To derive, adapt or link XLS ???

[Anonymous]

Well, I'm about to start a final design on a small assembly of mine. A
couple sonic welded components with an assembled sub assy.
I started my design using much adaptivity. Since the design was fresh, a lot
of the geometry that was used in adaptivity got swallowed and I lost many
references along the way. I didn't like that. Although now that I know I am
close to final design and going back through my geometry, maybe it will work
better for me this time. I also found the possibility of deriving my parts
from a part file full of global parameters to be interesting......that might
work, but I'm concerned about that parameter file and what might happen to
it down the line. Next we arrive at linking an excel file to all my parts.
Seems simple and I'd be working from one sheet. this might be nice as I will
be applying drafts and such to my parts this time. What would be nice is if
I could embed my xls in the assembly file and pull all my parameters from
that one file, no external xls. But, it doesn't seem to work for me. Am I
wrong in assuming if I use a stand alone xls that I will need to do a link
operation to each and every part ? It sure would be nice to be able to pull
it from the assembly. Then I'd know it would never go away.

any thoughts ?

tia

[Anonymous]

Without going full bore into skeletal modeling

http://www.sdotson.com/freetut/introduction%20to%20skeletal%20modeling.pdf

http://www.mymcad.com/KWiK/iMaster/iMaster.htm

you could take the first step and place all your parameters into a file.
The derive this file into new files and create your parts from there. Any
changes to the first file will propagate down the line to your derived part
files. Then there is one place for all parameters to exist. The
disadvantage is that you cannot refer to these parameters in the assy itself
without a few workarounds.

http://www.sdotson.com/freetut/linked%20&%20embedded%20parameters%20part%20t
hree.pdf

Or you can wait till December and come see me at Autodesk University speak
on this very subject.

http://tinyurl.com/ioyk

--
Sean Dotson, PE
http://www.sdotson.com
Check the Inventor FAQ for most common questions
www.sdotson.com/faq.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Tim Dougherty" wrote in message
news:94CCE17C6610E07CAFC37A38A5D4B339@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> Well, I'm about to start a final design on a small assembly of mine. A
> couple sonic welded components with an assembled sub assy.
> I started my design using much adaptivity. Since the design was fresh, a
lot
> of the geometry that was used in adaptivity got swallowed and I lost many
> references along the way. I didn't like that. Although now that I know I
am
> close to final design and going back through my geometry, maybe it will
work
> better for me this time. I also found the possibility of deriving my parts
> from a part file full of global parameters to be interesting......that
might
> work, but I'm concerned about that parameter file and what might happen to
> it down the line. Next we arrive at linking an excel file to all my parts.
> Seems simple and I'd be working from one sheet. this might be nice as I
will
> be applying drafts and such to my parts this time. What would be nice is
if
> I could embed my xls in the assembly file and pull all my parameters from
> that one file, no external xls. But, it doesn't seem to work for me. Am I
> wrong in assuming if I use a stand alone xls that I will need to do a link
> operation to each and every part ? It sure would be nice to be able to
pull
> it from the assembly. Then I'd know it would never go away.
>
> any thoughts ?
>
> tia
>
>

[Anonymous]

Thanks for the input Sean. That may be exactly what I need to do since my
two main parts are pretty much a mirror image with minor thickness
differences and other minor features like energy directors and locating
features.
So, I would be able to have all kinds of different sketches in my MASTER.IPT
to share? Like an I.D. draft revolve and slot profiles....not to mention
parameters and their equations. Is there any end to the amount of sketches I
could share? Any pitfalls in taking this path? I guess I'm liking this
more now.

Thanks, I think I'll give it a try. 🙂

[Anonymous]

I don't know for sure, but I would guess you are only limited on sharing sketches by how
powerful your computer is. I would guess at any rate you would reach your personal limit
for keeping it all straight long before you ran out of system resources.

--
Kent
Assistant Moderator
Autodesk Discussion Forum Moderator Program


"Tim Dougherty" wrote in message

Is there any end to the amount of sketches I
> could share? Any pitfalls in taking this path? I guess I'm liking this
> more now.
>
> Thanks, I think I'll give it a try. 🙂
>
>

[Anonymous]

Let me ask you guys this. Since my two main components are near identical,
would there be anything wrong with deriving the "top" from the "bottom",
then adding or swallowing geometry ? Not much different than adaptivity....I
know.
Maybe I'm just thinking about this too much. 😉

[Anonymous]

Often times my mirrored parts aren't exactly alike. There should be no problem adding or
removing material from the derived part.

--
Kent
Assistant Moderator
Autodesk Discussion Forum Moderator Program


"Tim Dougherty" wrote in message
news:58130D2A4D959E5F293A5B3CEE226E50@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> Let me ask you guys this. Since my two main components are near identical,
> would there be anything wrong with deriving the "top" from the "bottom",
> then adding or swallowing geometry ? Not much different than adaptivity....I
> know.
> Maybe I'm just thinking about this too much. 😉
>
>