AnsweredAssumed Answered

Using SmartMate to stack the same part on top of itself multiple times?

Question asked by Chris Kulig on Dec 13, 2011
Latest reply on Mar 25, 2016 by Ivan Skachko

Like • Show 1 Like1
Comment • 10

I've got a situation where I need to insert the same part many times into assemblies and I need to stack it onto itself almost like a lego chimney of sorts (and in my case, the legos are cyclindrical), one after the other. Is it possible to pull that off with smartmates or mate references in some way? Patterning won't work for me because I need to be able to choose different configurations of the part as I'm stacking it. I don't mind putting the parts in one at a time, it's just that there should be an easy way for the bottom of my next part to notice and mate to the top of the previous part.

Chris Kulig Dec 21, 2011 4:26 PM

Correct Answer

Ok, got everything to work and it's mostly like you said, Jeremy, so big Kudos your way man.

The one snag I ran into is that it worked ok if I happened to make the other

parts from my first part. Unfortunately for me I need to bring in assemblies as well and it just wasn't recongizing the faces well (even if I renamed the face!, which I thought was weird). Long and short of it, this is what solved my problem, for those who may be listening in:

For each part or assembly I wanted to stack I needed to add a "MateBottom" plane, "MateCenter" axis and a "MateTop" plane. No biggie, just a plane directly on top of the faces and a centerline to drop in. Main issue was that they all have the same name.
I did not use SmartMates or Mate References, to unpredictable.
Since my tallest stack of objects is, say 15 components tall, I was able to insert 15 of the same part and took the time to carefully mate each succesive part to the next in exactly the same order.
Once that was done (and the point is that you only have to do #3 once), I was able to readily substitute ANY part or assembly I set up with those same "mate" planes/axis at any position I needed using "replace component".
When done I have all separate files (i.e. my variants are not configurations), but I simply use a master drawing that I copy and redirect at any new "stacks" I create.

If anyone knows of a sweeter way to do this (and just with basic SolidWorks please), I'd be really interested. It's working fine, main work was just setting up my first pile of parts all stacked up.

See the reply in context

No one else had this question

Outcomes

Jeremiah Feist Dec 13, 2011 2:45 PM

worked for me - though it was a bit jumpy as to which end it would want to mate to, but as long as I pay attention to the preview, it went where it showed.

Attachments

Assem2.SLDASM.zip76.9 KB

Actions

Chris Kulig @ Jeremiah Feist on Dec 13, 2011 3:02 PM

Awesome! that's going to be a great start for me. Thank you, thank you, thank you. My other challenge will be to stack other cylindrical parts into the model on top of that same stack and hopefully have them stick. I'll give this a try for a while before I attempt that.

Thanks,

Chris

Actions

Ivan Skachko @ Jeremiah Feist on Mar 25, 2016 5:55 PM

The parts in your assembly are not stacked in top to the bottom of the next manner, which can be easily seen if you introduce a taper in extruding the boss in part 1. This is because the smart mate TOP of one brick can only mate TOP mate of another brick.

Actions

Kelvin Lamport Dec 13, 2011 2:48 PM

The config of a pattern instance can be changed after the pattern is created.

Actions

Chris Kulig @ Kelvin Lamport on Dec 13, 2011 3:04 PM

Cool, I learned something else too! Thanks!

Thanks, but in this situation I definitely can't use patterns for this. Ultimately I have to pull in several other cylindrical parts in and drop them on this continual stack build up.

Thanks,

Chris

Actions

Jeremiah Feist @ Kelvin Lamport on Dec 13, 2011 3:29 PM

and in this case all of the cylinders would have to be the same height or length for a pattern to work. I had assumed that since Chris already said patterns would not work, that meant his configs were different lengths.

Actions

Chris Kulig @ Jeremiah Feist on Dec 13, 2011 3:57 PM

I'm such a noob and I'm sorry. First time on this site too. Awesome response! Maybe the below will help break down the problem into something that might still be do-able.

Sorry, to be clear, my ultimate goal is something like this:

Figure I have about (5) different parts, all cylindrical, all with flat surfaces top and bottom. (So here I'm thinking they all share, three basic things in common: A top flat surface, a cyclidrical body, and a bottom flat surface).
Each of these parts will also have different heights based on the configuration (didn't think that would make a difference).
The parts can go in right side up or upside down, doesn't truly matter.
Rotational mating is not really vital (though I like fully constrained, I'll drop that if favor of something that I can get to work).
As you can imagine this amounts to a huge amount of permutations if the stack is 15 parts high, but able to be from any of the (5) parts, and any of their configurations. My hopes were to be able to drag and mate these parts (stack them up) pretty fast based on the customer order. We had a scheme in another 3D program where we had every part in every possible position with about 600+ equations to figure out where each item would go and which would be suppressed and which would stay visible (all backed by a design table where you pick the parts out). The problem with that is you've got a jillion parts suppressed in the background and an insanely complicated and huge file that gets carried over to everything else you are doing with it. It was set up and it worked fast until the system broke when a new release of the software came out.

