best practices for forgings ---> machined parts ---> assembly operations

[geoffraynak]

Greetings!

I have a question about how best to handle the following workflow:
Step 1: 'raw' part is created by forging
this part will require some inspection dimensions and an inspection drawing for the factory
Step 2: 'machined' part is created from the raw part
the 'raw' part is fixtured and machined to create the final details (think tapped threads and faces surfaces)
Step 3: part is 'assembled' with additional steps that deform the part
here the part has two tabs that get swaged to lock the part in place.


Question: Is there a best practice that NX recommends to allow this part to live as only one file?

I do not want to use letters as part-name qualifiers ... like 0000329.prt as the machined part and 0000329F.prt as the Forged part ... because that can get too messy
Can I use reference sets and a well constructed model to suppress feature groups that can be used in assemblies or drawing documentation?
I'd like to have a master drawing file that would have all 3 Steps (configurations?) of the part in one dwg file.

Many thanks in advance

Regards
Geoff
NX9.0

 

[looslib]

One file for all that data is asking for trouble.
Master Model techniques say it is best in 4 files, forging, machined, assembly and drawing. Even better would be 6 files, separate drawings for each modeled step.

The real question is how do you sequence your modeling? Does the machined model come first and then the forging OR the forging and then the machined model? The assembly is a non-issue as it will always be done last.
Machined model first, you have to add material around the part for the forged shape, which is the normal way forgings are constructed.
Forged model first, then you have to work with cutting the model down to its machined state.



"Wildfires are dangerous, hard to control, and economically catastrophic."

Ben Loosli

 

[geoffraynak]

Thanks Ben ...
can you explain why it is asking for trouble ... i am an NX rookie ... and am open to all advice

can i make a 'master model' that designs the part (smartly) all the way to the 'assembled' state ... and then use Part Families to create subordinate parts by turning off feature groups?

i believe i could make 0000329 and then have the family create 0000329-F, 0000329-M, 0000329-A ...
the 'master' would not have a drawing ... but the other 'children' in the family would all have drawings ...

As for 'sequencing' ... I try to keep it as it will be made

Forming: forging/casting/extrusion/sintering/etc ...
Machining: take away material to create a finished part
Assembly: any final steps to make it into the final user state

 

[NutAce]

There are different ways of doing this.

Like stated above by Ben.
However, my opinion would be that I'm engineering the finished product. For me it is important what the end result looks like as that is what I will be applying.
So I start from there.

For machining and forging allowances I create additional parts in an assembly where my finished part is the parent. By creating wavelinks to my forged and machined part I have linked models where I can ADD my machining allowances.
Working like this I ensure that I any changes made will also directly reflect on my machined and forged parts.


Ronald van den Broek
Mechanical Engineer
Cad Environment Coordinator
Wärtsilä, Propulsion Services
NX8.5.3 / TC9.1.2
HPZ420 Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-1620 0 @ 3.60GHz, 32 Gb Win7 64B
Nvidea Quadro4000 2048MB DDR5
HP EliteBook 8570W Intel(R) Core(TM) I7-3740QM CPU @ 2.70GHz, 16Gb Win7 64B

 

[looslib]

The problem with one file is the amount of data, copying objects between layers, keeping everything in sync and the actual file size grows to be huge.
Using Master Model with each 'step' in its own file allows objects to be shared, not copied, between the files.

It can be done in a single file but you will need arrangements and/or reference sets to get things to show at the various steps. Plus the use of layers to turn things on and off.



"Wildfires are dangerous, hard to control, and economically catastrophic."

Ben Loosli

 

[geoffraynak]

thanks for the clarifications!

i think the best solution for me will be using a part family to turn on/off various feature groups ...

one master file ... and as many as 3 subordinate files.

does this make sense ... and would it be considered a 'best practice' in NX?

thx
geoff

 

[SDETERS]

What we do is we have a raw material Model. (Casting) Then we have the machined part that has the wavelink from the Casting model. Then we make our machine features to this machined model. So if the Raw material Changes the Machine changes. But we can make changes to the machine print without touching the RM model.

We have a Raw material print. Then we also have a Machining print.