Adaptivity not working

[Mario428]

Using Inventor 2012 SP2

Have been using Inventor for 6 months or so after being on Solidowrks for many years.

With the settings I have from the start I have been avoiding using adaptivity because it causes more problems than it seems to fix.

Just ran into this problem a few minutes ago.

Basic rect angle iron frame, put holes in them for fasteners. Created the cover and constrained it to the frame assembly. Used project geometry to locate all the holes in the frame onto the cover. Use the "Hole" feature and everything is good with the world.

Then changed the side pc of the frame, shortened it by 1.25 inches. Would not update until I deleted the cover and the fasteners. Even then I had to go thru all the constraints I used, edit them back to the number I had used. Once I did all that the frame was the correct size.

I must be missing something serious, it has to be easier than this to use adaptive parts.

[Cadmanto]

Welcome to the forum.

How did you create your frame?  Frame Generator? 

Honestly working with parts out of the CC is not an easy task.

As you are finding out using adaptivity can be tricky at times.  Take a look at this link and see if it clears it up a bit for you.

http://wikihelp.autodesk.com/Inventor/enu/2012/Help/0073-Autodesk73/0308-Parts308/0353-Part_fea353/0...

If this solved your issue please mark this posting "Accept as Solution".

Or if you like something that was said and it was helpful, Kudos are appreciated. Thanks!!!! 

[Mario428]

Frame was created using 2 different parts. Frame generator does not work for us for a bunch of reasons mostly to do with the BOM.

Does anyone do top-down assemblies in Inventor? Seems to be impossible given all the hoops that have to be jumped thru.

Do not seem to be able to make my assembly adaptive after the fact, looked at document properties and that checkbox is grayed out.

[blair]

Adaptivity requires being in the Assembly environment and at least two different parts in the Assembly and you need to be editing one of the parts and requires the projection of geometry of the other part on the part you are editing.

Adaptivity is a great thing and a bad thing. It does help with the creation of parts but does slow the system down and can lead to funny results. I try to clear Adaptivity as soon as possible and lock my design down.

[DVDM]

Forget Adaptivity, use skeletal modelling techniques instead:

http://www.widom-assoc.com/MA301-1P.pdf

It's a very robust way or working, though it doesn't suit all types of designs, i.e. if individual parts you make using skeletal modelling techniques are 'standard' and need to be reused elsewhere, then this method has it's downsides (due to parts having a common origin).

[Mario428]

I was working in an assembly and do know how adaptivity is supposed to work. I did post I worked in Solidworks for many years. This would have been a non issue in SW, the assy would have updated in the blink of an eye.

I looked thru the skelatal method, would have to try it to see its appeal. Would not work for me at the main assembly level since we want parts to have movement to check clearances etc.

What I do not understand is Inventor is sold as a parametric modeler, why isn't it?

[blair]

Can you post the files, IPT's and IAM

[mrattray]

I suggest looking into "muscular modeling" techniques using multi-body solids.

[Mario428]

Time for a whoops and an apology.

I discussed the issue with my office Inventor guru and he was surprised I had the troubles I did. So he sent me his application settings named appropiatly "Solidworks sucks". LOL

Loaded them and retried the changes to the same assembly, worked instantly.

So my faux pas and my apologies to Inventor for the harsh words. GRIN

[blair]

one of those "ID ten T" errors...

[mrattray]

I still think you should explore the world of multi-body solids...

[Mario428]

Quote

"still think you should explore the world of multi-body solids... Mike (not Matt) Rattray"

Not quite sure what you mean by this.

Our BOM is very important to us, drives the manufacturing process here at our plant so it has to be correct. When I think of multi body I see BOM issues but may be thinking about it in the wrong way.

[SBix26]

Yep, you're thinking about it the wrong way!  Multi-body solids is a very powerful way to control multiple parts from one master file.  Quick tutorial: model your various parts as separate solids in your master file, where you can make all kinds of interdependencies between parts without adaptivity.  Push the solids out into individual part files (these are simply derived parts), where they have their own materials, appearances, and iProperties.  Assemble these parts into an assembly as usual (static parts, though, can be simply grounded at the origin).  Any change you make to the master part will be reflected in the assembly with a click on the Update button (the parts all update, of course, but don't need to be open for that to occur).

I don't recommend trying to model a whole thousand-part machine in one master file, but I supposed it's theoretically possible.  But a master layout sketch could be derived into many master parts where subassemblies are modeled as multi-body solids.

The tools to help with part creation are on the Manage tab in the Layout panel: Make Part and Make Components.

Sam B
Inventor 2012 Certified Professional

Please click "Accept as Solution" if this response answers your question.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inventor Professional 2013 SP1.1 Update 2
Windows 7 Enterprise 64-bit, SP1
HP EliteBook 8770w; 8 GB RAM; Core™ i7-3720QM 2.60 GHz; Quadro K4000M
SpaceExplorer/SpaceNavigator NB, driver 3.16.2
still waiting for a foreshortened radius dimensioning tool in Drawing Manager

[LT.Rusty]

---

@Mario428 wrote:

Time for a whoops and an apology.

I discussed the issue with my office Inventor guru and he was surprised I had the troubles I did. So he sent me his application settings named appropiatly "Solidworks sucks". LOL

Loaded them and retried the changes to the same assembly, worked instantly.

So my faux pas and my apologies to Inventor for the harsh words. GRIN

---

I'd love to see what those settings are.

Just in the last few days I've started having some problems with adaptivity as well.  I'll throw a bunch of parts together, make changes to the one based on geometry projected from another, and the parts do not become adaptive.  The projected geometry from part A shows up in part B as if it were projected from within part B, rather than from a different part.  When planes and axes move, I have to re-project them.

Not quite sure what's happened here ... but I suspect a bunch of my problems are going to go away in a few days, when my new SSD shows up and I get to reinstall the whole computer from scratch.

[blair]

You mght as well wait for IV2014 to ship then  

[LT.Rusty]

---

@Mario428 wrote:

Quote

"still think you should explore the world of multi-body solids... Mike (not Matt) Rattray"

Not quite sure what you mean by this.

Our BOM is very important to us, drives the manufacturing process here at our plant so it has to be correct. When I think of multi body I see BOM issues but may be thinking about it in the wrong way.

---

When you create something as a multi-body solid, you spin the solids off into their own part files, after a certain point in the process.  From there you can adjust the iProperties of the individual parts to suit your BOM needs.  It's really a pretty handy way to do things.  It's come in VERY useful for me quite a few times, and my company is pretty **** about BOMs as well.

[Mario428]

Will look at it harder, may play with it.

Sure would be easier to deal with one part until most of the way thru a design then break it up into an assembly. Did not know about the create part from a solid feature. looks like an alternative way to work for some designs.

Thanks to all who threw in their info, really helping a rookie like me to look at things from a different side