casting model methodology 2

[MoynoGuy]

I am looking for options and methodology that maintain dependancies between the cast and finished part.
configuration management seems to be the most obvious, but I would like to pursue other methods.

Thanks

 

[chancey]

You could make your finished part a derived part based on the casting.

 

[ctopher]

If you are talking about how to model it, create the casting, then add to an assembly, then cut-away the material for finished part.

Chris
Sr. Mechanical Designer, CAD
SolidWorks 05 SP3.1 / PDMWorks 05
ctopher's home site

FAQ559-1100
FAQ559-716

 

[Heckler]

Check this link thread559-107192 the topic has been brought up before. I personally make the cast at part then insert it into an assembly then add machined features. But their are many schools of thought regarding this topic.

Best Regards,

Heckler
Sr. Mechanical Engineer
SW2005 SP 2.0 & Pro/E 2001
Dell Precision 370
P4 3.6 GHz, 1GB RAM
XP Pro SP2.0
NIVIDA Quadro FX 1400
o
_`\(,_
(_)/ (_)

"There is no trouble so great or grave that cannot be much diminished by a nice cup of tea" Bernard-Paul Heroux

 

[CorBlimeyLimey]

Just curious ... what is the benefit of "Part to Assy" method over straight config.


Making the best use of this Forum. faq559-716
How to get answers to your SW questions. faq559-1091
Helpful SW websites every user should be aware of. faq559-520

 

[ctopher]

You can have a cast model with it's own rev controlled dwg and a machining dwg (M/F casting) with it's own revision control. you do changes to the casting model, the machining (assembly) will update. Both models can be sent to vendors separately also.

Chris
Sr. Mechanical Designer, CAD
SolidWorks 05 SP3.1 / PDMWorks 05
ctopher's home site

FAQ559-1100
FAQ559-716

 

[Heckler]

CBL,

The cast model should stand alone as a part. We sent the cast model to Howmet and they developed the tooling via a SLA model. The machined features inside of the cast model could have made this a much more timely process and I say could have. On this project, the casting ending up being around 400+ features and the machined part was 450+ features. One draw back doing it this way was the limited number of features available as time dependent features.

If I had another casting project I would do the cast model as a part then insert it into another part to add the machine feature.

Best Regards,

Heckler
Sr. Mechanical Engineer
SW2005 SP 2.0 & Pro/E 2001
Dell Precision 370
P4 3.6 GHz, 1GB RAM
XP Pro SP2.0
NIVIDA Quadro FX 1400
o
_`\(,_
(_)/ (_)

"There is no trouble so great or grave that cannot be much diminished by a nice cup of tea" Bernard-Paul Heroux

 

[ctopher]

Heckler,
Sometimes I think we are cast from the same mold!


Chris
Sr. Mechanical Designer, CAD
SolidWorks 05 SP3.1 / PDMWorks 05
ctopher's home site

FAQ559-1100
FAQ559-716

 

[TheTick]

I'm surprised no one is using Insert --> Part to place a raw casting as a base feature for a finished casting model. Seems like that was what it was made for.

 

[ctopher]

Tick,
I have tried that. For some reason I can't get others here to get a grasp on it. Everyone here (and vendors) seems to understand the other method, so I didn't mess with it.

Chris
Sr. Mechanical Designer, CAD
SolidWorks 05 SP3.1 / PDMWorks 05
ctopher's home site

FAQ559-1100
FAQ559-716

 

[chancey]

My bad calling out derived part - I actually meant to say what The Tick recommended. This is the most headache free method of dealing with cast and finished parts.

 

[MoynoGuy]

Thanks for the reference thread Heckler.
I am not sure why I did not get a hit on this when I did a search for "cast" or "castings".

Thanks to all

 

[btrueblood]

Hmm. For convenience, I create cast parts as a "rolled-back state" configuration of the machined part. Maybe not "by the book" but it was quick & effective. All of the features of both cast and machined parts were available for modification during the design process. The vendors received paper drawings and "dumb solid" exports from SW, as well as the parent SW file for their use.

 

[EngJW]

I have made several now, thanks to help from this forum. I make the casting model, then insert it as a part into a new model and make all the machining cuts on it. I change the color of the machining operations in order to keep track of them. I also like to build the casting to a point, and then start the machining model and work on them concurrently. If you find that you are machining into air, you can fix the problem right away.

We no longer have checkers, but I think if you can make the machined model from the casting you have done more than a checker would do.

 

[ShaggyPE]

Good tip about changing the color of the cut features. I use this methodology (insert part into part) when I do an altered item model/drawing. Sometimes we purchase a part and then make a couple cuts on it. I model the part as purchased, insert it into new part and make all the modifications necessary. At that point, like EngJW, I change the color of the cuts they stand out.

 

[TheTick]

Or just change the color of your base feature to something different from the document color.

 

[macduff]

Casting-Separate model.
Machining-Insert to new part. More options availble to remove material. Change color of cuts.

Bad thing about this is that when filed in the PDM vault the cast part doesn't follow along. I drops it to the bottom of your project folder.



Macduff
Colin Fitzpatrick
Sr. Mechanical Designer
macduff's SW page
Dell Precision PWS370
Pentium(4)2.80GHz
Ram 2.00 GB
SW2005 Pro SP 1.1
XP Pro SP2.0
NIVIDA Quadro FX 1300

 

[ctopher]

Insert-part makes sense, but I prefer separate models. I agree with macduff, it also makes it easier in PDMWorks.

Chris
Sr. Mechanical Designer, CAD
SolidWorks 05 SP3.1 / PDMWorks 05
ctopher's home site

FAQ559-1100
FAQ559-716

 

[macduff]

ctopher,
they are separate models, but the machining references the casting within that part model. Or am I missing something?

Macduff
Colin Fitzpatrick
Sr. Mechanical Designer
macduff's SW page
Dell Precision PWS370
Pentium(4)2.80GHz
Ram 2.00 GB
SW2005 Pro SP 1.1
XP Pro SP2.0
NIVIDA Quadro FX 1300

 

[pdybeck]

mcaduff,

You are not missing anything. PDMWorks does not display the casting visually underneath the machining in the vault view as you might expect it should. If you look at the references and where used information then PDMWorks does know that they are referenced to one another and when you open the machined part from the vault, you will have the option to take out the cast part with it. I'm sure you have seen this if you are working with the base part method. I have still been asking for PDMWorks to display the base part underneath where its used in the vault view. Joy (product manager for PDMWorks) understands this current limitation but the request has never made it far enough up the list for items to develop for the next version of SolidWorks due to the fact that not enough people request this change between new releases. I have given my input in the Beta forum several times, but need others to do the same in order for SolidWorks to see this is something worth their time in development.

Another thing - if you use the base part method then the compare geometry tool in SolidWorks Utilities becomes invaluable for checking casting and machining models against each other to verify proper material removal. We use that all the time here and find it very helpful.

Pete