidWorks.

...

You don't even have a job. Why do you care what Solidworks is or isn't doing?

Maybe you should actually learn how to apply what you've learned to the real world, instead of focusing on shortcomings that you'd never have found by yourself, and don't understand anyways.

 

[jon_banquer]

"You don't even have a job."

Just like pepperoni pizza being served at the Chevy's Mexican restaurant chain in an event that you insisted happened and never did.

I do note how you never participate in comp.cad.solidworks newsgroup with anything specific just like your pal Cliffy.

Jon Banquer
San Diego, CA
http://worldcadaccess.typepad.com/blog/2007/07/spend-a-littleo.html#comment-76366100

 

[Dale Dunn]

Thanks for the tip. It appears the hole series feature requires that all the holes are done at once through all parts. In my case, I've already done the holes in one part and would like to relate holes in another to them. Doesn't look like it's possible as far as I can tell which is surprising seeing how common the situation is.

-Matt

Too bad. This is the same limitation that usually stops me from using a hole series.

 

[jon_banquer]

I'm not a Solidworks guru by any means.

You got that part right.

You're an idiot and a proven liar. I have no doubt you can barely use SolidWorks.

Jon Banquer
San Diego, CA
http://worldcadaccess.typepad.com/blog/2007/07/spend-a-littleo.html#comment-76366100

 

[PotFlower]

jon_banquer wrote:

So did the question of "which features will be deleted if I delete this parent?" posted and asked by the only remaining Amigo ever get answered or did this whole thing die in cyberspace.

I don't understand why SolidWorks 2008 appears to do nothing in this regard. This reminds me of how long it took to get Multi-Body / Disjoint Solid support in Solidworks... way too many fucking years.

I'm not going to have to move this one up to Level One of my Jihad list am I? I resent the concept of having to pay extra for basic functionality that should be in SolidWorks.

...

You've got a list? That's really weird, Hon. You mean you rant according to a list? So this is intentional? That just makes you a loser. Wjat else is on your list? =multiple contexts default setting =use flex for any non-straight shape =deform as a way of life =any other underused feature you can name should be used for everything

So now your on to some other software? SoludMap? That make unifid hyubrid solid models? Got a video training for it yet? Did you bother to look for other opinions on that software? Just because it exists is good enough. You just want something to rail against. done care if your jihad makes any sense. Is it shaped like a windmill?

Hey, maybe this other software suggests uses for multple contexts, seeing you can't come up with any.

Without even a machining job during the day, what is it approximately that you plane to use this Map for?

Daisy.

 

[Joe788]

On Sep 20, 4:52 pm, jon_banquer wrote:

> I'm not a Solidworks guru by any means.

You got that part right.

You're an idiot and a proven liar. I have no doubt you can barely use SolidWorks.

Jon Banquer
San Diego, CAhttp://worldcadaccess.typepad.com/blog/2007/07/spend-a-littleo.html#c...

HA!! And Smartcam doesn't have chains.....

 

[Cliff]

On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 16:13:37 -0700, jon_banquer wrote:

I resent the concept of having to pay extra for basic
functionality that should be in SolidWorks.

"SolidWorks is without a doubt a leader at early innovation of 3rd party software components" - jon banquer on Nov 15 2003

"And who, exactly, recently went on many rants about buying "components" as the wave of the future? Are you saying that that clueless idiot was a moron?" - Cliff on Oct 25 2003

"The D- cubed components handle the solving while Solid Edge handles the shape presentation. " - jon banquer on Oct 23 2003

"And the clueless buzzword king wrote ~40 posts saying that components were the wave of the future." - Cliff on Sep 26 2003

"Press release time !!! Yup, nothing like quality 3 party components to help make it easier for CAD/CAM vendors to offer other alternatives to Windows" - jon banquer on Sep 24 2003

"I checked CAD/CAM Components website last week so this must be very new. " - jon banquer on Sep 18 2001

"You want change in mid-range CAD/CAM and alternatives to what you label Windoze, then the software components have to be there" - jon banquer on Sep 16 2001

"We might have a little problem using LightWorks MachineWorks because unlike components like Parasolid," - jon banquer on Aug 4 2001

"Besides, most VB apps get their true power from heavily utilizing components that are written in C/C++. " - jon banquer on Jul 13 2001

"Someone who is making a first time implementation of third party hooks these days would be insane to ignore COM." - jon banquer

There is LOTS more <G>.

