Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations JAE on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
INSERTING ACTUAL PART SIZE IN BOM 1
- Thread starter rdhdesign
- Start date
PatCouture
Mechanical
Hi Rick,
I've been able to insert the dimension of my parts using the design variables of the parts. If your variables of the parts are the same as those in the bom options they will be displayed in the bom.
Example, for the lenth of the piece, MDT uses "DIM" to retreive the dimension of the tubing inserted with the Power Pack, then if you create a part and the length of the part is controlled with a design variable called DIM then you will have your length in the bom column DIM.
You can create any kind of name of variables to uses in your bom as long as you name it the same in the column of the BOM.
Excuse me if it's not clear but I'm trying as much as I can to explain it correctly.
Pat
I've been able to insert the dimension of my parts using the design variables of the parts. If your variables of the parts are the same as those in the bom options they will be displayed in the bom.
Example, for the lenth of the piece, MDT uses "DIM" to retreive the dimension of the tubing inserted with the Power Pack, then if you create a part and the length of the part is controlled with a design variable called DIM then you will have your length in the bom column DIM.
You can create any kind of name of variables to uses in your bom as long as you name it the same in the column of the BOM.
Excuse me if it's not clear but I'm trying as much as I can to explain it correctly.
Pat
- Thread starter
- #3
Pat,
Thanks for the info and I'll see if that will work for me.
I was hoping that since MDT can figure mass, it already knows how large the detail is, and that I could retrieve that information instead of cubic inches.
I am designing progressive dies and usually have in excess of 80-100 details to list the size, 1.000 x 2.000 x 3.000, for example.
Do you have any thoughts along that line?
Thanks again,
Rick Hamlin
Thanks for the info and I'll see if that will work for me.
I was hoping that since MDT can figure mass, it already knows how large the detail is, and that I could retrieve that information instead of cubic inches.
I am designing progressive dies and usually have in excess of 80-100 details to list the size, 1.000 x 2.000 x 3.000, for example.
Do you have any thoughts along that line?
Thanks again,
Rick Hamlin
PatCouture
Mechanical
Hi Rick
I have no clue for what you are asking, I really don't know how MDT calculate the mass so I'm sorry but I can't help you with that.
Good luck
Pat
I have no clue for what you are asking, I really don't know how MDT calculate the mass so I'm sorry but I can't help you with that.
Good luck
Pat
Part Variables in BOM seems to work fine... but now I want to apply functions that sort variables after their actual values ! Everything is OK except the result of this functions are represented in BOM with to many zeroes... ! I tried to format result value with function "text", or "dimstylelin" but nothing happened - I have no examples how to use them correctly... For example let's define 2 local variables A, B ( linked to a sketch dimensions d0, d1); I want to check witch values are bigger between d0 and d1 !! So let's define in BOM - 3 new columns - X, Y, Z. Now I applied formulas in this columns - in column X formula =<PART:A>, column Y formula =<PART:B> and column Z formula =<MAX(PART:A,PART:B)> !! Now let's assume that actual d0=1.75, d1=1 and dim "precision" is set to .00 ! The result in BOM will be - col X - 1.75 , col Y - 1 and col Z - 1.75000000 !!. How to control the format of function's result in col Z to have displayed 1.75 instead of 1.75000000 !? Thank you.
-
1
- #6
RdhDesign, Im sorry to hijack your thread, but I would love to ask how how you think Mechanical Desktop fairs in designing Progressive Dies!.
Im an Autodesk fan, Love MDT but have been getting more into Inventor, yet I cant envisage designing progressive dies in Inventor. We use Teksoft 'Procad' CAD/CAM for 2d design of progressive dies and fixtures at the minute which is a nightmare, and I would like to recommend the Inventor Series to use as a combination in our aim to design Progressive stamping dies.
I hardly ever see anyone around these parts that does toolmaking other than plastic mold tools, so I would like your opinion on how MDT has been for you in regards of Prog Die design and the benefits its braught you.
