tigris
|
| posted on 17/6/06 at 04:14 PM |
|
|
who is using solidworks?
I just got the program 2006 office. I am self-learning (slowly ) Any good resources online? Could anyone give me a walktrough on the commands they
used for a spaceframe (I've extruded a tube thus far)? Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
Lippoman
|
| posted on 17/6/06 at 04:42 PM |
|
|
MCADCentral
The forums at MCADCentral helped me along, I'm using Pro/E however.
They do have a section for Solidworks, so if it is anything similar it's worth checking out.
http://www.mcadcentral.com/solidworks/forum/default.asp
|
|
|
SeaBass
|
| posted on 17/6/06 at 06:07 PM |
|
|
I'm doing the same...
Weldments are what you want for the chassis. The programs tutorials are very very good. I would suggest going through them all...
I've been working on some surface designs this evening for the middy I'm 'modelling' for fun.
[Edited on 21/6/06 by SeaBass]
|
|
|
Alan B
|
| posted on 17/6/06 at 06:15 PM |
|
|
Not sure I'd agree about using weldments....I've found them to be...let's say "not quite perfected"...just yet at
least......powerful feature, just not always predictable IMO.
|
|
|
SeaBass
|
| posted on 17/6/06 at 06:19 PM |
|
|
I've produced the chassis using weldments so far with custom tube profiles... You have to be pretty careful with the intersections but otherwise
seems pretty good to me. I've not come to manufacture anything yet though...
What specifically do you find 'unpredictable'??
|
|
|
Moorron
|
| posted on 17/6/06 at 06:25 PM |
|
|
yeh weldments are bad, after 5 years of using this at work stay away from them.
depends on what u want to do, if u want detailed drawings of each chassis part u need to daw them up as parts, 1 part for each member. then creat your
assembly from those parts. its much longer to do but is the correct engineering way to do it.
if u just want to creat the chassis so u can work 'around it' then just draw it up as one part. qiucker but actaully harder as u will need
to creat planes all over the place for each extrude u do.
Sorry about my spelling, im an engineer and only work in numbers.
|
|
|
ned
|
| posted on 17/6/06 at 07:43 PM |
|
|
seabass, what part of that rendering did you design?!  
[Edited on 17/6/06 by ned]
beware, I've got yellow skin
|
|
|
tigris
|
| posted on 17/6/06 at 10:14 PM |
|
|
creating planes
is there a command for making new planes? how do you splice and cut intersecting tubes? These are probably very basic questions, but I'm just
looking for a point in the right direction so I can get started. Thanks
|
|
|
jono_misfit
|
| posted on 19/6/06 at 11:26 AM |
|
|
Yes,
Not got SW in front of me at the moment, but seem to remeber its third menu in from the left and under reference?
Theres points, axis's and planes in the same part.
|
|
|
Garbrand
|
| posted on 19/6/06 at 01:35 PM |
|
|
Reference Geometry
quote:
Originally posted by tigris
is there a command for making new planes? how do you splice and cut intersecting tubes? These are probably very basic questions, but I'm just
looking for a point in the right direction so I can get started. Thanks
New planes made are with the "Reference Geometry" command, in the "Insert..." menu if I'm not mistaken. Splicing and
intersecting tubes are a little tricky to explain here, but you'd create a part inside the assembly. Follow along at the tutorials mentioned
above, and you'll get the hang of it quickly! IMHO, SolidWorks is the easiest CAD app to pick up, and I've used quite a few.
Good luck!
|
|
|
kreb
|
| posted on 21/6/06 at 04:57 PM |
|
|
If one was to try and self-learn Solidworks say three evenings a week, how long would one be likely to take before he could do chasis designs and
skins? I do have decent conventional drafting skills, and there's a current copy on Solidworks sitting on my computer. I did one of the
tutorials and it seemed reasonable (Which is to say about 3x easier than autocad).
https://www.supercars.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/1966_FiatAbarth_1000SP1.jpg
|
|
|
chrisf
|
| posted on 21/6/06 at 05:25 PM |
|
|
I would say that after nine hours of playing around, you could do a chassis. Try modeling a couple things around the house. After you do that, try
making simple assemblies that have some movement.
I agree with the folks that suggest making each tube its own part, rather than drawing the chassis up as one whole bit.
--HTH, Chris
|
|
|
Mad Dave
|
| posted on 21/6/06 at 07:10 PM |
|
|
quote:
its much longer to do but is the correct engineering way to do it
I don't agree with this.
It depends which program you are using. In Solidworks the idea of weldments is to create a "multi-body" part. You then use the cut list
to 'Insert into New Part' any chassis member you would like. It has been developed to save time, effort and therefore cost, so why would
you want to go back to how it used to be done, ???even if it is not the correct engineering way???
