Derived parts? need to create one part from another. 1

[RTFM]

Im tring to leave Inventor behind and give solidworks a good shot as our 3D modeling software, but I keep hitting walls left and right with things I could easily accomplish in other 3D software that I can not seem to do here.

I am in the Progressive Die business and I have modeled a simple form. Now I need to create the punch. In Inventor I simply created an assembly with the form, offset it for my stock thicness and created the punch body and layed it into position, saved and opened a new part file and clicked a button called "derived part" chose the assembly file and it inserts the assembly with a popup window showing me my components. Whichever components you select are removed from the part file.

Basically I would remove all the components cept the punch and I would be left with all the geometry from the form insert on the face of the punch. Save that part file as the punch. Start a new assembly drawing insert the punch and form insert and all was jolly.

I cant seem to figure out how to do this in solidworks. I looked into Core/cavity and unless im missing something very simple I couldnt get that to work properly.

Im simply trying to create one part from the geometry of another and they need to be associative so if I change a form insert the punch would also change (because it is derived from the insert)

Am I making any sense? hehe - Anything would be helpful, links, tuts, comments, whatever. I'm just starting to lose steam with solidworks and want to figure this out. Its a 2 minute process in Inventor.

 

[Heckler]

You might want to look into some combined solid techniques: Add, Subtract, and Multi Bodies Intersecting. Also, look into getting some training or search the FAQ for tutorials. Here are a few good sites

http://home.pct.edu/~jmather/

http://www.scottjbaugh.com/

http://www.mikejwilson.com/solidworks/solidworks_files.htm

Best Regards,

Heckler
Sr. Mechanical Engineer
SW2005 SP 5.0 & Pro/E 2001
Dell Precision 370
P4 3.6 GHz, 1GB RAM
XP Pro SP2.0
NVIDIA Quadro FX 1400
o
_`\(,_
(_)/ (_)

Never argue with an idiot. They'll bring you down to their level and beat you with experience every time.

 

[Diemaker1]

Funny, what I like most about SW is its ability to work with surfaces. Although I miss IV’s derive about as much as it’s params. I’m fairly new too so criticize away.

Short answer: Create a surface in the die part by using offset. In manager under “surface bodies”, RMB the surface, “insert into new part”. Which makes a new part… that’s what SW calls a derived part. Then insert that part into your punch part. The derived surface is linked till you break it.

Now the long answer I got from reading how some of the mold designers do it… And the way I’m having luck with. Use the piece part file to create surface(s) you need… before you create any tooling. Derive these surfaces (“insert into new part”). These now become the new masters. ( you might want to break the link of the master derives) Cut blocks from these masters, or offset and derive new surfaces that you modify, like the other side of the material, or a surface with the fillets removed. They all update to the master. I keep all the surfaces in a separate folder, if there are a lot of them.

This may seem like extra files compared to IV… BUT… if you’re like me, your building off dumb imports. And if you have a revision that scraps the original with entirely new surfaces… you can overwrite the old master with derived surfaces from the new piece part. And all subsequent derives will update. I’ve done it. Had 2 dies with very complex crush forming sequence get 5 substantially different revisions. I created a new master and all the form blocks updated. I had to reattach dimension and constraints to the new updated surfaces but I was thrilled.

I know your example stated the die was modeled… but on more complex surfaces you will want to use the part geometry.

You talked about putting punch an die into an assy. I think you meant the finished P&D… but SW could offset a surface off the die while editing the punch in assy. Maybe that would work best for you in this case. But derives are more stable and quicker than in-contex (i think).

Hang in there, I hated SW for a long month before catching on.

 

[RTFM]

HAHAHA if this is who I think it is... THAT is too funny.

That is exactly what I was looking for, and worked perfectly.

I had the offset surface in place already, but was attempting to extrude a sketch that would terminate on that surface... soldiworks was doing it, but the results were really weird. There were areas along the two surfaces that did not remain symetric.. this is to say stock thickness was .0393701 which was the offset, but when I extruded my sketches down to the surface that .0393701 gap between punch and die was not uniform.

If this is who I think it is by the way, rumor has it we will be meeting in person to talk soon haha.

*Hint* I shook Stan and Dave's hand last week when I met them.

Disclaimer - if I'm wrong disregard me making a fool of myself in this post lol.

 

[Diemaker1]

You might be right JJ.

offset gap shouldn't vary. any chance top and bottom are not perfectly in line?

 

[RTFM]

I knew it! Well at least we know we are both forum junkies

Yeah the top and bottom were parallel. It was very weird, I should save the file and send ya am email so you knwo what I am trying to do.