Announcements
IMPORTANT. Forum to be archived in several phases. You can no longer submit new questions - but can only answer existing threads until Oct 17th 2016. Please read this message for details
Mechanical Desktop (Read Only)
cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Reply
Message 1 of 6
Anonymous
164 Views, 5 Replies

Assembly Tweaks

Has anyone ever mastered assembly tweaks, or is the consensus that they are
just broken\inconsistent in MDT (MDT 6 SP 3)?

I'm trying to move our drafters beyond projected 2d assembly drawings and
MDTs inconsistent tweaks are not helping. Example, tweaking a "parent" part
will move some of the "child" parts but not all of them.

To test, I took 3 parts from our current product; an I\O plate and two
support brackets. Both support brackets have right angle tabs to attach to
the I\O panel. Both brackets are constrained in exactly the same way; 1
insert and 1 line to line, constraints applied in the same order. To
prevent any of these from being grounded, I added a dummy part1 as the
top\grounded part. Tweaking scenarios:

If the I\O panel is above the two brackets, both move when the panel is
tweaked. This makes sense relative to browser order.

If the I\O panel is below both brackets, the top bracket will stay in its
original place, the second bracket will move with the panel. If I reverse
the order of the two brackets the behavior follows - the top bracket always
stays in place, the lower always moves. This does not follow browser order.

If I change the constraints on the lower bracket (the panel still being the
lowest part), to a line to line and a flush then the middle bracket does not
move.

I realize that changing the constraint type from insert to flush solves this
simple 3 part assembly, but trying to follow this logic thru a 200 part
assembly is pretty well impossible, particularly when the person
placing\constraining parts is not the same as the person doing the tweaking,
and at the time of part constraining, no one knows how the parts will be
tweaked in the assembly drawings.

The Knowledge Base suggests: a) change the order of the parts (doesn't work
consistently as evidenced by the above), b) try changing the order parts are
picked when constraining (doesn't make any difference as far as I can tell),
or c) adding a negative constraint the child part that moved (works, but is
cumbersome at best and messes up trails - one child does not have a trail,
the other does, even tho both are in their original position. Yes, trails
could be deleted, but....)

For those who have switched to Inventor, is it any better??

Thanks
Steve Miles
Olympic Medical
5 REPLIES 5
Message 2 of 6
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

Steve,
Iv'e seen similar in one of my assemblies, but it remained a uniq case so
far.
Are you aware of the SP4 and the new assembly.arx? Maybe applying these
might help a bit.

Regards,
--
Leo Laimer
Maschinen- und Fertigungstechnik
A-4820 Bad Ischl - Austria
Message 3 of 6
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

Leo,

Thanks for the reply. This seems to be very repeatable if parts are
constrained with only insert and line to line constraints. I made a new
drawing with a set of test parts, they behave exactly the same.

For the sake of trying it, I applied the SP$ and assembly.arx, and have the
same behavior.

Steve Miles
Olympic Medical

"Leo Laimer" wrote in message
news:FBEF8F88C65E7C48B247C2F21839FB27@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> Steve,
> Iv'e seen similar in one of my assemblies, but it remained a uniq case so
> far.
> Are you aware of the SP4 and the new assembly.arx? Maybe applying these
> might help a bit.
>
Message 4 of 6
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

Steve,

If you want to zip up and email your sample drawing set along with a general
discussion of what's going wrong with the tweaks I'll see that someone takes
a look at the problem to see if there's anything we can do to improve it.

Mike Dickason
Developer
Autodesk Mechanical Group


"Steve Miles" wrote in message
news:C2A3E9D81456179E5B8A4E9F4B1B8C3E@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> Leo,
>
> Thanks for the reply. This seems to be very repeatable if parts are
> constrained with only insert and line to line constraints. I made a new
> drawing with a set of test parts, they behave exactly the same.
>
> For the sake of trying it, I applied the SP$ and assembly.arx, and have
the
> same behavior.
>
> Steve Miles
> Olympic Medical
>
> "Leo Laimer" wrote in message
> news:FBEF8F88C65E7C48B247C2F21839FB27@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> > Steve,
> > Iv'e seen similar in one of my assemblies, but it remained a uniq case
so
> > far.
> > Are you aware of the SP4 and the new assembly.arx? Maybe applying these
> > might help a bit.
> >
>
>
>
Message 5 of 6
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

Mike

Thanks for the offer, I directly e-mailed files to you. Let me know if you
did not get them

Steve Miles

"Mike Dickason (Autodesk)" wrote in
message news:807F3440FC130BA6F5D8F31380BA9564@in.WebX.maYIadrTaRb...
> Steve,
>
> If you want to zip up and email your sample drawing set along with a
general
> discussion of what's going wrong with the tweaks I'll see that someone
takes
> a look at the problem to see if there's anything we can do to improve it.
>
> Mike Dickason
> Developer
> Autodesk Mechanical Group
Message 6 of 6
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

Just to add:
Maybe IV doesn't have this specific problem, but sure it has lots of
others...(especially for guys who try to do a simple jump from MDT)

--
Leo Laimer
Maschinen- und Fertigungstechnik
A-4820 Bad Ischl - Austria

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

Post to forums  

Autodesk Design & Make Report