[Edited on 22/6/06 by Mad Dave]
|
|
|
Alan B
|
| posted on 22/6/06 at 01:01 PM |
|
|
I take issue with."THE correct engineering way"
Say's who?
Surely the purpose of drawings are to communicate the intentions of the designer to the machinist/fabricator in such a way that the parts get made in
a clear, accurate and timely fashion?
So ANY method that achieves this is "A" correct engineerig method?
Just my thoughts....
|
|
|
kreb
|
| posted on 22/6/06 at 03:17 PM |
|
|
Has anyone used this program?
http://www.touchcad.com/
They seem like a low-budget operation - originally for boatbuilding, but they seem to have some nice features for doing surfaces. Check out the online
video of designing a car. The guy basically mocks up a rather pretty 3D model from scratch in about 10 minutes!
Here's a nice rendering on their site:
http://www.touchcad.com/Images/sevenfront.jpg
[Edited on 22/6/06 by kreb]
https://www.supercars.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/1966_FiatAbarth_1000SP1.jpg
|
|
|
Syd Bridge
|
| posted on 22/6/06 at 04:54 PM |
|
|
I'm with you Alan. I've been using Solidworks for a bit over a year now, easy to use, but weldments does need careful attention when doing
joints. OK for simple stuff though.
Try doing a yacht hull in Solidworks surfaces if you want some fun. I've given up and gone back to Rhino! Oh for Catia again!
Cheers,
Syd.
|
|
|
wildchild
|
| posted on 24/6/06 at 04:56 PM |
|
|
CATIA good.
Until you need to do a drawing, especially of a big assembly. The drafting workbench really lets the package down.
Or until you work with a customer who insists you use a 5+ year old release!
http://www.wildchild.org.uk
Build photos on Flickr
|
|
|
Syd Bridge
|
| posted on 25/6/06 at 08:08 PM |
|
|
No probs with extracting drawings with v5 r16. 
Cheers,
Syd.
|
|
|
Moorron
|
| posted on 26/6/06 at 10:22 AM |
|
|
oops looks like i have upset a few here. wasnt my intension to do so.
i agree that the object of an engineer is to cuminicate what he/she wants in the form of the drawing, however i dont think this has much to do with
how good they are at engeering. Things like drawing and therfore part control is, if an Engeering Change Notification (ecn) is needed after a part is
in production u need to rework part and drawing and if its not easy to do as the engineer didnt bother to think of such possible future problems then
they have now turned a easy job into a bad one.
engineering isnt just about making parts as a one off, its about the control of future alterations also.
|
|
|
Moorron
|
| posted on 26/6/06 at 10:30 AM |
|
|
regards to the OP, i think u can knock parts up after a few weeks of using SW. But like Cad, u can do the same think in so many ways and this leads to
the learner to get confused on what they are doing/looking at.
U will only learn the best method of each task after a few years of using it because its only when u need to go back and alter your part will u find
out u have shot yourselfe in the foot and its going to take ages to make a small change.
tip, try not to use 'tangent mates' in your assemblys, this slows down your pc alot and also creates errors in the models. so many times
has it crashed at work due to tangent mates. argh
Sorry about my spelling, im an engineer and only work in numbers.
|
|
|
wildchild
|
| posted on 26/6/06 at 12:17 PM |
|
|
@ Sid:
R16 is better at generating views from large assemblies, but there's lots of rough edges to the workbench in general. According to our catia
reseller, this is because Dassault think the future is CNC machining parts direct from 3D models, so they ignore any change requests to the drawing
workbench. Shame for the 99% of the industry that still has to work from 2D drawings.
Don't get me wrong, Catia generally, and even the drawing functions, are still far better than any of the other packages I have used, but this
high quality makes the things that don't quite work stand out.
@ Mooron
I entirely agree. It's easy to produce a 3D model that is geometrically what you want to be. The 'proper engineering' way of doing
it is to produce a model which someone else can pick up at a later date and easily change because you've thought about the design intent of it
and constrained it appropriately.
@ tigris:
Sorry, this has nothing to do with your original question! Solidworks is the only one of the 'well known' packages that I have never been
anywhere near.
http://www.wildchild.org.uk
Build photos on Flickr
|
|
|
Syd Bridge
|
| posted on 26/6/06 at 03:28 PM |
|
|
 I'm a one man band doing contract work involving frogs. With that in mind, Catia is a breeze.
I still do most of my work in 2d, A'cad 12!!
Cheers,
Syd.
|
|
|
sforma
|
| posted on 6/7/06 at 12:40 AM |
|
|
And what about using SoliWorks + cosmos to study the chassi and optimize it?
[Edited on 6/7/06 by sforma]
|
|
|
