Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
Showing results for
Show only
|
Search instead for
Did you mean:
This page has been translated for your convenience with an automatic translation service. This is not an official translation and may contain errors and inaccurate translations. Autodesk does not warrant, either expressly or implied, the accuracy, reliability or completeness of the information translated by the machine translation service and will not be liable for damages or losses caused by the trust placed in the translation service.Translate
Currently in an assembly I can only build one frame whereas for the purposes of detailing for manufacturing I may have occasion to actually have 2 or 3 frames from the same layout sketch in the same assembly...this normally requires the creation of 3 separate assemblies from one sketch combined together at a top level assembly...a lot of work and duplication.
Frames are already Subassemblies, aren't they...? So packing them in a sub-sub just for this reason seems to be a bit hacky... 😞
The BOM-Structure weren't clean in this way, too... I personally think, if there is a "numbering" on the Frames by default, it implies the ability to have more of them.
Yes the frame itself is a sub assemblies in a sense, but they rely on some of the files in the assembly they are in. In the bill of materials I believe the frame sub assembly is ignored as though the components are in the main assembly.
A "Frame" usually consists of more components than the members themselves. The frame subassembly you are thinking of is really a wrapper for the members.
More complex projects require multi level sub assemblies. You will find advantages in having each frame in its own sub assembly, it gives you the option to separate the BOM and it allows you to work on them independently.
I you want them both to be based on the same base component or skeleton you can add that part file into 2 separate assembly files before making the frames. Then bring the 2 frames together in a main assembly file.
Actually, Frames are physical assemblies with the "Phantom" flag for BOM. Using the proposed SubAssy way, leads to a substructure in the BOM.
Therefore you don't have all the beams on one level.
Considering there is an actual Machine in the main assy, the BOM-setting"parts only" (not sure about the english term) seems not to be an option om partlist-generation. So you go with structured list, all levels:
However, I just want to say, there CAN be scenarios, where the need of placing more frames per Assembly is a legitimate.
I am not clear on why you can't use parts only. How are you trying to break you BOM up?
Sorry if I seem a little resistant to your idea. I have been following the Ideastation since it was started and it has only led me to be frustrated with Autodesk's development priorities. It has led me to jump on ideas that I feel there are workable solutions for.
I'm honestly surprised that each newly initiated instance of Frame Generator isn't already its own separate BOM line item already. I do like dusan's approach above in making an adaptive and still separate Frame Generator instance.
