middle constrain

[Dan_Margulius]

Hello ,

I have 3 parts (cubes) in assembly. I want the middle one to stay in the middle always. I hope it is clear.

For example if the offset between faces is 100 then the middle is 50. If the offset changes to 200 then the new middle is 100 and I want the middle part to adjust automatically. I am attaching a picture . How can this be done with constraints.

Thanks,

Dan 

[Dan_Margulius]

Hello ,

I have 3 parts (cubes) in assembly. I want the middle one to stay in the middle always. I hope it is clear.

For example if the offset between faces is 100 then the middle is 50. If the offset changes to 200 then the new middle is 100 and I want the middle part to adjust automatically. I am attaching a picture . How can this be done with constraints.

Thanks,

Dan 

[Steve_Bahr]

What is your design intent?

If you want the middle cube to remain stationary, always, you could constrain it to the assembly's origin planes, ground it and delele the constraints you just created.  Note that the first part placed in your assembly is always grounded, so you'll need to remove the grounding first.  Then you could constrain each of the other cubes to the origin planes of the middle cube.  Use parameters to make the offsets equal to eachother.  This process also works if you need one of the other cubes grounded.

[Steve_Bahr]

What is your design intent?

If you want the middle cube to remain stationary, always, you could constrain it to the assembly's origin planes, ground it and delele the constraints you just created.  Note that the first part placed in your assembly is always grounded, so you'll need to remove the grounding first.  Then you could constrain each of the other cubes to the origin planes of the middle cube.  Use parameters to make the offsets equal to eachother.  This process also works if you need one of the other cubes grounded.

[Dan_Margulius]

Hello Steve,

This is an educational question. How can I make a part adjust to the middle whenever the parts from the right and left size

move apart or come close to one another.

Thanks,

Dan

[Dan_Margulius]

Hello Steve,

This is an educational question. How can I make a part adjust to the middle whenever the parts from the right and left size

move apart or come close to one another.

Thanks,

Dan

[Steve_Bahr · Accepted solution]

Hi Dan.

Try this.  I hope you have IV 2010.  In the assembly, edit constraint Flush4 and watch what happens.  Constraint Flush9 is dependent on Flush4.

Is that what you're after?

[Steve_Bahr · Accepted solution]

Hi Dan.

Try this.  I hope you have IV 2010.  In the assembly, edit constraint Flush4 and watch what happens.  Constraint Flush9 is dependent on Flush4.

Is that what you're after?

[Dan_Margulius]

Hello,

I am checking...

Thank you,

Dan 

[Dan_Margulius]

Hello,

I am checking...

Thank you,

Dan 

[Anonymous]

So I wanted to use a middle constrains to keep the two high lighted parts in place. Both slide back and forth. The middle constrain found in Solidworks does the job beautifully, in Inventor (where there are just a few weird working constrains) I couldn't find it. What I want is to select the faces of the part in the middle and simply say: stay in the middle of these faces and select the faces where they should be in the middle in. Easy

as that, when you change the size of the hole/guide or the slider it self it stays in the middle. 

[Anonymous]

So I wanted to use a middle constrains to keep the two high lighted parts in place. Both slide back and forth. The middle constrain found in Solidworks does the job beautifully, in Inventor (where there are just a few weird working constrains) I couldn't find it. What I want is to select the faces of the part in the middle and simply say: stay in the middle of these faces and select the faces where they should be in the middle in. Easy

as that, when you change the size of the hole/guide or the slider it self it stays in the middle. 

[Anonymous]

Sorry but it's seems like only the way how to make more work. Not a solvation.

Constrain must make automatically without offsetting parts from each other.

8 years pasted after this post. 

Does anybody knows how really solve it?

[Anonymous]

Sorry but it's seems like only the way how to make more work. Not a solvation.

Constrain must make automatically without offsetting parts from each other.

8 years pasted after this post. 

Does anybody knows how really solve it?

[johnsonshiue]

Hi Guys,

I thought Symmetry constraint has been there for a while (2012 or later). Could you try using Symmetry constraint and see if it works for you?

Many thanks!

[johnsonshiue]

Hi Guys,

I thought Symmetry constraint has been there for a while (2012 or later). Could you try using Symmetry constraint and see if it works for you?

Many thanks!

[Dan_Margulius]

Hi 

The Symmetry constraint  Inventor has is not what people are asking. 

The only thing i found to overcome this limitation is "Between two faces " in the Joints.

At this point after waiting so long and seeing your remark it means that for 8 years nobody understood what we need 

or it was ignored on purpose 

Thanks

Dan

---

@johnsonshiue wrote:

Hi Guys,

I thought Symmetry constraint has been there for a while (2012 or later). Could you try using Symmetry constraint and see if it works for you?

Many thanks!

---

[Dan_Margulius]

Hi 

The Symmetry constraint  Inventor has is not what people are asking. 

The only thing i found to overcome this limitation is "Between two faces " in the Joints.

At this point after waiting so long and seeing your remark it means that for 8 years nobody understood what we need 

or it was ignored on purpose 

Thanks

Dan

---

@johnsonshiue wrote:

Hi Guys,

I thought Symmetry constraint has been there for a while (2012 or later). Could you try using Symmetry constraint and see if it works for you?

