SW03 and Disjoint Bodies

[MadMango]

I know this is a new feature in SW03, but I haven't had the chance to use it yet at work.

We'd like to use this feature to create "dummy" parts of our electrical harnesses for our assemblies. We are thinking that we can use our models of our various connectors, place them in the appropriate locations in our assemblies, and then sweep the harness body around to meet the connectors. Viola, instant "looks good" harnesses.

My question relates to the BOM on the drawing. How does the numbering in the BOM get affected by disjoint bodies in a part? Does the BOM number each segment of the disjoint bodied part with the same number, or will it assign individual numbers for each segment of the disjointed part? "The attempt and not the deed confounds us."

 

[BBJT]

I would assume that it treats the whole part, no matter how many disjointed features are in it, as one part. This is a part not an assembly. The part contains Disjoint Features not disjoint parts. BBJT CSWP

 

[Standing]

MadMango,
What I do it create an assembly of my cable. Place the connectors in space and insert this into the next level assembly. If I use the cable in any other assemblies I create configures. I have tried sweeping a harness and always got errors. We did purchase EMbassyWorks and liked what it did for us. We never found a good schematic capture program that would please the Engineers and put out a net list that would work with EMbassyWorks. So therefore we never used EMbassyWorks to build our cables.
Bradley

 

[MadMango]

BBJT, I was thinking along the same lines, just wanted some verification.

Bradley, we were thinking about item bubbles, and splitting them. On the top half you would have the item number (1, 2, etc) and the lower half would have the plug number (P1, P2, etc). Then in our assy drawings, we could hide the swept cable body, and just leave the plugs in the model. The assemblers would then be able to look at our drawing, see the connectors, and know that this is P1 and that is P2 of cable "X".

The way our standards are set-up at work, if it's an assy, it needs to be accurate, and reflect all parts required to make it. We can also create "dumb parts" of purchased assys, or items that aren't controlled by the SW model. In this case, we are still using OrCad and AutoCAD to create the manufacturing drawings for our cables, but still need to represent our cables in the model. I was thinking a disjoint SLDPRT model would be easier to work with over a SLDASM model of the cable. "The attempt and not the deed confounds us."

 

[anrol]

MadMango
No matter how many disjoint bodies are in that file, its still a part file. Multiple bodies are a technique to create a single part, and should not be used to create multiple parts. As a single file, it will only possess a single 'properties' file, and this is the source of the BOM information. "Properties" will only provide fields for a single part description, and will make only one entry into the BOM.

 

[MadMango]

That's exactly what we are looking for. Thank you Anrol. "The attempt and not the deed confounds us."

 

[RawheadRex]

On page 5-2 of the What's New manual shipped with my 2003 upgrade there is a section entitled "Multibody Parts Versus Assemblies." While it may be redundant information to some I highly recommend reading through this section in the What's New manual.

In reading through this section the first paragraph states, "A general rule to follow is that one part (multibody or not) should represent one part number in a Bill of Materials....." It also goes on to say that if one needs to "represent dynamic motion among bodies, use an assembly."

This seems to make good sense to me and I intend to use this rule of thumb when instructing the other users in my group how to best utilize this new capability.

Chris Gervais
Mechanical Designer
American Superconductor