Different assembly configurations

[c_chandler068]

  Is there any way to show two different assembly configurations?  All the parts would be the same, but they would be mounted/located in different positions.  I don't mean something like cylinders extended vs. retracted.  Rather I mean "this cylinder gets mounted here for this part and there for that part".

  We have families of parts that have varying lengths, so we end up with a lot of fixtures where we change the locations of clamping cylinders and such depending on the part length we're running.  I'm trying to create drawings showing operators where components need to be for each length, and it would be much simpler to track if it were all in one file.  

  I haven't been able to find a way to represent this other than creating separate assembly files for each part length/component configuration.

  Any suggestions appreciated.

Chris

[Rob67ert]

I can try to explain, but open the example.

Change the parameter HANDVATPOSITIE

It is done with some simple iLogic.

You can do the same buy suppress a constrain.

[c_chandler068]

I like it, but unfortunately it doesn't solve my problem (at least not in any way I can see).  

I choose the one representation and make a drawing file.  If I then change to the other representation the drawing file changes as well.  

The ultimate goal is to have all the different position shown in a single drawing (multiple copies of the assembly placed) where I would add part number designations to show the operator the setup for each.

Failing that, being able to generate a separate drawing for each would work.  

It makes sense why Inventor is doing what it does, I just wish I could make it stop when I wanted it to.  🙂

Thanks again, if nothing else I picked up some valuable info on iLogic capabilities.

Chris

[Rob67ert]

Maybe easier: Make a Position Representation.

And in your drawing you can chose what position you like to make a view from, you can make multiple views from different Position representations.

[TheCADWhisperer]

Oops, I just went back and read your description more carefully.

Are you using iParts, Flexible subs and iAssemblies?

[mcgyvr]

yep.. Sounds like you want to use "positional representations" 

https://knowledge.autodesk.com/support/inventor-products/learn-explore/caas/CloudHelp/cloudhelp/2014...

[mflayler2]

No, it sounds like the OP can't use POS REPs because the cylinders are in completely different installed configurations.

I would do this with either iAssemblies or iLogic coding....however...

I don't like having all the options in one file, it makes design tracking more difficult and if you change the "Master" assembly incorrectly, it could affect released drawings.  Consider your Data Management of your files before you proceed down this path further.  I'm not saying its a bad thing you are trying to do, but you are making your life and the life of any designer that needs to touch it later possibly more difficult.  I could elaborate more, but I think you understand my concern.

[mcgyvr]

---

@mflayler2 wrote:

No, it sounds like the OP can't use POS REPs because the cylinders are in completely different installed configurations.

---

Maybe..

Could also be as simple as using "flexible" assuming this cylinder assembly is a subassembly and that they used "limits" in constraints to allow the cylinder to be in different "extended" positions.. 

Some screenshots of the different configurations would really help here.

I think flexible/constraint limits "might" be all thats needed..

[mcgyvr]

An image to go along with my flexible comment.

This is the same cylinder subassembly placed twice into an assembly and set to flexible with constraint limits to allow the rod to move in the cylinder..

[Anonymous · Accepted solution]

Check "Positions" to see if this is what you are wanting.

2017

[mflayler2]

The OP stated... Not like extended or retracted

[c_chandler068]

That is it exactly dlmsdm1!!

With those three files you provided and a little fiddling around, I was able to figure out how you did it and replicate it for my application.  

I never would have thought to place the component and then suppress that joint and make another and swap which was active/suppressed depending on which positional view I was in.  I always viewed positional views to be about moving components like cylinder strokes, etc.  Thanks for knocking me out of that rut.  🙂

Thank you!

Chris

[mcgyvr]

---

@mflayler2 wrote:

The OP stated... Not like extended or retracted

---

ok.. fine.. Just an example..

The same can be done with whatever brackets or whatever "different configurations" means to them..

"mounted here or there" really doesn't tell me anything about what details are changing/different.. Flexible might still be the easiest option.. 

But looks like they got an answer they were happy with.. 

I'd still hope they look into flexible too.. (Its a good function to know about anyways)

[mflayler2]

Agreed.

I am still just concerned with having the OP put all the "Configurations" in one basket if they are indeed different designs.

You can control Revisioning with Drawings from the same model, but technically the model will Revise as well when Form/Fit/Function changes and incorrect adjustments could affect Released drawings.  If they are truly all the same design but different options for installation, then I get that, but maybe I am reading too much into it.

[c_chandler068]

They are truly the same design, just different positions for the clamps.  The operators change the position depending on the part.  

I'll attach a drawing (now that I can actually make it!) so you can see what I'm talking about.

And to the person that mentioned flexible, I use that (and adaptive) all the time, they just didn't cover what needed to be done.

[mcgyvr]

---

@c_chandler068 wrote:

They are truly the same design, just different positions for the clamps.  The operators change the position depending on the part.  

I'll attach a drawing (now that I can actually make it!) so you can see what I'm talking about.

And to the person that mentioned flexible, I use that (and adaptive) all the time, they just didn't cover what needed to be done.

---

From what I see in that drawing "flexible" would absolutely be the process I would use.. 

But the drawing doesn't show model/assembly structure,etc.. so there could be details I'm not aware of..

[c_chandler068]

You're going to have to explain how it could be done using "Flexible", because I'm not seeing it...  as far as I understood it, both "Flexible" and "Adaptive" bring the allowed movement from sub-assemblies to the master assembly.  

If this is an incorrect impression, please clarify for me.

Those cylinders are physically changing location, not sliding along a track or anything.  (Basically the Join point in the assembly changes).

Heh, I just checked and those cylinders have already been made "Flexible" so I could check the clamping stroke and make sure everything was where it needed to be.

[mcgyvr]

---

@c_chandler068 wrote:

You're going to have to explain how it could be done using "Flexible", because I'm not seeing it...  as far as I understood it, both "Flexible" and "Adaptive" bring the allowed movement from sub-assemblies to the master assembly.  

If this is an incorrect impression, please clarify for me.

Those cylinders are physically changing location, not sliding along a track or anything.  (Basically the Join point in the assembly changes).

Heh, I just checked and those cylinders have already been made "Flexible" so I could check the clamping stroke and make sure everything was where it needed to be.

---

Without actually seeing the iam files I'm not really going to guess here (but I did some given the details I have so far)..

I have NO idea what in that 2d image you posted is what.. I don't know whats the clamp assembly.. I don't know what the clamped part is,etc..

2d drawing really gives very little information as far as this discussion is concerned..

But I see something thats either constrained to one set of holes (I assume in some base plate) and another versions where its constrained to 2 other holes..

I see the potential for "flexible".. 

"Flexible" simply allows parts in a subassembly to move anywhere their degrees of freedom allows them to... 

Adaptive is a totally different beast and is really not related to flexible at all.. 

To give a generic example.. I have numerous "fastener kits".. Its a subassembly with only 40 washers being constrained to 40 nuts.. No other constraints..

I use that same kit on multiple assemblies and their location could be all over the place and all independent of each other.. The only constant is that 1 nut and 1 washer move together.. But they can be anywhere..

So each is physically changing location with respect to each other.. 

[rogieA]

Hi, i have also a somewhat similar problem like this one.. but mine is, the variable is the length? everything is the same. i tried saving it as to another filename and change just the length. but the original file is also changing. i've attached the file.. i need 4 configurations with different length (d0) appreciate your help.

[TheCADWhisperer]

@rogieA

You should have started a new thread with a reference link back to this thread.

An assembly must include parts (*.ipt) files.

Do you see any part files in your attachment here?