Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
Showing results for
Show only
|
Search instead for
Did you mean:
This page has been translated for your convenience with an automatic translation service. This is not an official translation and may contain errors and inaccurate translations. Autodesk does not warrant, either expressly or implied, the accuracy, reliability or completeness of the information translated by the machine translation service and will not be liable for damages or losses caused by the trust placed in the translation service.Translate
Good morning, I suggest to make possible to check/uncheck a flag to exclude/include threaded parts (library part and/or normal part) in interference analysis...
This option could simplify the interference analysis of assembly...
I use the "Analyze Interference" tool quite often to check for unintentional interference in my assemblies. This gives much more thorough results than if I tried to do this check visually. However, there are some issues I have with this tool. Many of these assemblies contain weldment subassemblies (welded plate or frame structures). There are also often threaded holes and fasteners. This leads to two problems:
1. Weld beads often cause some sort of interference. In many cases, eliminating these interferences with the weld environment's commands would be very difficult or time consuming, and thus not worth the effort.
2. Inventor's own default modeling values for threads cause male and female threaded surfaces to show up as an interference.
After running an interference analysis on an assembly under these conditions, I often have to try to pick the real problems out from among all of these false positives.
I would like to see an addition to the interference analyzer to allow filtering out of objects (preferably filtered before the analysis so it will calculate faster, but filtering the results would also be acceptable). In particular, I would like to be able to filter out weld beads and threaded features. There may also be some speed benefits to a filter for standard parts, so hardware can be left out of the analysis when not relevant.
Even though your post is about three weeks older, the other Idea has more kudos and will be used as the Master Idea going forward. Please be sure to cast your kudo to it as to not split votes. Thanks for undertanding. - Dan
I suggest to correct error in "Analize Interference". Essence of error consists in that interferences are detecting in correct bolted connections, in which bolts and nuts have equal diameters of screw-thread.
DWhiteley - your comment is not addressed in the accepted version of the idea. It might be good for you to post it seperately as a new idea (if it doesn't already exist on its own).
jtylerbc, I saw an idea, a link to which you typed. But this idea does not suit me, because there simply is proposed to exclude from the analysis of the thread intersections.
There is an additional part to this interference checking, not only does it need to be checking the thread size but also the pitch and the hand (left vs right). I would love to see this added.
How about making the analysis dialog box bigger (or expandable) so we don't have to constantly scroll side to side to see the results. Most other dialog boxes are resizeable. Also, if any dialog box is re-sized and/or re-positioned, it should retain that setting even after it's closed.
Let's say you have a long welded joint, which has some stiffener plates in various locations along the joint. In this example, the entire structure gets fit up, tacked, then fully welded by zipping up around all the plates. In reality the long weld has interruptions at the stiffeners. There wouldn't be a corner relief because the weld doesn't really exist yet, and will never exist behind the stiffener.
This may sound lazy, and probably is. Modeling this accurately using the tools available in the weld environment (Start & Stop, multiple beads along the same joint, etc.). is a pain, and sometimes just isn't worth the time and effort. So I will just create a bead that runs the entire length of the joint, and ignore the fact that it actually protrudes through the stiffener plates. When I'm doing this, using the Interference Analysis can create a large number of false positives.
Your reason for wanting to be able to detect interferences with the weld is a perfectly valid one, and one that I need in other scenarios as well. That's why I requested this as a "filter" that you could include or exclude as needed, rather than universally removing it from the analysis.
This idea has been implemented within Autodesk Inventor 2017.3. Special thanks to everyone who cast a vote for it and added your additional requests within the comments. We were able to deliver a number of improvements based on your feedback. Thanks to everyone! -Dan
Please check out the following links for more info on what we delivered in Inventor 2017.3:
![Autodesk Design & Make Report](https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/1350519iCB55845EBFC43016/image-size/large?v=v2&px=999" "Autodesk Design & Make Report")