dynamic simulation output grapher

[Anonymous]

Hello, i m new to dynamic simulation environment and i would like to ask something. I have 2 scotch yoke mechanisms and i adjust a torque to one cylinder. i want to know which diagrams i should take for the horizontal forces as seem on image1 i attach. Which cubes i should check to watch it?

thank you

[JDMather]

It is highly unlikely that you will get any useful responses without attaching your assembly here.

The image you attached does not show that there are any grounded components - this could be OK, but you don't show the Standard Joints.  I don't see any useful information.

Attach your assembly here and end all doubt.

What book are you using to learn Dynamic Simulation?

[Anonymous]

created in Inventor 2015

[Anonymous]

one more part and the assembly

[JDMather]

This does not appear to be the same assembly as the image you posted earlier?

Some part sketches are not fully constrained.

I would pattern Features rather than Sketch Entities.

In the real world there is clearance between moving parts.

Have you installed Service Pack 2?

[Anonymous]

No i don t think i have service pack 2 installed. What is this? How could it help?

How should i go on , so as take my results?

Thank you

[JDMather]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

1. No i don t think i have service pack 2 installed. What is this? How could it help?

2. How should i go on , so as take my results?

---

1. It won't help, but I think you should install Service Pack 2.

2. Attach the file you posted image of with everything set how you think it should be set.

I most likely will change your 3D contacts to 2D contacts and add some clearance, but first I need to see your attempt.

[Anonymous]

ok that i want to do is to study the relationship between the torque and the horizontal force that producing from this mechanism. if i adjust a torque on the rotor that rotates the 2 flywheel i will take horizontal forces (sinusoidal).

 i am trying to simulate that on dynamic simulation

i have put constraints in my assembly (that i believe become standar joints in dynamic simulation??????) and i put 2 joints (3d contacts) in the dynamic simulation environment.and i adjust a torque on one of the flywheel.(i don t know how to adjust it on the rotor)

my assembly is that i attach(i made my scetchs fully constrained)

[JDMather]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

....(i made my scetchs fully constrained)

---

When is this assignment due? It will probably take me a little while as I will have to remodel all of the components from scratch as your sketching technique of repeating and repeating and repeating dimensions is not how I normally model a part.

[JDMather]

Sketch1 appeared to be too complicated and too much unnecessary work to me - I decided to see if I could simplify.

[JDMather]

I want to follow a similiar technique of simplification with emphasis on using symmetry.

In the process of using symmetry I found a questionable dimension on the original part.

The design intent would need to be clarified with the original designer to make sure these feature should not in fact be symmetrical.

[JDMather]

Where did you go?  Is it too late to complete this assignment? We didn't even get to the Dynamic Simulation yet!

[Anonymous]

i m here.

Firstly thank you for your time. i m really surprise you spend so time for me.

ok this forum has helped me a lot in the past.

You are right using symmetry.

Yes as you see there is a dimension that is not on symmetry, it s not a mistake.

Ok now we have our parts fully constrained, I want to ask you why that is so important for dynamic simulation?

some times i m away from computer and i m late to see our discussion.(work, time difference) 

[Anonymous]

JDMATHER i still need your advice. i wonder if i could send you a personal message

[JDMather]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

... i m really surprise you spend so time for me.... 

---

Unfortunately I do not have as much time during the summer to work on stuff like this.

I like to see evidence of progress in topics already covered - can you attach your new file of this part

Sketch 1 is too complicated - pattern features rather than sketch

Sketch 2 is not needed (share Sketch 1).

[JDMather]

In a previous response - I asked you if you had installed Service Pack 2.

The iProperties of you file indicate that you have not done this.

Is this your computer?  Can you install Service Pack 2?

Here is another method of modeling Part2.  (examine attached file)

Oops, I just realized that I modeled that part in 2016 - you will not be able to open the file.

I would Extrude Part 1 mid-plane (symmetric).

Always make logical use of symmetry when possible.

[JDMather]

Inventor might not "care" about non-clearance contact, but in the real world there must be allowance for manufacturing tolerances.

The largest diameter must be smaller than the smallest slot when accounting for normal manufacturing tolerance.  The side of the cylinder touching might not be as critical depending on the rest of the design.

It is good practice to design  up-front with the necessary clearances in mind.

It is easier to manufacture cylinders than it is to manufacture "slots", therefore I recommend making the cylindrical feature smaller with tight tolerance and the slot larger with loose tolerance.  Tight and loose tolerance are relative terms - important considerations of manufacturing process and cost (and of course  - the function of the parts in the assembly).  In general, use the loosest tolerances possible with appropriate dimensions for clearance that will result in an assembly that functions as needed.

Now that I have experimented with your assembly - I see why you offset this to one side.

[JDMather]

Tomorrow I will come back and explain why I choose to use 2D Contact Joints rather than 3D Contact Joints.