I sold the management that if they bought me SolidWorks I could do this fairly fast just with simple brute force of building each stack fairly fast and keeping it simple with just configurations and quick mating of some type. In which case each stack is lean and mean without complicated code or humongous files. They bought me SolidWorks (thank you God) and now I'm kind of stumbling over stacking these things up with quick mates of some sort. But, if I have to I can drop back to brute force mating, since I'm fairly fast at that, but they want a system from me that others, not so familiar with 3D at all, can pick up fairly easily.

Sorry for the long story, but that's where this is coming from. Thanks for all your help. I unmarked this as unanswered (no offense, just to see if others may have some additional ideas and perhaps yourselves).

Just knowing you kind of heros are out there, willing to help is a major moral booster for me.

Thanks,

Chris

Actions

Jeremiah Feist @ Chris Kulig on Dec 14, 2011 1:04 PM

you may want to look into driveworks express (comes with some level of SW http://www.solidworks.com/sw/products/details.htm?productid=514)

with out something like DriveWorks I would do this:

make a "start assembly" with 15 of your parts in it - which ones won't really matter, but how you go about mating them will. but fist things first. name the faces of the part you will be using to mate. name them the same in all of the parts. then mate them in the assembly.

now you can take any part in the stack and either change its configuration or replace it with another part (replace componect command). once the stack is configured to the new product, do a save as.

Actions

Chris Kulig @ Jeremiah Feist on Dec 16, 2011 9:09 AM

Yes, I don't know much about Driveworks yet, but I was thinking along the same lines as you. I was thinking MatePlaneBottom, MatePlaneTop, and then something for the centricity (possibly I can just use the origin points). I'd have to make sure these mateplanes were consistent as far as the direction of their normals right?

Main thing is for me to spend more time with it (been distracted with other things). And come back to the forums when I get stuck again.

Thanks for getting me off the ropes!

Chris

Actions

Chris Kulig Dec 21, 2011 4:26 PM

Ok, got everything to work and it's mostly like you said, Jeremy, so big Kudos your way man.

The one snag I ran into is that it worked ok if I happened to make the other

For each part or assembly I wanted to stack I needed to add a "MateBottom" plane, "MateCenter" axis and a "MateTop" plane. No biggie, just a plane directly on top of the faces and a centerline to drop in. Main issue was that they all have the same name.
I did not use SmartMates or Mate References, to unpredictable.
Since my tallest stack of objects is, say 15 components tall, I was able to insert 15 of the same part and took the time to carefully mate each succesive part to the next in exactly the same order.
Once that was done (and the point is that you only have to do #3 once), I was able to readily substitute ANY part or assembly I set up with those same "mate" planes/axis at any position I needed using "replace component".
When done I have all separate files (i.e. my variants are not configurations), but I simply use a master drawing that I copy and redirect at any new "stacks" I create.

If anyone knows of a sweeter way to do this (and just with basic SolidWorks please), I'd be really interested. It's working fine, main work was just setting up my first pile of parts all stacked up.

Actions

10 Replies

Jeremiah Feist Dec 13, 2011 2:45 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
worked for me - though it was a bit jumpy as to which end it would want to mate to, but as long as I pay attention to the preview, it went where it showed.
Attachments
- Assem2.SLDASM.zip76.9 KB
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
- Chris Kulig @ Jeremiah Feist on Dec 13, 2011 3:02 PM
  Mark Correct
  Correct Answer
  Awesome! that's going to be a great start for me. Thank you, thank you, thank you. My other challenge will be to stack other cylindrical parts into the model on top of that same stack and hopefully have them stick. I'll give this a try for a while before I attempt that.
  
  Thanks,
  Chris
  Like • Show 0 Likes0
  Actions
- Ivan Skachko @ Jeremiah Feist on Mar 25, 2016 5:55 PM
  Mark Correct
  Correct Answer
  The parts in your assembly are not stacked in top to the bottom of the next manner, which can be easily seen if you introduce a taper in extruding the boss in part 1. This is because the smart mate TOP of one brick can only mate TOP mate of another brick.
  Like • Show 0 Likes0
  Actions
Kelvin Lamport Dec 13, 2011 2:48 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
The config of a pattern instance can be changed after the pattern is created.
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
- Chris Kulig @ Kelvin Lamport on Dec 13, 2011 3:04 PM
  Mark Correct
  Correct Answer
  Cool, I learned something else too! Thanks!
  
  Thanks, but in this situation I definitely can't use patterns for this. Ultimately I have to pull in several other cylindrical parts in and drop them on this continual stack build up.
  
  Thanks,
  Chris
  Like • Show 0 Likes0
  Actions
- Jeremiah Feist @ Kelvin Lamport on Dec 13, 2011 3:29 PM
  Mark Correct
  Correct Answer
  and in this case all of the cylinders would have to be the same height or length for a pattern to work. I had assumed that since Chris already said patterns would not work, that meant his configs were different lengths.
  Like • Show 0 Likes0
  Actions
  - Chris Kulig @ Jeremiah Feist on Dec 13, 2011 3:57 PM
    Mark Correct
    Correct Answer
    I'm such a noob and I'm sorry. First time on this site too. Awesome response! Maybe the below will help break down the problem into something that might still be do-able.
    
