AnsweredAssumed Answered

Multi-Body Weldment Part or Assembly....??

Question asked by Damien Petty on Nov 8, 2017
Latest reply on Nov 8, 2017 by Jim Steinmeyer

Like • Show 0 Likes0
Comment • 6

I really prefer to use multi-body parts for weldments and sheetmetal work. (Of which, I do ALOT).

This functionality was demonstrated to me at the Weldments Module of the Foundations Training I undertook some time back and I have continued to do it that way ever since.

I have since collaborated with a few other designers/SW Users (from different disciplines) who've actually taken it upon themselves to break up Multi-Body parts into separate single files, (even while the collaborative process is still ongoing..?!)

I have previously queried this and usually hear, "That's just how it's done" or "We always do it that way" or worse, no response at all.. But so far, no-one has been able to offer up a suitable answer as to "why" it should be done this way.

I do not know if there actually is a "Right way or Wrong way" to do this. Certainly no-one has been able to convince me not to use multi-body components. Or to break them up that way. There is evidently something I am simply not understanding here.

It is quite likely well past time I asked some Professionals...

So, my question is: Why?

Why would someone take a well constucted, very stable multi-body part file, parametrically driven by a master sketch, with all the Cut-list info it contains, and break it all up into individual parts of an assembly.? Thereby leaving no sketch to manipulate it and all parametrics for easy alteration being lost along with all sheetmetal and cutlist info.

Which then needs to be re-assembled inside an assembly by fiddly mates.?!?! ...

No one else has this question

Outcomes

Ari Arponen Nov 8, 2017 1:24 AM

Well, I have never done sheet metal parts as multibody parts. And when you add parts when making a assembly, I think it works as well as it could. But how about BOM lists, or part drawings etc? And what if you need to use bolts nut and stuff in your part/assembly?

Maybe you should show how you have done it? Im bit curious.

Actions

Elmar Klammer Nov 8, 2017 2:51 AM

Hi Damien,

Multibody sheetmetal parts are easy to model. They however are hard to manage. It can be done, but needs most often custom addins or macro's to work efficiently. Multibody works good for structural members but sheetmetal is a whole different beast. If you need drawings for flat pattern, parametric linked properties for BOM than single body part drawings are much easier to handle then multi part drawings. Especially if you make frequent design changes. Checking your exported DXF against SolidWorks drawings is also easier.

All in all. Both techniques can work. You will need to see if one or the other fits into your current company work flow. It's important to understand the overall time value. That means that you have to measure the time it takes to model & create drawings. Provided you use drawings. Multibody models faster but is also slower to create drawings. Bear in mind that SW is slower in the drawing department and faster in the 3D model area. Drawing creation is already the bottle neck. I would stay away from making that more difficult and adding much time and frustration. Bear in mind that in multi user environments you need to consider how someone else will be able to work with your SW model & drawings. We use a hybrid technique. We combine multibody with assembly models but only for structural members.

Getting blank size information from SW is not straight forward. Not to this day. The way SW handles flat pattern in multibody models is hard to handle and has been unreliable. I have often seen problems and found single body sheetmetal to work more efficient in our applications.

Hope that helps a little

Elmar

Actions

Glenn Schroeder Nov 8, 2017 8:27 AM

While I almost never do sheet metal, I use weldments for almost every project, and they're frequently multi-body. I've never had a reason to break one up into multiple Parts. This discussion has happened here before a few times, and the only reason for breaking them up that I thought made sense was so custom properties would call out automatically in the title block of a Drawing. It is apparently not possible to link a Note to a cut list property if the Note isn't linked to the drawing view.

Actions

David Matula Nov 8, 2017 8:36 AM

If you want an assembly as the end product, I would build the skid or what ever as an assembly. I like the weldments cause they are easier to find and change out structural members. I could do the same process with an assembly by starting out with the skeleton sketch and then mating structural members to the sketch. Then again why? I can ref the part # for the weldment and drawing # to the bom...the only hard thing is adding the materials to the MRP system.

Actions

Brad Meador Nov 8, 2017 8:58 AM

Damien,

While I haven't used multi-body sheet-metal, our company likes to break up weldments into individual files with unique part numbers. We use it with a strict set of rules created by our PLM and it lets us closely monitor all changes from beginning to end. This also allows us to use the same file in multiple parts. This hasn't been an issue with us as we have our own internal fab shop so very little collaboration is needed.

