Best approach for modular frame hole patterns/shared handrail connections?

[mattKKSX3]

Hello all, 

Yes, i used AI to generate the question because i didnt know how to clearly ask it without even confusing myself. I’m building a modular frame system in Autodesk Inventor made up of 4 different module variations. Each module is essentially a welded square frame (example shown below is a 3’ x 3’ module). The modules need to:

• Bolt together to adjacent modules
• Share/commonize connection patterns
• Support removable handrail sections using the same hole patterns where possible

The issue I’m running into is deciding the best modeling strategy for the hole locations and feature management.

Some frame members require connection holes and handrail mount holes, while others do not depending on module position/configuration. Since these modules can be reused in multiple layouts, I’m trying to avoid a situation where patterned holes propagate into places they are not needed.

Right now I’m debating between two approaches:

1. Create all frame members with the full standardized hole pattern regardless of whether every hole is used in every module
2. Keep “clean” members and selectively add holes/features per module or assembly configuration

My concern with option 2 is managing feature suppression/pattern control across multiple module variants and assemblies without things becoming difficult to maintain later.

The handrail mounting holes are also intended to double as module connection holes, so I’m trying to keep everything standardized and modular.

For those who have built modular weldment/frame systems in Inventor:

• Is it generally better to standardize all members with common hole patterns even if some holes go unused?
• Or is there a cleaner workflow using iLogic/adaptive features/derived parts/etc. that avoids feature duplication headaches?
• How would you structure this for long-term maintainability and future module additions?

I’m trying to keep the design scalable and easy to revise later rather than optimized only for the first build.

(Attached image of one example module.)

One other problem of note. I am inserting these modules onto the frame and there will be bolt holes where there do not need to be, in open spaces. Additionally, would it be better to leave them in the open spaces or modify each individual frame member?

-Matt

[mattKKSX3]

here are the pictures, wouldn't let me attach to the original post

[johnsonshiue · Accepted solution]

Hi Matt,

Another approach to consider is to completely separate the frame structure from the holes. Essentially, you keep the Frame Gen assembly as is without drilling any holes. Then derive the Frame Gen assembly and add the holes to the bodies for documentation purpose. The nice thing about this workflow is that you don't need to worry about cross-part association.

Many thanks!

[mattKKSX3]

Sorry for being obtuse. So like, create the frame and save it and then do what, make a derived part from it THEN add the holes?

[johnsonshiue]

Hi Matt,

Yes! That is the idea. Adding the holes to the individual frame members or to the assembly will be more realistic for sure. However, such details may make the assembly unnecessarily complicated due to the need to align holes across members. Adding the holes in one part with multiple solid bodies is much more straight forward.

Many thanks!

[lauri_barnhart]

Hello @mattKKSX3, thanks for posting in the community!

Did the information provided by johnsonshiue help?

If yes, please mark the reply as the accepted solution.

This helps other users benefit from the shared solution.

If the issue persists, let us know with an update so we can assist further.

Thanks!