.....as for the BOM, Yeah, Ive also wondered how to do this!. If we had a 3d presstool, the information we are interested in is "material" (ie tool steel, mild steel etc) the amount of occurences of that part, and the phsical sizes the STOCK material needs to be to manufacture the part.
I was looking a year or so ago, might have been on Cadalog.com - there was a demo of "Smart Lister" - I never got around to trying it, but it may be worth you taking a look. I think I remember it being a potentially usefull tool for this task!
Thanks
Sirius2
Im an Autodesk fan, Love MDT but have been getting more into Inventor, yet I cant envisage designing progressive dies in Inventor. We use Teksoft 'Procad' CAD/CAM for 2d design of progressive dies and fixtures at the minute which is a nightmare, and I would like to recommend the Inventor Series to use as a combination in our aim to design Progressive stamping dies.
I hardly ever see anyone around these parts that does toolmaking other than plastic mold tools, so I would like your opinion on how MDT has been for you in regards of Prog Die design and the benefits its braught you.
.....as for the BOM, Yeah, Ive also wondered how to do this!. If we had a 3d presstool, the information we are interested in is "material" (ie tool steel, mild steel etc) the amount of occurences of that part, and the phsical sizes the STOCK material needs to be to manufacture the part.
I was looking a year or so ago, might have been on Cadalog.com - there was a demo of "Smart Lister" - I never got around to trying it, but it may be worth you taking a look. I think I remember it being a potentially usefull tool for this task!
Thanks
Sirius2
take a look, I cant see who its by, but it may tell you on install.
Cheerio
Sirius.
- Thread starter
- #8
Hi Sirius2,
Thanks for your input on the BOM software but it appears that it only works with Boolean Solids and not Parametrics. I will look into it farther though.
As far as using Mechanical Desktop for Die Design I am very impressed with it. It takes a little more time to do the complete design, but it sure makes detailing & updates
faster after you have a parametric part.
No. 1 problem right now is staying with customer needs as far as software releases, MDT6, MDT2004Dx, etc. I purcased the latest but they won't convert backwards except for going back to .sat, then I loose all the part information.
To me 3d is the only way to go since most customer files I recieve are 3d and it is faster and more accurate to design around the part than it is to make alot of 2d views and visualize what the tool is going to look like.
Thanks again,
Rick Hamlin
RDH Design & Detail, LLc
Thanks for your input on the BOM software but it appears that it only works with Boolean Solids and not Parametrics. I will look into it farther though.
As far as using Mechanical Desktop for Die Design I am very impressed with it. It takes a little more time to do the complete design, but it sure makes detailing & updates
faster after you have a parametric part.
No. 1 problem right now is staying with customer needs as far as software releases, MDT6, MDT2004Dx, etc. I purcased the latest but they won't convert backwards except for going back to .sat, then I loose all the part information.
To me 3d is the only way to go since most customer files I recieve are 3d and it is faster and more accurate to design around the part than it is to make alot of 2d views and visualize what the tool is going to look like.
Thanks again,
Rick Hamlin
RDH Design & Detail, LLc
Thanks for your reply....
Ah, I didnt realise it was only for dumb solids
. You would have thought it was an easy task within the software wouldnt you, finding its length bredth and height like "Mild Steel - 128x145x30 - 2 off", most of the other junk it puts in there just doent tally with our toolmaking needs. Its prbably editable, but without a size extractor to order the raw material theres no point!.
Thanks also for your reply on the toolmaking front!.
I am a big fan of MDT, but unfortunately we dont have it at work.....I have just been drooling the last few years for them to upgrade from a dire 2d/3d program thats all the functionality of a drowned whelk......
Ive been looking into Inventor more and more, and although I thought Id never say it, I think I now prefer it to MDT - Im sure you would to. I think you are probably the same as me in the way that MDT handles all tasks admirably (wireframe, surfaces, solids, drawing views) with the surface/wire iges function and views of that surface data is bound to be a vital role in our game. This is why Inventor has put me off all this time, becuase it just cant handle the data typical of Japanese car manufacturers thats often cruddy half surfaced wires.
