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: 

Moving End of Part Marker in drawing

10 REPLIES 10
SOLVED
Reply
Message 1 of 11
tboardman
1186 Views, 10 Replies

Moving End of Part Marker in drawing

I am using Inventor 2010 and would like each view of a drawing to show a different machining step.  I.e.. A rough cut dimension and then the finish cut dimension.  Is it possible to create the part as it would be machined and then use the EOP marker to set each view.  Would like to model one part and get all views.

 

Thank you in advance

10 REPLIES 10
Message 2 of 11
JDMather
in reply to: tboardman

No, not with the EOP.

 

I think you will have to use Derived Component for each separate operation that you want to create a view of.

You can use Overlay views or some other technique.

In some cases the Weldment environment might serve this purpose if only 3 states and operations show only removal of material.

 

Another option might be to use the Engineers Notebook - but that only creates screen capture documentation steps - not drawings.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Autodesk Inventor 2019 Certified Professional
Autodesk AutoCAD 2013 Certified Professional
Certified SolidWorks Professional


The CADWhisperer YouTube Channel


EESignature

Message 3 of 11
jtylerbc
in reply to: tboardman

Could also be done as an iPart.  Each iPart member could suppress the features for the machining operations that haven't happened yet.

Message 4 of 11
tboardman
in reply to: jtylerbc

Thank yo for the help, I will try a derived and Ipart and see which on meets my needs better.

 

Thanks again

Message 5 of 11
karthur1
in reply to: tboardman

A few ways to do this...

1.When you get the part complete, do a save copy as.  Open the saved copy and suppress the feature.  Make another save copy as and suppress the next feature.  You will end up having a version for each machining step. Pros: can do this pretty quick. Cons: if there is a change later to the original part, you have to go back and change all the copies that you just made.  If there is alot of changes to the original, you might just have to start over and save the parts off again.  Now you will have to replace the model references on the idws and redo the sick/missing dimensions.  Can end up causing a bunch of work.

 

2. Creat an ipart.  You will have to make a decision if you want the ipart to be a copy of the original part. Or, convert the original part (the one that is in the assembly) to an ipart. The number of members that you will have will depend on how many machining operations you want to show. One of the members should have all operations "computed". Pros: if you convert the original part to an ipart, any change to the part will show in all the members. Cons: takes more time to set up if your not familar with iparts.  Cant take time to manage also.

 

3. Derived part.  Never tried this, but you probably could do it.  Derive the part into a new part and then add material back so you can model what machining step you want to show.

 

Its a shame that we have to jump thru hoops like this just to show machining operations.

Message 6 of 11
tboardman
in reply to: karthur1

Thanks,  I actually did the save as copy and moved the EOP for each model and it works fine.  If I have to make a change I will have to update each model to update each view.  Kinda clunky but not unworkable.

Message 7 of 11
jtylerbc
in reply to: karthur1


@karthur1 wrote:

 

3. Derived part.  Never tried this, but you probably could do it.  Derive the part into a new part and then add material back so you can model what machining step you want to show.

 


Seems to me that it would be easier to start with the least machined version (essentially the "blank"), and cut away material in each successive step.  This is similar to the way we modeled parts machined from castings and forged blanks at my previous company (though in that case, we only cared about the original and final, no intermediate models between).

 

Takes a little forethought in your modeling process, but since our castings and forgings were often used for multiple finished parts, it was thinking we needed to do anyway.

Message 8 of 11
rhasell
in reply to: jtylerbc

I agree with jtylerbc

iPart is the way to go, using the 'save copy as' will cause problems later if you ever decide to make a change to the part, isn't that what inventor is all about, the big change? iPart in this instance is the same as moving the EOP, which is what you wanted.

 

Just my thoughts.

 

Reg
2024.2
Please Accept as a solution / Kudos
Message 9 of 11
SBix26
in reply to: tboardman

My preference for this process would be to do it all in one multi-body layout file, using the Rectangular Pattern tool with New Solid to copy each successive step.  That makes them all associative and very easily modified.  See attached 2012 format file for an example layout (EOP is rolled up to reduce file size).  From this file, push out derived parts, or just use the layout directly in a drawing.

Message 10 of 11
karthur1
in reply to: SBix26

Thats interesting... Guess you "could" do the same thing with derived part if the design of the final part is worked out.

Message 11 of 11
Doug_DuPont
in reply to: tboardman

This is something that we have to do a lot here.

What we do is make a master sketch of our customer part with no features. We have a different sketch for each operation needed to make the part. Then we make the cut-off blank and make that the OP1 part, we derive that into OP 2 part and then also derive in the master part with just sketch 2. We make the feature for OP 2 save it and then derive that into OP 3. Then the process continues all the way to completion. The good thing about this is we only have to change the master and do updates if the customer changes his part. If the process changes like OP 6 and OP 9 swap all we need to do is open OP 6 change the derive master sketch, and make a new feature, same for OP 9. Everything down stream updated. We also use the master part sketch to make all the tooling model.

I find that this is the best for us.

Douglas DuPont
Inventor 2016 Pro, Vault 2016 Pro
Quadro M4000
Windows 10 64 Bit

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

Post to forums  

Autodesk Design & Make Report