Many thanks!

---

[TheCADWhisperer]

---

@Anonymouswrote:

Does anybody knows how really solve it?

---

If you start a new thread (you can link back to this one for reference if desired) and attach your assembly here - I will show you the correct way to solve this problem.  (Assuming you have Inventor 2017, 2018 or 2019.)

[TheCADWhisperer]

---

@Anonymouswrote:

Does anybody knows how really solve it?

---

If you start a new thread (you can link back to this one for reference if desired) and attach your assembly here - I will show you the correct way to solve this problem.  (Assuming you have Inventor 2017, 2018 or 2019.)

[Anonymous]

Hi.

Time passed, but I still cant't find normal solution.

In attach step file with two pipes assembly.

The task is to put the part in the center of another part. (Without planes constrain)

Please try

[Anonymous]

Hi.

Time passed, but I still cant't find normal solution.

In attach step file with two pipes assembly.

The task is to put the part in the center of another part. (Without planes constrain)

Please try

[hosford]

utilizing the symmetry constraint allows you to do what you are looking for.

assuming you design a plane mid way between the faces of the central part, then use this plane as your symmetry base.

[hosford]

utilizing the symmetry constraint allows you to do what you are looking for.

assuming you design a plane mid way between the faces of the central part, then use this plane as your symmetry base.

[Anonymous]

Hi,

Sorry but the point was constrain two simple details without using plane of any. Only faces

Your variant is with three more parts and using plane of one of them.

Thanks for try

[Anonymous]

Hi,

Sorry but the point was constrain two simple details without using plane of any. Only faces

Your variant is with three more parts and using plane of one of them.

Thanks for try

[SBix26]

Sorry, can't be done as you have posed the problem.  Why do you need to impose these conditions?  To "prove" that another software application is superior?

---

Sam B
Inventor Pro 2019.3 | Windows 7 SP1
LinkedIn

[SBix26]

Sorry, can't be done as you have posed the problem.  Why do you need to impose these conditions?  To "prove" that another software application is superior?

---

Sam B
Inventor Pro 2019.3 | Windows 7 SP1
LinkedIn

[hosford]

dmitrijs.sisonkovs

this message was stated using 3 parts and clearly shows a plane in the middle part.

you post two parts in a stp format and want one of them to be constrained between something and not using a plane and yet you want it to float exactly mid position between what?

[hosford]

dmitrijs.sisonkovs

this message was stated using 3 parts and clearly shows a plane in the middle part.

you post two parts in a stp format and want one of them to be constrained between something and not using a plane and yet you want it to float exactly mid position between what?

[Anonymous]

Very often designing construction I better put parts by middle of each other. Then after change part width or length, symetry of construction will stay.

But if You start speak about superior of another sowtware, why do not build such function for Inventor? 

[Anonymous]

Very often designing construction I better put parts by middle of each other. Then after change part width or length, symetry of construction will stay.

But if You start speak about superior of another sowtware, why do not build such function for Inventor? 

[SBix26]

When working with actual physical parts, there are no features to constrain them to be centered.  The fact that you can use origin planes or work planes to do so in a solid modeling application is a benefit of the software, and the obvious way to accomplish what you're asking. 

Why would you demand that the software not use the tools provided for the task?  It's like telling a craftsman to drive a screw into a piece of wood, but no fair using a screwdriver-- you have to use a saw!  I'm having trouble understanding your desire to not use planes for this task; that's exactly what they're for!

---

Sam B
Inventor Pro 2019.3 | Windows 7 SP1
LinkedIn

[SBix26]

When working with actual physical parts, there are no features to constrain them to be centered.  The fact that you can use origin planes or work planes to do so in a solid modeling application is a benefit of the software, and the obvious way to accomplish what you're asking. 

Why would you demand that the software not use the tools provided for the task?  It's like telling a craftsman to drive a screw into a piece of wood, but no fair using a screwdriver-- you have to use a saw!  I'm having trouble understanding your desire to not use planes for this task; that's exactly what they're for!

---

Sam B
Inventor Pro 2019.3 | Windows 7 SP1
LinkedIn

[DRoam]

@Anonymous's request is a legitimate one. Nothing wrong with asking if there's a better way to do something. And if there isn't, nothing wrong with asking why (especially after 8 years).

This is a logged wish that you can vote for here: Symmetric constraint involving a Width Mate like solidworks.

Currently has 73 votes. Add another 50 if you count the duplicates. Add 50 more if you count this idea, which was marked as implemented even though the Symmetry constraint only works for one type of symmetry condition. It can't center something between two faces on a part, or center two pairs of faces with each other. Hence all the remaining duplicates and ongoing discussions like this one...

[DRoam]

@Anonymous's request is a legitimate one. Nothing wrong with asking if there's a better way to do something. And if there isn't, nothing wrong with asking why (especially after 8 years).

This is a logged wish that you can vote for here: Symmetric constraint involving a Width Mate like solidworks.

Currently has 73 votes. Add another 50 if you count the duplicates. Add 50 more if you count this idea, which was marked as implemented even though the Symmetry constraint only works for one type of symmetry condition. It can't center something between two faces on a part, or center two pairs of faces with each other. Hence all the remaining duplicates and ongoing discussions like this one...