I have heard there is a new function in the AIS9 for 3d iges wires and a surface construction improvement, but I doubt it gives views of surfaces still. If I had to choose, Id recommend them to get Inventor Series, because IV is a joy to use, but until its proven in fixture and presstool design using customer data (and views thereof), MDT would be the one with Rhino as a sturdy partner.
Inventor is great, but not quite there yet for the presstoolers out there at the moment I reckon (spesh where strip layouts and formed sheetmetal is concerned), but Im VERY keen to take a look at the new version 9 and see if any issues are adressed - just being able to model a proper component from customer wireframe would be a huge bonus.
As for the 2d design of tools, its a nightmare concept isnt it now I suppose?, lol. Ive been at the company 8 or 9 years, and when another draughtman gives me a 2d job to finish off and detail I **still** sit there dumbfounded at what the bloody hell Im looking at!!!!!!!.I can look at it for hours trying to figure it out. Ive found with 3d its much much clearer, almost instant, and you get better spacial awareness and come up with neat touches that you would never have thought of in 2d.
Besides that, 2d "long hand" projection view creation of tool sections and component views is a HUGE time waster for us - at the minute we have to get a copy of a dimensioned paper drawing and redraw the item from scratch! . often guessing and 'close enoughing' at irregular forms. . and these days, the amount of companies fully dimensioning a product is very rare, they all assume 3d cad interoperability!!!!!!. Our software cannot generate any sort of view. Im suprised we are still in business actually.
Well, thanks for your time, and hope you get that BOM thing sussed
Cheerio
Sirius2
Ah, I didnt realise it was only for dumb solids
. You would have thought it was an easy task within the software wouldnt you, finding its length bredth and height like "Mild Steel - 128x145x30 - 2 off", most of the other junk it puts in there just doent tally with our toolmaking needs. Its prbably editable, but without a size extractor to order the raw material theres no point!. Thanks also for your reply on the toolmaking front!
.I am a big fan of MDT, but unfortunately we dont have it at work.....I have just been drooling the last few years for them to upgrade from a dire 2d/3d program thats all the functionality of a drowned whelk......
Ive been looking into Inventor more and more, and although I thought Id never say it, I think I now prefer it to MDT - Im sure you would to. I think you are probably the same as me in the way that MDT handles all tasks admirably (wireframe, surfaces, solids, drawing views) with the surface/wire iges function and views of that surface data is bound to be a vital role in our game. This is why Inventor has put me off all this time, becuase it just cant handle the data typical of Japanese car manufacturers thats often cruddy half surfaced wires.
I have heard there is a new function in the AIS9 for 3d iges wires and a surface construction improvement, but I doubt it gives views of surfaces still. If I had to choose, Id recommend them to get Inventor Series, because IV is a joy to use, but until its proven in fixture and presstool design using customer data (and views thereof), MDT would be the one with Rhino as a sturdy partner.
Inventor is great, but not quite there yet for the presstoolers out there at the moment I reckon (spesh where strip layouts and formed sheetmetal is concerned), but Im VERY keen to take a look at the new version 9 and see if any issues are adressed - just being able to model a proper component from customer wireframe would be a huge bonus.
As for the 2d design of tools, its a nightmare concept isnt it now I suppose?, lol. Ive been at the company 8 or 9 years, and when another draughtman gives me a 2d job to finish off and detail I **still** sit there dumbfounded at what the bloody hell Im looking at!!!!!!!.I can look at it for hours trying to figure it out. Ive found with 3d its much much clearer, almost instant, and you get better spacial awareness and come up with neat touches that you would never have thought of in 2d.
Besides that, 2d "long hand" projection view creation of tool sections and component views is a HUGE time waster for us - at the minute we have to get a copy of a dimensioned paper drawing and redraw the item from scratch! . often guessing and 'close enoughing' at irregular forms. . and these days, the amount of companies fully dimensioning a product is very rare, they all assume 3d cad interoperability!!!!!!. Our software cannot generate any sort of view. Im suprised we are still in business actually.
Well, thanks for your time, and hope you get that BOM thing sussed
Cheerio
Sirius2
- Status
Similar threads