Community
Inventor Forum
Welcome to Autodesk’s Inventor Forums. Share your knowledge, ask questions, and explore popular Inventor topics.
cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

IV8 Constraint problems

5 REPLIES 5
Reply
Message 1 of 6
pquenzi
271 Views, 5 Replies

IV8 Constraint problems

I continue to have problems with Transitional constraints as well as constraining ball-end linkage/cylinder supported bodies (ie: aircraft simulator; six way bulldozer blade, etc)in IV8.

I've been using Inventor and MDT before it for many years so do know how to constrain things (not to say I don't make mistakes). I have removed IV7, emptied temp files, removed & reinstalled IV8 but problems persist. Parts are non adaptive and active contact solver is off.

At this point I feel it is a problem with IV8 as some of the assemblies were created in IV7 and worked fine there.
Has anyone else experienced these problems or does soemone have suggestions as to what else I might look at.
Thanks.
Phil Quenzi
5 REPLIES 5
Message 2 of 6
Anonymous
in reply to: pquenzi

> I continue to have problems with
Transitional constraints

> as well as constraining ball-end linkage/cylinder supported bodies

 

Phil,

 

Transitional constraints have been finnicky from
day one. They want the two parts to be close when you start.

 

If you would like me to look at one or more of your
assemblies, let me know.

 

Are you designing aircraft simulators and
bulldozers?

 

- Gary
Message 3 of 6
pquenzi
in reply to: pquenzi

Gary,
Bulldozers and other construction equipment, not aircraft simulators. You answered my question on transitional constraints. I guess IV8 is even more finiky than 7. I don't need to pursue that any more. I can work around it.
What is of more concern is the ball end cylinders. I would like to make a simple assembly to email to you or post on the IVCF for you to look at. Would you mind.
Phil
Message 4 of 6
Anonymous
in reply to: pquenzi

> What is of more concern is the ball end
cylinders.

 

I would approach this via a point/mate
constrain.

 

> I would like to make a simple assembly to email to

> you or post on the IVCF for you to look at. Would you mind.

Phil,

 

Post to iCF or email (or snail mail)
me.

 


Autodesk,
Inc

attn: Gary
Smith

7995 SW
Mohawk

Tualatin, OR 
97062


class=243282219-09122003>
 



class=243282219-09122003>
 


class=243282219-09122003>503-692-8339
Message 5 of 6
Anonymous
in reply to: pquenzi

Gary:

Thanks for the reply to the Phil's question about transitional constraints.
I'm currently using IV 6. I thought I was seeing some finnicky responses
when attempting to create this particular constraint. Besides being needing
to be "close" there seems to be another issue about being finnicky.

What other "requirements" are needed to sucessfully place a transitional
constraint?

Are there any "procedural" changes between IV6, IV7 or IV8?

Does it sometimes require simply attempting over and over a few times until
the constraint is solved?

Thanks for your help in this most finnicky of situations.


"Gary R Smith (Autodesk)" wrote in message
news:6482C55E436B84577F5F5FDED33EEA57@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> I continue to have problems with Transitional constraints
> as well as constraining ball-end linkage/cylinder supported bodies

Phil,

Transitional constraints have been finnicky from day one. They want the two
parts to be close when you start.

If you would like me to look at one or more of your assemblies, let me know.

Are you designing aircraft simulators and bulldozers?

- Gary
Message 6 of 6
Anonymous
in reply to: pquenzi

> Besides being needing to be "close"... what other "requirements"
> are needed to sucessfully place a transitional constraint?

The two parts should be in physical proximity to where they would be with
the constraint applied.

When you select the faces involved, we use the location where you have
selected the face as part of the calculation, so for example in a case where
you have a cam follower up against a cam, do not select the cylindrical face
of the follower 180 degrees away from the point where the follower comes in
contact with the face of the cam.

Other than those two guidelines, try to have at least one other constraint
placed (usually ends up being a flush) - a transitional constraint isn't
going to do well at all if it is the only contraint you have between the
moving part and the assembly.

- G

Can't find what you're looking for? Ask the community or share your knowledge.

Post to forums  

Autodesk Design & Make Report