Welded frame assembly & drawing woes

[Garret_H]

I've had this issue with welded frames (a simple four post welded stair landing) for a while now and thought I had it beat.... I was wrong.

I want to create simple views of four post frames complete with a cut list on the same page, or at least a separate parts sheet of all the cut items. These drawings should be Top, Front, and End view.  

2D AutoCAD drawing below as an example:

So I created a new drawing style with views at Object Front, Object Top, and Object Right Side. 

This all works well, but only sometimes. 

This is what I get sometimes, the front view is the top, side view not at all what I want. What Advance seems to want to define as front or top isn't always what I want OR what I've told it to be via set assembly detailing direction and what the Assembly CS shows as.

I seem to be having intermittent issues of the Assembly CS not translating into the right views being generated and I can't figure out why.  I've tried changing the main part of the assembly, and had that work... sometimes.

For context I'm using these type of settings in numbering:

• SP No (for Main part) = assembly number   ((This is my preferred setting for beams and columns))
• Single part and assembly numbers are both by drawing number
• I use the tool "Create Assembly Part" so that all my part numbers are typical and by drawing. 
• I will then use "define assembly detailing direction" to set the Assembly CS to be looking at the front of the part I want.

I keep running into roadblocks where the views being created just don't align with what the assembly CS tells me it is. I just had one drawing completely flip views on me (on another CAD station after I created it) and ended up losing all the dimensions and details that went into the drawing.... not good.

Anyone have suggestions to working with welded frames like this? Would be nice if Advance had a drawing style that just worked out of the box with these...

[s_hannemann]

Hi,

i am doing similar things and have no troubles at all. Maybe u share a model which troubles u and we can have a look?

What my drawing style often looks like is Front, Top, Side View and Cut Views. They depend all on the main part coordinate system. Sometimes the numbering process isnt arranging the coordinate system right, so i change it manually. I cant find the screencast download anymore so i cant share a drawing of a simple steel structure, unfortunately.

[Sebastian_Eiche]

I agree with @s_hannemann , seems to be an issue with the CS of the mainpart.

Do you always use the same object? From my point of view I would use the rafter as mainpart. This seems to be the best for the definition top, front and so on.

If you always use it and define it as mainpart while modelling it, it should be not necessary to define the mainpart CS

[Sebastian_Eiche]

I tried it with the detailstyle beam and a very small example (I know it's a very simple one):

Blue beam is the mainpart, then "4.04 beam" from the international version:

I moved the cut views and there's no side view, but a good start to do more.
So I copy the detailstyle and add a side view, delete the view from the bottom and change the scale. So up to now smale changes and from my point of view, with a few more time for labeling and so on, it should be possible to get a good result:

[Garret_H]

I seem to be struggling with main parts and "Create part Assembly" as if I try and change the main part after creating my part assembly the box around it disappears and I need to define things again.

Even then there seems to be issues where the drawings created aren't showing the front view that object CS tells me I should have. 

If I try this with a simple frame I don't seem to have any issues. Working with a frame that is a landing for stairs and I have problems.  I'll try and present the object from different angles that make the most sense from a detailing and drawing layout perspective.  

Assembly CS: 

Drawing result. Not what I want, plan view should be top, front view below, end view to the side with all legs pointed down.

Model is attached, as well as the created dwg file.

[bigcarl5000kg]

And the fun begins ... for an already numbered model, make a test - change CS for main part, make drawing ... at some later time you reset the numbering (MP / SP / ...) and voila ... CS returns to its original state ... and you are at the beginning  

[Garret_H]

Is that what's happening here? It makes sense in a way, certainly explains the behaviors. 

Ugh. Not looking forward to redoing handrail details if I need to update numbers...

[bigcarl5000kg]

In case you perform the numbering incorrectly and reset even once... the changed CS are gone... and that I made a lot of trouble with it ... until today, despite the experience, there is simply no way around it

[Drawtech]

@Garret_H 

As others have eluded to, I think the problem here is using "Create Assembly Part" and it doesn't work as it should.

I never use "Create Assembly Part" and I never have any issues with this type of assembly.

However, to do so you would need to make some compromises on your preferred numbering.

Either:

1. Still use "SP No (for Main part) = assembly number " but accept that similar parts to the main part will have a different number.

Or

2. Use one of the other numbering options (I use "SP No (for Standalone part) = Assembly No") and then if other parts are similar to your main part they will still get the same single part number.

You can still manually set which part is the main part (but is the heaviest part by default).

Maybe you know all this already, but I think it would save you a lot of headaches by avoiding "Create Assembly Part" completely!

Cheers,

Dave

[Drawtech]

I also never have any issues with any manual CS for drawing views - once set, it always stays where I set it even on renumbering.  I think it would only be lost if the mainpart changes and again probably more of a problem with the  "Create Assembly Part" function.

If for some reason you ARE still having problems with manual CS for drawing view, even when NOT using "Create Assembly Part", you may not even need to manually set the CS for view direction since normal front view on a beam (your main part) is looking into the web anyway. 