 

[jon_banquer]

>SoludMap? That make unifid hyubrid solid models?

Drunk again, I see. Seems like Ed Eaton has your number.

Jon Banquer
San Diego, CA
http://worldcadaccess.typepad.com/blog/2007/07/spend-a-littleo.html#comment-76366100

 

[PotFlower]

jon_banquer wrote:

>SoludMap? That make unifid hyubrid solid models?

Drunk again, I see. Seems like Ed Eaton has your number.

Jon Banquer

Drunk and bad speling are two different things.

Even if I were drunk, that's easy to fix, so is bad spelling, if I weren't too lazy to use a speling checker.

Dyslexic and stupid aren't so easy to fix. The only number that bloated swell has is 1701.

Daisy.

 

[jon_banquer]

"The only number that bloated swell has is 1701."

And you don't have a massive ego? Sober up and get back to me on this.

Jon Banquer
San Diego, CA
http://worldcadaccess.typepad.com/blog/2007/07/spend-a-littleo.html#comment-76366100

 

[Edward T Eaton]

So did the question of "which features will be deleted if I delete this parent?" posted and asked by the only remaining Amigo ever get answered or did this whole thing die in cyberspace.

I'm going to deal with this as a valid question (because it is) I always, always! RMB-click a feature before I delete it and choose parent-child to investigate the child relationships before deleting.

If it has lots of kids I want to keep, I do not delete right away - I sabotage the feature (search the newsgroup for the technique) and then repair the kids before deleting the parent.

Works great, it's fast, and no extra software is required. Been doing it for years with great productivity.

The more interesting question is how to tell how deleting features that are references for in-context features can be diagnosed in advance of deletion? There are subtle and shaky tricks for this from a few years back - I would be interested to hear if anyone has sounder footing (please ignore trolls, especially the drunk one).

Ed

 

[Edward T Eaton]

Paul,
Thanks for the inspiration.
I am working on a product that was started by another design group with a 'master model' technique, and they used Split Part to make the sub-parts (bad idea, at least through all released versions of SWx - we'll have to see about 08). Fortunately, the parting lines are simple, but I was struggling to think about how to handle the mounting bosses. I love your suggestion of using insert-part to bring in the axes of those mounting bosses - I did not consider doing that becasue I don't make too many axes in my biz. Of course, when you insert-part you have the option to bring in axes along with planes (and other items) This could be clean and efficient, more so than in-context references via an assembly in my aplication To add to your post, I would suggest that instead of deleting a face on a configruation of the source part (if I read your post correctly) that one simply delete the solid body of the inserted part as the first (or so) feature of the new part. What I tend to do is insert a part, capture all critical relations in sketches and planes with references to the inserted body, then delete the body so it doesn't interfere with my new work. This (I think) saves the step of creating and managing a new config of the parent part. But thanks for posting - I think your suggestion of axes has saved me some time and head-scratching Ed

 

[PotFlower]

Edward T Eaton wrote:

> So did the question of "which features will be deleted if I delete
> this parent?" posted and asked by the only remaining Amigo ever get
> answered or did this whole thing die in cyberspace.
>

I'm going to deal with this as a valid question (because it is) I always, always! RMB-click a feature before I delete it and choose parent-child to investigate the child relationships before deleting.

If it has lots of kids I want to keep, I do not delete right away - I sabotage the feature (search the newsgroup for the technique) and then repair the kids before deleting the parent.
...

Not that it matters, but I'm not drunk. Funny how assumptions go. I like how now Bong queer is now the good guy. You don't believe any of his shit any more than anyone else does, you just won't say so as long as I'm around. posturing.

By the way, truly ignoring means making no mention, not mentioning the ignored in every post.

Maybe you missed that in the magazine article.

Daisy.