Composite iMates with different names match

[Anonymous]

Two components have differently named composite iMates containing same-named iMates: sleeve has sleeve_lr iInsert iFlush holder has rsr_holder iInsert iFlush If I place a sleeve and a holder, the iMates are matched and consumed. I thought the composite names had to match. What's up? Mike

[Anonymous]

I have the same problem... I could not find anyone to answer me on that one...

Maybe this time someone will come up and solve this mystery... I sure would appreciate it!

[Anonymous]

Inventor will match any two iMates whose key characteristics match. In the case of simple iMates, these characteristics include the type (mate, angle, tangent, etc.), modifier value(offset, angle, ratio, etc.) and solution (mate, flush, inside, outside, forward, reverse, etc.). In the case of composite iMates, all of the non-suppressed member iMates must match. The names of the iMates are only used to resolve ambiguity in the event that an iMate can be matched to more that one iMate. In that case, preference will be given to the pair of iMates whose names match. Thus in your example, the two composite iMates matched because all of their member iMates matched. The names of the composite iMates were either not considered (because there was only one possible valid pairing of the composite iMates) or there were multiple valid pairings without any name matches. -- Scott Kohls Inventor Development Autodesk, Inc. "Mike Habich" wrote in message news:40f59cd5$1_1@newsprd01... > Two components have differently named composite iMates containing same-named > iMates: > sleeve has > sleeve_lr > iInsert > iFlush > holder has > rsr_holder > iInsert > iFlush > > If I place a sleeve and a holder, the iMates are matched and consumed. I > thought the composite names had to match. What's up? > > Mike > >

[Anonymous]

Thanks for the explanation. I will play around with iMates a little more and try all the situations that you describe in your examples.

Thanks again.

[barsea]

I am finding that the imate names are not taking precedence over the imate type.

I have one part with a composite imate named "tank_frame_left" containing three imates, "TF_face_mate1", "TF_plane-axis_mate1" and "TFL_plane_flush1".  I also have a second part with a composite imate named "tank_frame_36_left" containing three imates, "TF36L_plane_flush1", "TF36L_face_mate1" and "TF36L_plane-axis_mate1".  A third "base" component has both composite imates and is the first part in the assembly to which the other two parts will be mated with.

When I place the first part, the composite imates resolve as expected.  When I place the second part (the first part removed), the composite imates resolve except that the part resolves to "TF_plane-axis_mate1" instead of "TF36L_plane-axis_mate1".  I can right click and select "Next Assembly Imate" and then the part resolves properly.  Because the imates have different names, shouldn't the second part resolve properly without the intermediate step of "Next Assembly Imate"?

I have noticed that if I put the composite imate for the second part higher in the list on the base component, the second part resolves properly right away, but the first part needs "Next Assembly Imate".

Inconsistencies like this is what makes Inventor difficult to use, couldn't it be more intuitive?