This content has been marked as final. Show 8 replies
Hi Doug, are you talking about COSMOSXpress or COSMOSWorks? There are some properties with different tempers in the COSMOS Library which contains nearly 200 materials. I've been out of Pro/MECHANICA for a few years but last I recall, they only had a couple dozen materials. Has this been expanded?
Interestingly, I went on Matweb to look at the differences between the tool steels you looked at and even they didn't have all the materials you listed. We have had requests to broaden our material database but I think it is fair to expect that we'll never have every material that every design engineer might use.
Under that assumption, can anyone on this forum suggest alternate ways to make more materials available through the software, if not specifically in the software?
vince, i have cosmosworks. there are A LOT more properties in this than in the regular solidworks materials. i just got into pro-e/mechanica, and they have hundreds and hundreds of materials listed. every GE plastic is listed in Pro-E.
Matweb does have the materials i have listed on here. If you search for crucible, you should find all the tool steels i listed.
how can solidworks market to mold makers and tool makers and not include the most important materials. Graphite is a HUGE deal, if your electrode weighs too much, you need to counterbalance the electrode holder. A-11 is used pretty often in Stamping Dies. It's something that solidworks needs to look into.
it's nice that they tell you to go to matweb, but we should not be forced to go to another service to get the information we should get directly from solidworks.
i can understand how the hardness would be difficult to list all of them, but with all the other needless functions that solidworks has (to accomidate ACad users), i think that they could think of a way to get more materials
Thanks for the question. I agree that the material database is woefully inadequate for many things. I also know that it is quite easy to add materials if you need to, so its not really a deal breaker. But, with those things said... A problem or annoyance I have is the separation between the Cosmos Material library and the SolidWorks material library. In order to modify the out of the box SolidWorks material library, you have to copy it and then add to it. When you install Cosmos, you get another library. So now I have 3 material libraries to manage and keep up to date. Kind of silly. With the Cosmos library there is no consideration given to the size of the raw material that will be used. Material yield values will vary based on the forming technique and the size of the raw stock. An example... according to ASTM B211... 2024 T4 can be permitted to vary in minimum yield strength from anywhere from 38,000 psi up to 45,000 psi depending on the thickness of the bar. With the Cosmos library I see an issue - there is not enough granularity in the classification of materials to get you that information. You could name each material by form, temper, size range, etc... but it would make more sense if there could be columns added to further classify materials. On the SolidWorks material side - they limit you to the size of the description - really annoying. I have to end up abbreviating material descriptions because of this. Very annoying because SolidWorks allows and seemingly wants you to fill in material descriptions on a material definition and then have that pushed to file properties and then onto drawings. I can't do this because they have put a character limit on the description in the SolidWorks material database - ARGHHH. So I end up with an abbreviated name, and then I manually type in the full description I want listed in the drawing in the parts material file property. Also, it would be nice if there was a column that would allow you to specify where these values came from. Are they backed up in a spec somehwere? Did a user dream them up? Did they come from a vendor's data? It seems silly that we drive our solutions to FEA to be as accurate as possible without considering the how accurate and reliable our material information is. How trustworthy of a safety factor do we have from material definitions that have no standard to back them up? For my company's purpose, we always try to spec the material according to ASTM standards, so that when we purchase the material we can qualify it to a standard that should be met by the industry. I am attaching a spreadsheet to this post that shows how I have classified material information for our company use. It would be nice if the material library was flexible enough to allow this...
In summary... Things could be improved by...
1) Better integration between the SolidWorks material libary and whats being used in Cosmos.... Why the need for 3 libraries to do what we need. I just want 1 that works for everything, including information that is eventually passed onto drawings.
2) Allow for more granular classification of materials according to form and size range.
3) Allow for information on qualifying specifications used to certify material values
4) Eliminate the stupid character limit in SolidWorks material database on the description field - highly annoying...
Thanks for the question. I hope I explained myself well enough. I wish for these items to be addressed in a way that works for not just Cosmos, but for all of the data used in SolidWorks. Right now things are choppy at best and kind of kludged together. I'm sure I could have more to add. I don't mind being contacted about this offline to discuss. I have been putting in enhancement requests for years to no avail. I just gave up after a while. Nice to see someone at SolidWorks asking the question.
Material Database.zip 30.0 KB
Thanks for the input Pete!! Can you send me a note offline with your contact information?
Vince, is there a way for solidworks to get with some of the larger manufacturers of materials and get their specs of their steel, ie POCO graphite, Crucible Steel, and so on. Or would this cost money to get them to contribute.
you could get an unpaid intern to input the data into a materials database.
I am lucky that i can go to our heat treater and get any information on the changing of the material properties for every process (he's my uncle) but a lot of people would have to jump through some holes to get this info.
the nice thing about Solidworks is the price...it's not a rediculous price, so smaller shops can afford to have it. but when you add additional costs just to use the product, it's a bit unfair to the smaller companies. and matweb seems like it would be a nice product. but without registering, i can't see any of the information we'd need to do a quality test in Cosmos.
Hi Doug, I'll look into making some of these alternate databases available but no promises. Please remember that with thousands and thousands of users, in hundreds of industries, satisfying everyone's material needs is a practical impossibility. That was why we provide an open material database.
Why don't you think you can use the materials in Matweb (that you confirmed you could find) in COSMOSWorks? I clicked thru a handful of the Crucible steels you suggested and each one had Yield and Tensile strengths listed. Beyond that, for most applications, all you'd need is density, Young's Modulus, and Poisson's Ratio. The great thing about carbon steel is that these don't really change. You can confidently use 30e6 psi for E, 0.3 for PR, and 0.28 lbf/in^3 for density.
Are you familiar with the custom material dialog in CW? This should do the trick for most of your material needs.
With respect to plastics, Campus, GE, and many other supplier databases are available for free on the Internet. With this depth of information available at your fingertips & knowing that they have the resources and flexibility to keep it up-to-date, do you think expanding the list of materials in CW to thousands, with the search baggage this would entail, is worth it? I'd appreciate your feedback on this.
Finally, I just checked with my old pals who still use Pro/MECHANICA and they confirmed that the list is larger due to integration with the ProE material list, it is not much more extensive (as installed) than it was. His installation didn't have any GE materials in it but saw that it was easier to import properties. Is it possible that someone added those materials to the Pro/MECHANICA version you looked at?
Interesting that you noted GE Plastics as a differentiator. Since Pro/MECHANICA has no nonlinear material capabilities, that would be an odd database for them to incude in the first place. For plastics people out there, the GE website has temp and strain-rate dependent stress-strain curves that you can use in CW Advanced Professional. Being an ex-plastics guy, this is one of my favorite websites.
Thank you vince for your replay. i believe that some materials are a must to have included in solidworks. whether or not we have the same size or larger than Pro-E isn't a huge issue.
The problem for me was that the most commonly used tool steels are not in the database and you have to input all the information youself. also, a couple basic graphite materials would be very nice to include.
It's just that Solidworks has "air" in there but not some very basic materials.
and i'm only talking about 5-10 different materials that i believe should be included in the database. i believe graphite should be added to the regular solidworks database.
"Thanks for the input Pete!! Can you send me a note offline with your contact information?"