    Sorry, to be clear, my ultimate goal is something like this:
    
    Figure I have about (5) different parts, all cylindrical, all with flat surfaces top and bottom. (So here I'm thinking they all share, three basic things in common: A top flat surface, a cyclidrical body, and a bottom flat surface).
    Each of these parts will also have different heights based on the configuration (didn't think that would make a difference).
    The parts can go in right side up or upside down, doesn't truly matter.
    Rotational mating is not really vital (though I like fully constrained, I'll drop that if favor of something that I can get to work).
    As you can imagine this amounts to a huge amount of permutations if the stack is 15 parts high, but able to be from any of the (5) parts, and any of their configurations. My hopes were to be able to drag and mate these parts (stack them up) pretty fast based on the customer order. We had a scheme in another 3D program where we had every part in every possible position with about 600+ equations to figure out where each item would go and which would be suppressed and which would stay visible (all backed by a design table where you pick the parts out). The problem with that is you've got a jillion parts suppressed in the background and an insanely complicated and huge file that gets carried over to everything else you are doing with it. It was set up and it worked fast until the system broke when a new release of the software came out.
    I sold the management that if they bought me SolidWorks I could do this fairly fast just with simple brute force of building each stack fairly fast and keeping it simple with just configurations and quick mating of some type. In which case each stack is lean and mean without complicated code or humongous files. They bought me SolidWorks (thank you God) and now I'm kind of stumbling over stacking these things up with quick mates of some sort. But, if I have to I can drop back to brute force mating, since I'm fairly fast at that, but they want a system from me that others, not so familiar with 3D at all, can pick up fairly easily.
    
    Sorry for the long story, but that's where this is coming from. Thanks for all your help. I unmarked this as unanswered (no offense, just to see if others may have some additional ideas and perhaps yourselves).
    
    Just knowing you kind of heros are out there, willing to help is a major moral booster for me.
    
    Thanks,
    Chris
    Like • Show 0 Likes0
    Actions
    - Jeremiah Feist @ Chris Kulig on Dec 14, 2011 1:04 PM
      Mark Correct
      Correct Answer
      you may want to look into driveworks express (comes with some level of SW http://www.solidworks.com/sw/products/details.htm?productid=514)
      
      with out something like DriveWorks I would do this:
      
      make a "start assembly" with 15 of your parts in it - which ones won't really matter, but how you go about mating them will. but fist things first. name the faces of the part you will be using to mate. name them the same in all of the parts. then mate them in the assembly.
      
      now you can take any part in the stack and either change its configuration or replace it with another part (replace componect command). once the stack is configured to the new product, do a save as.
      Like • Show 0 Likes0
      Actions
      - Chris Kulig @ Jeremiah Feist on Dec 16, 2011 9:09 AM
        Mark Correct
        Correct Answer
        Yes, I don't know much about Driveworks yet, but I was thinking along the same lines as you. I was thinking MatePlaneBottom, MatePlaneTop, and then something for the centricity (possibly I can just use the origin points). I'd have to make sure these mateplanes were consistent as far as the direction of their normals right?
        
        Main thing is for me to spend more time with it (been distracted with other things). And come back to the forums when I get stuck again.
        
        Thanks for getting me off the ropes!
        Chris
        Like • Show 0 Likes0
        Actions
Chris Kulig Dec 21, 2011 4:26 PM
Unmark Correct
Correct Answer
Ok, got everything to work and it's mostly like you said, Jeremy, so big Kudos your way man.

The one snag I ran into is that it worked ok if I happened to make the other

parts from my first part. Unfortunately for me I need to bring in assemblies as well and it just wasn't recongizing the faces well (even if I renamed the face!, which I thought was weird). Long and short of it, this is what solved my problem, for those who may be listening in:
1. For each part or assembly I wanted to stack I needed to add a "MateBottom" plane, "MateCenter" axis and a "MateTop" plane. No biggie, just a plane directly on top of the faces and a centerline to drop in. Main issue was that they all have the same name.
2. I did not use SmartMates or Mate References, to unpredictable.
3. Since my tallest stack of objects is, say 15 components tall, I was able to insert 15 of the same part and took the time to carefully mate each succesive part to the next in exactly the same order.
4. Once that was done (and the point is that you only have to do #3 once), I was able to readily substitute ANY part or assembly I set up with those same "mate" planes/axis at any position I needed using "replace component".
5. When done I have all separate files (i.e. my variants are not configurations), but I simply use a master drawing that I copy and redirect at any new "stacks" I create.
If anyone knows of a sweeter way to do this (and just with basic SolidWorks please), I'd be really interested. It's working fine, main work was just setting up my first pile of parts all stacked up.
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions

Using SmartMate to stack the same part on top of itself multiple times?

Outcomes

Attachments

Related Content

Recommended Content