Mating axis' between bolts and holes 3

[BodyBagger]

Hello all,
I am coming across many different things I have not seen done before while working this contract job. I noticed that all of the nuts and bolts have been created from scratch (not from TB) and they all hace an axis included. On the assemblies, they mate the axis of the bolts with the axis of the hole they are being used with rather than concentric mates. Why would this be the preferred method or am I missing something here? When I asked why they were creating bolts from scratch and not pulling them from TB, they said "what's toolbox?".........

 

[MadMango]

I can't think of a benefit for mating Axis-Axis.

"Art without engineering is dreaming; Engineering without art is calculating."

Have you read faq731-376 to make the best use of these Forums?

 

[CorBlimeyLimey]

I can think of two reasons to use axes instead of faces.

1) Planes and axes (not temp axes) created from planes are more stable than faces and geometry. Faces and geometry ID's can change if they are modified in some way.

2) Created axes can be selected from the FM, which is much easier than zooming in to select individual faces.


My company only has the Standard package plus the PhotoWorks/PV360 and FeatureWorks modules (no Toolbox).
I did have the opportunity to try Toolbox for a while, but didn't like it. I created my library from a utility called SolidMech (sadly no longer available). Any new items are either modified from existing or created from scratch ... and where applicable, always with axes.

 

[EEnd]

I tend to mate the axes. My impression is that they are more stable / persistent than the surfaces / edges that are used in concentric mates. Additionally a concentric mate means align the axis of these two cylindrical objects. Using the axis directly conceptually cuts out the middle man. I am also not sure when concentric mates became available. It might be that axis to axis was the only option when I started on ProE way back when and I just stuck with what I knew.

Eric

 

[drawoh]

BodyBagger,

On my first enounter with toolbox, I worked out that it did not meet our requirements. It did not work well with mulitple users, and the BOM entries were too cryptic. I want to copy and paste from the BOM, to our purchase requisitions and I want to check fasteners into PDM. I designed my own fasteners, admittedly, without centre axes.

Ask, tactfully.

I set all sorts of stuff up shortly after we installed SolidWorks. I would do a lot of it differently now if I had to start from scratch, again.

JHG

 

[Eltron]

My only argument against using axes is the they have to be turned on. In a complex assy having all of those crappy little blue lines all over Hell's creation is a bit of a mess visually.

Dan

http://www.eltronresearch.com

Dan's Blog

 

[CorBlimeyLimey]

Eltron,

That's mainly for the Temp Axes. If you create and use reference axes, you don't need to have the View > Axes active, because they are selectable from the FM.

 

[drawoh]

Eltron,

Turn the axes on when you need them, then turn them off when you are done. I hate having to switch stuff off from the view menu.

I can make a good case for using the hole wizard sketch points for centreing fasteners. If you do it this way, you can change the holes without losing your assembly constraint. Now if only I had done it that way...

You can centre on the fastener body. There is no need to use axes.

JHG

 

[EEnd]

And some days you just want to put a square peg in a round hole.

 

[CorBlimeyLimey]

drawoh,

The visibility of Axes and Temporary Axes can be toggled with keyboard shortcuts.

"You can centre on the fastener body"
Do you mean by selecting the cylindrical face?

I agree, there is no need to use axes ... it's just personal preference.

 

[TheTick]

A face is about the least likely bit of geometry to be lost. Especially true for hardware, which isn't subject to design changes.

Using axes precludes use of concentric mates. This is a bit of an annoyance when trying to decipher and correct mate conditions.

 

[drawoh]

CorBlimeyLimey,

Yes, I meant the cylindrical face. I have used axes for mating on occasion. Adding an axis to a slot makes slots easier to centre on.

TheTick,

You do not lose faces on your standard parts. You do lose faces when you mess with the hole wizard, and I believe firmly in messing with the hole wizard.

JHG

 

[ShaggyPE]

About the only time I lose a face using hole wizard is if I switch from a c-sink hole to a regular hole etc. In this case a concentric mate will lose its face. This doesn't bother me, I still mate concentric. If mating to an axis (not a temp axis)... you would have to create an axis for each hole... right? That seems like a royal waste of time. Though just one axis for the seed hole of a pattern is all that is necessary... but this still seems like it is not the best solution.

-Dustin
Professional Engineer
Certified SolidWorks Professional
Certified COSMOSWorks Designer Specialist
Certified SolidWorks Advanced Sheet Metal Specialist

 

[ShaggyPE]

I agree with Drawoh regarding creating an axis in a slot for mating. This is the only time I mate a fastener to an axis.

-Dustin
Professional Engineer
Certified SolidWorks Professional
Certified COSMOSWorks Designer Specialist
Certified SolidWorks Advanced Sheet Metal Specialist

 

[cpretty]

In terms of using the Toolbox, discussions on this Forum and the Solidworks Forum would suggest that less and less people use the Toolbox, especially so in multi-user enviroments.

Setting up a good fastener library seems to be the way a lot of people have gone (my last 3 jobs included). Quite often people use Toolbox to generate the part, then saveas to put it in the library.

Have a look into the overheads of having all the configurations that Toolbox creates for parts.

Also look into the issues created when sending designs to outside customers. If they don't run off the same Toolbox Database, then all hell breaks loose.

Both of these issues have been identified as major headaches with Toolbox in the past. They have been fixed in later editions, but are likely why long time users of Solidworks stay well clear of them. Once you have your library setup, then it is not a problem.

In terms of the axes, check that they are not using something tricky like auto-mates. This could explain the reason for using the axes.

Craig Pretty
Tru-Design Plastics

 

[Eltron]

Thanks for the vote of confidence, guys. I know how to toggle the temp and ref axes. It's just usually an unnecessary hassle for fasteners. I think I'm going to switch the toggle to a Mouse Gesture in 2010...when I get around to it.

Dan

http://www.eltronresearch.com

Dan's Blog

 

[gwubs]

To mate bolts/capscrews in a slot it is very effective to use the width mate....

 

[gwubs]

Question - do you fully define capscrews in your assemblies, that is; stop them from spinning in the hole? Some of our modelers don't bother, but I believe it is better for drawings (balloons), and so that you can keep your assemblies fully defined (good practice IMHO)

 

[CorBlimeyLimey]

It's not really necessary to fully define fasteners, o-rings, etc, to prevent rotation.

Some upsides;
Keeps the FM 'cleaner' looking.
Easier to find under-defined mating of other parts (because the (-) stands out).
Keeps the OCD sufferers calmer.

Some downsides;
More mates = more time to rebuild.
More mates = potential for more to go wrong (arguable).
The assy becomes easier to over-define.

 

[gwubs]

CBL- do you balloon fasteners? I find that there are enough little things that change when you open a drawing without needing to align balloons and leaders to bolt heads &etc. We reuse most of our assemblies, so the odds of an under defined part getting a little drag are quite good. I agree though that more mates are not a good thing from a rebuild point of view.