Search results for query: *

Or you could make construction geometry of the chord to the end points of the arc and perpendicular from its midpoint to that arc for your three point arc at a smaller scale. Then make the real ones and use equasions to scale up - saves calculations. You could even have some distances driven...

Did you go into the graphics driver and select the predefined Solidworks configuration? (Control Panel - Display - etc.....) John Richards Sr. Mech. Engr. Rockwell Collins Flight Dynamics There's no place like 127.0.0.1

One of the VAR's in our area (not our VAR, but we might be switching) sells both programs and a few more, I believe. Go to shounco.com John Richards Sr. Mech. Engr. Rockwell Collins Flight Dynamics There's no place like 127.0.0.1

Lightweight and large assembly mode will mask a lot of errors in subassemblies and parts. it is a logical downside to lightweight. Are you sure you are not saying "no" to updating the assembly when you switch back from the subassembly? John Richards Sr. Mech. Engr. Rockwell Collins Flight...

Are you trying to build the actual twisted wire core? Please tell me you are not. That's like to modelling helical threads on standard fastener hardware. John Richards Sr. Mech. Engr. Rockwell Collins Flight Dynamics There's no place like 127.0.0.1

Or...... get your main view orientation corrected before you create the section view? John Richards Sr. Mech. Engr. Rockwell Collins Flight Dynamics There's no place like 127.0.0.1

The Faro products are porbably some of the best in this class. However your actual question seems to be right on the money. How do you get all the point cloud type data to turn into intelligent, accurate solid geometry? I don't think there is an ideal solution yet. Most of the reasonably...

Please clarify your second sentence. BTW: I have never seen or heard of this problem and we have many levels of mated assemblies nad subassemblies where we drag and drop parts by both methods. And believe me, some of our folks squeel like a pen full of hogs if something doesn't appear to work...

The temperature method does work very well if applied correctly. We have some units that are attached to airframes at say 3 independent points and we (have to) model the attachements using the friction forces at the joints. We get excellent correlation with results from major airframe...

I know of one guy who has a unique hardware library. For example, he has one pan head screw file with many (MANY!)configurations all driven from a design table. For a new part, he merely adds a line to the design table. There are pro's and con's to that approach, but he loves it. John...

We had more of this on SP2.1 - SP3 seems to be better. But it does vary with the user and machine here, so I think Scott's input is right on the ball. John Richards Sr. Mech. Engr. Rockwell Collins Flight Dynamics There's no place like 127.0.0.1

I have had a spaceball since SolidWorks World 1, where I won it (pure luck). It is great, as any of these devices are. I really like the two-fisted approach in conjunction with a mouse. It does all everyone says. It can also be a fun distraction when you get bored. And it is real impressive...

Let me get this straight. you really want a geodesic sphere? So you do not want a sphere cut into triangles. You actually want a spherical looking thing made up of flat pieces - over 11k pieces. (Are you some kind of masochist? - just kidding.) If you do a google search you will find a site...

For future use. Remember than the origin and basic coordinate system of mathematical space is fixed. In fact it is the only thing that is fixed - it's your starting universe. Try to bear this in mind in future projects and make sure you start off oriented appropriately. It may seem obvious...

I would add that while creating junk part, etc. is a great tool. At various intervals in your progress setyourself a design task to accomplish. Something appropriate to your current skill level. The only problem with just junk parts is you don't push you self to set outside your comfort zone...

I don't want to sound uncharitable. but!!!!! I am tired of this hoary old issue coming up over and over and over and .... again. I'm sorry if you people don't get it and are unable to understand why backward compatibility is not possible with this type of modelling/CAD package. However I echo...

OK I have a different view of this issue - surprise, surprise!! First from your description, I think you need to go through the SW tutorials and take a class. Fully understand the differences in the modelling approaches of the two systems. Never try to relate a new CADsystem to the methods...

OK. Hands up those of you who actually read what ogray said? It is not much help to him if you ignore that and just give other information :-) I am guilty of doing this also sometimes. Maybe we should preface alternative info or opinions which do not really answer the question presented with...

Here's a small point, but very helpful for us to interpret what people mean in their questions: If you can correctly differentiate in your use of SW terms it really helps. I realize it is difficult when moving from an older CAD system or the "board"....ahhhh. Old habits die hard for all of us...

Yup, sorry I was confusing. SmarTeam takes care of the changes from drawing by default - it just will not let you change a model without checking out the model, so it does not really matter to us which way the option is set. If they need to change the model for a new config, etc. then they (in...