...and depending on position of end 1 and end 2 of your mainpart  in the model (and on your drawing style setting for orientation of beam end) you can control view direction on the assembly this way.

...but as mentioned, I do use manual CS for drawing views without any issues.

Good luck with it anyway!

[bigcarl5000kg]

Hi @Drawtech,

that's interesting, I've been using AS for a long time and it still does the same thing :-).

Example

1) L profile with some plate welded on, CS of MP and SP original / here after numbering displayed

2)  CS of MP/SP changed to current WCS (90° rotation):

After deleting all MP / SP numbers, the same situation as in point 2 - still good ....

After new numbering, the same situation as in point 1 - the CS of MP / SP  has been reset to his original state - very bad ...

It may not be a coincidence, but it confirms the rule 😎. Where the comrades made a mistake?

[Drawtech]

@bigcarl5000kg 

Intrigued, I just checked again and you are quite correct - apologies!

I feel very surprised I've not had a problem with this in over 20 years using the software and can only put it down to my workflows!

The manually configurable CS for drawing views was added as a new feature somewhere along my journey with the software and I suppose I had got used to careful consideration of where end 1/end 2 is when modelling members to control drawing view direction.  We also used to just use drawing styles based on UCS if something different were needed and set that at drawing creation time - once drawing is created view will stay in that direction permanently, so this may still be an option for you?

...but anyway, re the manual CS functionality, I had to have a long think about why I don't have a problem with it.

I no longer use drawing styles based on UCS and I DO use the manually set CS feature, but not as a matter of course.

For most members it's not necessary and I only set it manually for things like stair stringers & railings, trusses etc.

Basically ONLY assemblies where the main part is sloping in the model and I also want it the same in drawings.

For things like rafters, I prefer them horizontal on shop drawings and always model end1/end2 according the the direction I want them on drawings.

When I DO use a manual CS, I would have already created GA drawings and had them approved before creating shop drawings and I would only set the CS just before creating the shop drawings.

...so while continuing with the project, I will still re-number many times over but would never have any need to DELETE the numbers of the parts I have already detailed and issued - even if there were later revisions for these parts, I would not want to be deleting any of the numbers for them.

...and even if the main part of one of these issued items changed it would now be different to any previous ones that still exist and would have a new number and need a new assembly drawing anyway.

I think these are all reasons why I've never had problems with it.

I appreciate that perhaps none of that suits your own workflows, but hopefully there might be something above that is useful to you.  😀

Cheers,

Dave

[Sebastian_Eiche]

I could confirm what @bigcarl5000kg already told. The CS will be changed in a few situations.
For some I could understand why but not in all.

• by using the "delete numbers" the numbers will be deleted, but the information which is the mainpart is existing (could be tested) --> so why is the CS set to the original?
• handrails: one numbered and CS changed to the one I want. Now i change the handrail in some details of the structural element and so the elements will be "recreated". Now the CS is set back, and this is something I understand. 

From my experience: I often try to avoid to use this command by using the "define as mainpart" button

[bigcarl5000kg]

I use the CS change especially for special parts such as shaped bent sheets, because Advance Steel for such parts sometimes "non-standardly" defines the dimensions for the descriptions and thus also for BOM (the dimensions in the description do not agree with the dimensioning).

I then have to look for the replacement body and its orientation that AS internally generated and then used for this (marked with dashed lines - see picture below) - to define the new corresponding CS a get the right description in the drawing / BOM.

before (original CS):

after changing the CS and application of one special drawing style on this detail directly in the drawing:

I delete SP / MP numbering mainly for testing purposes, but in the case of unwanted execution by a standard user, there are a lot of changes in ... you know where. Unfortunately, I did not find another solution to this (and using a folded profile instead of such bent sheet metal is definitely not a solution).

[Garret_H]

Getting back to this, is it possible to move an Assembly Part after its defined? My customer went and asked to have the two flights of stairs swapped. 

I can move the parts but not the assembly frame. Deleting the frame causes problems with my existing drawings where the in drawing BOM is empty and won't load any parts...

[bigcarl5000kg]

Hi @Garret_H ,

of course it is possible, the only question is how and what you do so that it is displayed in the drawings and bill of materials after the update. Update recognize new parts, don't forget the numbering. Test it on some smaller test assembly to see how it behaves.

[Garret_H]

Thanks, I've tried experimenting around. It seems like once an Assembly Part is defined, the box it creates is locked into place. I can move all the objects, but the box stays floating in space where it was created.  Its a ASTXMAINPART object.

If I delete the Assembly Part frame all the renumbering and updates in the world won't fix the drawing of the assembly. The contents get orphaned as AS is looking for an assembly that no longer exists. Any changes I make to the assembly won't update either. 

So yes it seems I can move the assembly contents fine - but there is a whole lot of other liability here that I really am not liking with this "Create Assembly Part" feature.

[Garret_H]

Seems like creating dummy parts to define as the main part of my assembly is the way out of this nightmare.

If I'm feeling crafty I'll find a way to create a custom profile so the description in BOMs and GA labels is something useful like "Stair assembly" "Welded Frame" etc....