Simulation Environment of assembly with Imported Solidworks part files

[Anonymous]

I have been using Inventor 2017 Professional for about a year now, and I am starting to use it to run stress analysis simulations on an assembly model I am working on. Unfortunately, some of (not all of) the SolidWorks parts imported into the Inventor assembly do not seem to be interact-able for some of the usual features of Inventor such as the measurement tool, constraint setting, and the mesh command in the simulation environment.

The parts are enabled and visible under their extra options menu (usually accessed via right click) and under the "View" tab are set to render shaded with edges, but are still rendered by Inventor to look transparent. In the simulation environment (Environments>>Stress Analysis), whenever I try to select any feature (surface, edge) of them, Inventor ignores them and only lets me select features from the parts behind them.

When I try to set up constraints for the simulation environment (not in the usual assembly environment), I am also unable to select these parts to specifically apply forces or constraints to them. As mentioned before, when I run the mesh command, they are left out and actually completely disappear from the assembly, until I turn the mesh back off.

These parts are imported from an optics vendor (Thorlabs). As far as I can tell from re-trying to import one of the faulty parts, my import options are the same for each. I'm confused as to what could be causing this problem and if there is a way to make all the imported parts usable for Inventor's assembly simulation environment functions?

I have attached an assembly file with the parts from Thorlabs so you can see what I have described (zipped). When I open it, the GCM102/M, RC3, and CLS-SL are all rendered transparent, and are non-interact-able in the simulation environment.

[JDMather]

Many of the parts are surface bodies rather than solid bodies.

This is typically done in an effort to protect intellectual property.

Sometimes it is simply a matter of the source not understanding what they are doing in a CAD program.

In the process of repairing the bodies - I would definitely remove the text features for the purpose of analysis (don't want to spend time meshing text which will probably just result in stress singularities anyhow).

Can you attach the original STEP file here?

[Anonymous]

Hi JDMather,

Yep, they are attached (I hope you meant for each part file).  Is it possible to form the appropriate solid body version of the file from these STEP files?  Oh you mean remove the brand text on the parts?  Got it; that's a good point for stress concentrations.

Thanks for your quick and insightful response,

-Luke

[JDMather]

It might be tomorrow before I can get back to this.

You will want to Enable Construction Environment (Tools>Application Options >Part tab).

And yes, you figured out that when I said text I was referring the brand name markings on the bodies.

[Anonymous]

Hey JDMather,

I'm having difficulty removing the text even after enabling construction environment on the problem parts (for example the GCM102/M).  Should I not wait to remove the text on the newly formed solid body parts built from the STEP files though?  If you're still too busy to form the solid bodies from the STEP files, is there a simple way for me to do so myself?  Thanks,

-Luke

[JDMather]

Try the Extract Loop command to remove the text.

[johnsonshiue]

Hi! I took a quick look at the files. Extract Loop may partially fix the badness. But, there are quite a few issues with the imported bodies like untrimmed intersection and others. There is very little chance the files can become good solid bodies ready for simulation without a lot of work. You have a few choices. You can open each part, which is marked as surface and enter Repair environment. Next, use Repair tools to fix up the badness and remove the text loops.

Or, you simply recreate  the geometry based on the imported geometry. It should not take too long to do that.

Many thanks!

[Anonymous]

Hi JDMather and Johnson Shiue,

I've reloaded the files from the original STEP files instead of the SolidWorks files from Thorlabs and the CLS-SL loaded as a solid body (attached).  However, in the repair environment, when I try to use the extract loop command I am unable to select any part of the CLS-SL part. I am pretty sure I selected the right bodies of the part to repair, so I'm wondering what I need to do to be able to select and remove the text. 

Unfortunately, the body status is not the same for the GCM102/M or the RC3.  When I tell it to search for errors in these bodies, it does not seem to find or show any.  Are the errors you are referring to supposed to be identifiable this way or some other way?  I apologize if I seem rather clueless; I am not very experienced with correcting part files like this.

For re-creating the geometry, are you referring to manually creating every surface and therefore sketch necessary to make the parts?  I feel the GCM102/M may be a little complicated to recreate that way, at least for me anyway.

Thank you both for your input and help,

-Luke

[JDMather]

Extract loop (untrim surface) works on individual surface rather than solid body faces.

So first step (in construction or repair) you must unstitch the solid into individual surfaces.

Once you have removed the text then you can Stitch.

But there might be a far easier way.

Sometimes Delete Face with Heal option can be used on the solid body to remove extraneous faces.

  Edit:  Just took a closer look at the text geometry - this is complex and not likely to work with Delete Face and would be difficult to select all of the faces to Delete.

I think a better way to remove it is with two simple circles for the inside and outside of wall thickness and Extrude.

Edit 2:  Here is one example.

[Anonymous]

Hi JDMather,

Ah, OK, thanks for the example; that does look pretty simple; did you do that in the repair environment or just the usual environment for sketching and extruding?

Also, how are you and Johnson Shiue seeing the problems with the surface bodies when you enter the repair environment?  I'm selecting all bodies and searching for errors and it does not seem to show me any of them.  If I'm going to go through them one by one and fix them, how do I recognize them?  In the GCM102/M, one part in the back (inside the frame) looks obviously like an unfinished part because it is missing the top face; is this the kind of error you are talking about?  If so, Inventor does not seem to recognize it, and it's the only one I've been able to find just through visual inspection.

Sorry for my slow response and thank you for your continued attention with this issue,

-Luke

[JDMather]

First step with your latest attachment -

select first surface in browser

while holding Shift key, select last surface in browser.  This selects all surfaces.

Right mouse button and unselect Translucent.  Now it should be easier to see the geometry.

[JDMather]

I have more experience with the older Construction Environment rather than the newer Repair Environment.

The red in the attached images are gaps between stitched surfaces.

There are more of the open gaps visible when in Translucent than when opaque view.

[JDMather]

Before I begin the "repair" process - I like to move geometry into appropriate Groups.

[Anonymous]

Hi JDMather,

Thanks for laying out the process in more detail; unfortunately I'm just not getting the same results.  I have no idea why; I'm hoping you can tell me.  Below are images of the results I get when I try to check for errors in the repair environment or quality in the construction environment for the GCM102/M.  The same thing happens with the RC3 piece (the associated files are attached).  In both cases I've followed the tutorials online that apply to Inventor 2017, and yet no errors are shown.  First, the setup images:

The results when I click "examine" and "ok" (the repair environment window just goes away after I click "ok"):

I am able to activate and use stitch on the construction geometry from the part, but no changes are apparent to me.

If I'm not mistaken, I need to be able to see the errors in the part to be able to correct them, right?  What am I missing/overlooking in order to see these errors that you and JohnsonShiue have found?

Thank you for your patience and attention with my questions,

-Luke