AnsweredAssumed Answered

Change Over Control Valve - Custom Route Component Issues.

Question asked by Craig Hardman on Feb 25, 2014
Latest reply on Feb 27, 2014 by Craig Hardman

Like • Show 0 Likes0
Comment • 4

Hey folks,

I'm trying to model a control valve that has one input flange and two output flanges. It's causing me tons of issues.

For some reason, it will not create the other routing pipe in the right locations. See attached pictures

I've tried every combination of rpoints and cpoints I can think of. Getting one feature to work, typically ends up in another feature being borken. (EG. If you add rpoints to each flange, then all route line are in the correct spot but the tab and shit+arrow features on drag'n'drop don't work and the route point is misaligned.)

I don't really see why this fails. I have several similar parts that work without issue.

Any suggestions on how I can go about creating this custom routing part?

No one else has this question

Outcomes

4 Replies

Peter De Vlieger Feb 26, 2014 3:00 AM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
Craig,

Try this:

- no RPoints (rpoints are points were the route sketch has to go through, seeing as that the route has no continuation in the same co-liniar line there is no need for a Rpoint and in fact would be detrimental. Consider Exc. Red. parts where the same applies)
- on each exit have a Cpoint, 3 exits = 3 cpoints
- Vertical axis called "Vertical" has to be the last feature in the part to work as was intended by SW

Let me know if any of this makes sense to you and if you got it to work.

Have a nice one
Peter
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
- Craig Hardman @ Peter De Vlieger on Feb 26, 2014 11:24 AM
  Mark Correct
  Correct Answer
  Hi Peter,
  
  My feature tree looks like:
  
  The Rpoint was right above Cpoint1. If I remove the Rpoint (As in the picture) it won't allow me the drag to valve onto an existing route (As I expected).
  
  I wonder if I could make it work by adding mate references to each flange for concentric, and coincident on the face. The flanges it mates up to *should* have the same mate references.....
  Like • Show 0 Likes0
  Actions
  - Peter De Vlieger @ Craig Hardman on Feb 27, 2014 2:38 AM
    Mark Correct
    Correct Answer
    Craig,
    
    The feaure tree looks fine.
    
    The Rpoint was right above Cpoint1. If I remove the Rpoint (As in the picture) it won't allow me the drag to valve onto an existing route (As I expected).
    
    If you mean that you can't position it half way down an existing line, then indeed that can't happen if a part doesn't have an Rpoint.
    However that wouldn't make sense anyways because the part in question doesn't offer a colinear continuation of the route sketch going through multiple Cpoints.
    
    It should however be perfectly feasible to drag&drop the part (without Rpoint) on to the end of an existing route and with the help of the TAB key being able to flip through which of the 3 Cpoints you want to connect to that existing route.
    
    The orientation, how it is rotated around the route sketch, of the valve itself would then be able to be controlled by a construction line as in add a construction line to the end of the route sketch, drop the valve on to the end of the route sketch, exit the edit route mode completely and you should see that the valve automatically adjusts itself so that the "Vertical" axis gets colinear with the construction line.
    
    I wonder if I could make it work by adding mate references to each flange for concentric, and coincident on the face. The flanges it mates up to *should* have the same mate references.....
    
    Okay, now I'm lost. While I can see that the mate references would be helpfull in getting it positioned right with the connecting flanges so that the flanges of the valve would hook with the flanges on the piping, I can't see what that will do with no longer having issues orientation wise or routing wise. I
    
    f at all possible could you either post the part that you have or at least give a more detailed description of what you want to do, what you hoped would happen when you insert the part and what is actual happening and if need be why that is not up to your expectations?
    Like • Show 0 Likes0
    Actions
    - Craig Hardman @ Peter De Vlieger on Feb 27, 2014 12:29 PM
      Mark Correct
      Correct Answer
      Okay, now I'm lost. While I can see that the mate references would be helpfull in getting it positioned right with the connecting flanges so that the flanges of the valve would hook with the flanges on the piping, I can't see what that will do with no longer having issues orientation wise or routing wise.
      
      This is pretty much my solution. You just add the fitting outside of the route, and then add flanges to it useing mate references and then start a seperate route from each. Not convenient, but the only way I could get this working.
      
      I feel as though there may be issue with my routing ad-in though. I have valves that will allow themselves be rotated using shift+arrows, but they'll quit working one occasion and a full re-start of SW is needed for it to work again.
      
      Likewise with flanges. I'm having HUGE issues with them not stoping the pipe at the cpoint, but continuing them all the way until the rpoint. And they flip aroudnoften (Like you pressed tab) and end up inside the valve they are mated too. I'll try snag some screen shots to help explain.
      Like • Show 0 Likes0
      Actions

Change Over Control Valve - Custom Route Component Issues.

Outcomes

Related Content

Recommended Content