What are your experiences using NX6 assembly constraint? 1

[uwam2ie]

I'm looking for mre information on the in Nx5 introduced assembly constraints. I hope the strong user base here can help me. We are testing and looking for a decision to switch.
Here are some assembly function we use:
Partfamilies-BCT, variable positioning, arrangements, reference sets, deep structured asm. trees, - in various combinations.
What are your experiences using assembly constraint?
thx in ad

 

[NXConsultants]

I presume that you're looking for experiences relative to Mating Conditions..?

The various companies that I have consulted at over the last couple of years have successfully transitioned to Assembly Constraints in NX5 & 6

There was a little bit of resistance at first, users not liking change, but I'm sure most would struggle to use Mating Conditions now.

A lot of ‘my’ users are constraining complex F1 suspension assemblies, the ability to apply bi-directional constraints, the constraint browser in Part Nav, display constraints on the screen etc etc have all been seen as a positive improvement

There are obviously still a few things that could be improved, but on the whole I’d recommend using Assembly Constraints (even though the users call it Mating Conditions – There again, they still talk about Unigraphics..)

 

[RobLN]

Assembly constraints are the way to go.
I used a 'mating conditions' style approach in Unigraphics Solid Edge V10 when that method was quite new. I then went to I-deas where the assembly constraints are peculiar to that software (in every sense of the word!).

Since starting NX5 I'm very happy with the assembly constraints; easy to use, modify and view from the part navigator. This is compatible with arrangements too.

One thing to avoid is the deform command which is laborious and seems to be pretty unreliable when used with assembly constraints / arrangements.

 

[hudson888]

It would be worth making a search of recent similar topics in this forum since I recall replying a very similar question quite recently.

I think constraints are definitely more flexible and powerful. When applied to everything in a large assembly it seems that they can be a little heavy on the system because it is trying to apply them all concurrently. I have some reservations with the angle constraint flipping sides as it were when I attempt to use it as I did the planar angle in mating conditions.

Best Regards

Hudson

www.jamb.com.au

Nil Desperandum illegitimi non carborundum

 

[JohnRBaker]

Hudson,

Note that if when applying Angular Constraints, you use the 'Orient Angle' instead of the '3D Angle' option you will find that the results, particularly when making large edits later, will be much more predictable. The only real difference is that with 'Orient Angle' you will need to explicitly define an axis of rotation, something that was inferred when using '3D Angle', but which made that scheme more susceptible to ambiguity because the axis was left up to the software to define and interpret each time an edit was made.

John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Design Solutions
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Industry Sector
Cypress, CA

http://www.siemens.com/plm

http://www.plmworld.org/museum/

To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.

 

[JBIM]

I would like to use these mating condition but when i (reposition) a component by dinamyc constrain, it seem that there is no way to lock the snap ( or grid increment) currently depending on zoom factor to move component.

Some help would be most apreciate.

thanks

 

[JohnRBaker]

Not sure what you mean by no snapping. When Positioning a Component using the dynamic drag handles, if you select any of the 3 X,Y,Z axis, or the 3 Rotate About the X,Y,Z axis handles, you will have the option of entering linear or angular increment values which will be honored while dragging along or about an axis. Granted, there is no incrementing if you're dragging the origin handle, but there are for the directional and rotational handles. However, if you go to...

Preferences -> Work Plane...

...and activate either a Rectangular or Radial Grid on the Work Plane (the X-Y plane of the WCS) and toggle ON the 'Snap to Grid' option, then dragging the Component using the Dynamic handle's origin handle will now snap to the Grip Points.

So give those a try and see if this was what you were looking for.

John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Design Solutions
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Industry Sector
Cypress, CA

http://www.siemens.com/plm

http://www.plmworld.org/museum/

To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.

 

[hudson888]

Thanks John for the Orient Angle tip. I was quietly hoping you might eventually comment on that little problem I've been having.

You know what happened was that I had a three stage planetary gear system animated and converted to constraints into NX-6 which presumed the other option and went awry on me. The formulas did my head in the first time around and I didn't want the headache again of having to redefine things.

Best Regards

Hudson

www.jamb.com.au

Nil Desperandum illegitimi non carborundum