Actions

Jim Steinmeyer Nov 8, 2017 9:20 AM

Damien,

Adding to what Brad said, we have to have separate part numbers and drawings for each of out manufactured parts. We then attempt to use those parts in as many different products across different lines of product. This philosophy is in following lean manufacturing where we have as little extra inventory as possible, If I use the same part in 4 products I can get by with having maybe 3 parts in inventory as opposed to 8 ( 2 parts for each assembly). While I have used multi-body parts a little in weldments for jigs I would be very reluctant to use them in our normal product line for this reason.

I have also found, as Glenn and Elmar mentioned that getting custom properties for the weldment parts can be more tedious and time consuming. Maybe if I used them more I would get faster with it, but I can't figure out why SW makes BOM and cutlist information so vastly different. It's almost as if you are using two completely different software packages.

Actions

6 Replies

Ari Arponen Nov 8, 2017 1:24 AM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
Well, I have never done sheet metal parts as multibody parts. And when you add parts when making a assembly, I think it works as well as it could. But how about BOM lists, or part drawings etc? And what if you need to use bolts nut and stuff in your part/assembly?

Maybe you should show how you have done it? Im bit curious.
Like • Show 1 Like1
Actions
Elmar Klammer Nov 8, 2017 2:51 AM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
Hi Damien,

Multibody sheetmetal parts are easy to model. They however are hard to manage. It can be done, but needs most often custom addins or macro's to work efficiently. Multibody works good for structural members but sheetmetal is a whole different beast. If you need drawings for flat pattern, parametric linked properties for BOM than single body part drawings are much easier to handle then multi part drawings. Especially if you make frequent design changes. Checking your exported DXF against SolidWorks drawings is also easier.
All in all. Both techniques can work. You will need to see if one or the other fits into your current company work flow. It's important to understand the overall time value. That means that you have to measure the time it takes to model & create drawings. Provided you use drawings. Multibody models faster but is also slower to create drawings. Bear in mind that SW is slower in the drawing department and faster in the 3D model area. Drawing creation is already the bottle neck. I would stay away from making that more difficult and adding much time and frustration. Bear in mind that in multi user environments you need to consider how someone else will be able to work with your SW model & drawings. We use a hybrid technique. We combine multibody with assembly models but only for structural members.
Getting blank size information from SW is not straight forward. Not to this day. The way SW handles flat pattern in multibody models is hard to handle and has been unreliable. I have often seen problems and found single body sheetmetal to work more efficient in our applications.

Hope that helps a little

Elmar
Like • Show 3 Likes3
Actions
Glenn Schroeder Nov 8, 2017 8:27 AM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
While I almost never do sheet metal, I use weldments for almost every project, and they're frequently multi-body. I've never had a reason to break one up into multiple Parts. This discussion has happened here before a few times, and the only reason for breaking them up that I thought made sense was so custom properties would call out automatically in the title block of a Drawing. It is apparently not possible to link a Note to a cut list property if the Note isn't linked to the drawing view.
Like • Show 1 Like1
Actions
David Matula Nov 8, 2017 8:36 AM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
If you want an assembly as the end product, I would build the skid or what ever as an assembly. I like the weldments cause they are easier to find and change out structural members. I could do the same process with an assembly by starting out with the skeleton sketch and then mating structural members to the sketch. Then again why? I can ref the part # for the weldment and drawing # to the bom...the only hard thing is adding the materials to the MRP system.
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
Brad Meador Nov 8, 2017 8:58 AM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
Damien,

While I haven't used multi-body sheet-metal, our company likes to break up weldments into individual files with unique part numbers. We use it with a strict set of rules created by our PLM and it lets us closely monitor all changes from beginning to end. This also allows us to use the same file in multiple parts. This hasn't been an issue with us as we have our own internal fab shop so very little collaboration is needed.
Like • Show 1 Like1
Actions
Jim Steinmeyer Nov 8, 2017 9:20 AM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
Damien,
Adding to what Brad said, we have to have separate part numbers and drawings for each of out manufactured parts. We then attempt to use those parts in as many different products across different lines of product. This philosophy is in following lean manufacturing where we have as little extra inventory as possible, If I use the same part in 4 products I can get by with having maybe 3 parts in inventory as opposed to 8 ( 2 parts for each assembly). While I have used multi-body parts a little in weldments for jigs I would be very reluctant to use them in our normal product line for this reason.
I have also found, as Glenn and Elmar mentioned that getting custom properties for the weldment parts can be more tedious and time consuming. Maybe if I used them more I would get faster with it, but I can't figure out why SW makes BOM and cutlist information so vastly different. It's almost as if you are using two completely different software packages.
Like • Show 2 Likes2
Actions

Multi-Body Weldment Part or Assembly....??

Outcomes

Related Content

Recommended Content