Design Table or ??? for a Configurable Roll Assembly...
Design Table or ??? for a Configurable Roll Assembly...
(OP)
I have a general assembly model I wanted to make of a conveyor roller that we buy a lot of, and I wanted to make different configurations for diameter, length, and hex axle. I made (3) different part files for the roller tube, bearing, and axle, and then an assembly using the parts. How can I drive the parts through the assembly instead of having to make configurations of each part?
Derrick Hochgesang
Design Technician






RE: Design Table or ??? for a Configurable Roll Assembly...
ht
Regards,
Scott Baugh, CSWP![[pc2] pc2](https://www.tipmaster.com/images/pc2.gif)
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum PoliciesBerry Plastics
Cad Admin\Design Engineer
GEASWUG Greater Evansville Area SWUG Leader
www.scottjbaugh.com
RE: Design Table or ??? for a Configurable Roll Assembly...
That being said, reduce the complexity of your purchased parts down to a part. This is just good design practice. Plus, since suppliers often have multiple configurations, a part can be driven by a design table directly; so you don't have to drill down. Reduces the load time on your assembly... The benefits go on and on.
I have attached a part for a roller that I quickly whipped up. Look at the configurations tab to see the Design Table.
-----------
As some additional food for thought, you can also drive dimensions from a .txt file. Just insert the file in to each part (import through the equation manager) and then link dimensions to the imported variables.
To change dimensions, just change the .txt. This isn't a solution to multiple configurations though, it will just let you rapidly change similar dimensions between mating components.
ie. I have a bunch of flanged surfaces between 5 different parts. I want all the flanges to have the same dimensions. So I drive it by a global var
Devon, EIT [Mechanical]
Solidworks 2011 SP 1.0
RE: Design Table or ??? for a Configurable Roll Assembly...
Devon-I've given that some though, and I may end up going that route. I was looking at it from the standpoint of down the road being able to animate a machine if I needed to. That's a ways into the future though, and something I may never have to actually do. I should probably stick with the "KISS" plan.
Derrick Hochgesang
Design Technician