Archive for the ‘SolidWorks’ Category

A Few Drawing Tips

Monday, September 26th, 2011

Here are a few drawing tips that might help you out.

Save a rotated 3D view

  • When you go to View>Modify>3D Drawing View, you can choose any view and rotate it any direction.  When you choose a view that you like, it will stay like that.  That way you can get a great view on the drawing with a short amount of time.

Combine notes

  • If you have multiple notes on your drawing but you want to combine them, before you would need to copy and paste the text.  All you really need to do is just drag and drop one note to another.  They get combined.  If the main note is numerically indented, when you drop the other note on it, it will follow the same order.

Edit multiple dimensions at once

  • If you select a bunch of dimensions, you can edit them all at once.  You can add tolerance information, text, precision, etc.

I hope these tips help keep you productive.  If you have any questions about these, please contact 3DVision.

Josh Spencer

Josh Spencer
Application Engineer
3DVision Technologies

Southern Kentucky Launches New SolidWorks User Group

Tuesday, September 20th, 2011

Launching anything new these days is a feat just in itself but Steve Fye from Span-Tech is taking on the challenge with energy and excitement.

Their first meeting is scheduled for Thursday, October 20, and the Southern Kentucky SolidWorks User Group is planning BIG things.

With a goal to organize a local community of SolidWorks users who want to make the most out of their beloved software, Steve hopes to use this group to help spread knowledge, best practices and more.

Interested parties are asked to submit a simple online registration form which can be found here.

The first meeting is scheduled to begin at 5pm and will include food (always a plus), an open discussion between officers and new members, a presentation of SolidWorks 2012 “What’s New” by our own Chris Snider of 3DVision Technologies and most importantly, a raffle for a Nvidia Quadro 4000 graphics card.

As a supporter of all things SolidWorks, those of us at 3DVision Technologies encourages all users to join a SWUG near them.

For more information on the new Southern Kentucky SolidWorks User Group, click here.

Carrie Cavanaugh

Carrie Patrick
Marketing Manager
3DVision Technologies

SolidWorks 2013 Will Not Install on Windows XP

Monday, September 19th, 2011

It’s official – if you plan to upgrade to the latest and greatest version of SolidWorks next year, you will NOT be able to do so on Windows XP.

SolidWorks 2012 software (including CAD, Simulation, Sustainability, and Enterprise PDM) will be the last release that supports Windows XP.  This action is being taken as a follow up to Microsoft’s retirement of the Windows® XP operating system in April of 2009. SolidWorks 2013 will not install on Windows XP. For additional information please refer to the System Requirements page on the corporate website.

Chris Snider

Chris Snider
Application Engineer
3DVision Technologies

Solver Selection – Does It Matter?

Wednesday, September 14th, 2011

Choices. Everyone wants choices. We make simple choices like ‘paper or plastic’. Or one of my favorites, ‘domestic or import’! In SolidWorks we can be faced with decisions like ‘assembly or multi-body’! While these are simple examples, what do you decide when you’re faced with the decision ‘FFEPlus or Direct Sparse’? Which solver should you select? While this question does not have an easy answer, there are some guidelines you can follow to help in your selection. Understanding the two solvers is the first step in making a smart decision about which to use.

Before discussing the solvers, let’s recall the fundamental equation being solved by Finite Element Analysis, which is the resultant forces acting on a body are equal to the product of the stiffness and resultant displacement of the body. We express this with the following matrix equation: [F] = [K] * [U]. Regardless of the solver selected, this equation has to be calculated such that equality exists.

The FFEPlus solver is an iterative solver. After you have the CAD model set up with the appropriate boundary conditions, the FFEPlus solver makes an educated guess about the deformation, [U], of the model. Then it evaluates the matrix equations to see how good the guess was, and adjusts the deformation accordingly, depending upon the error in the calculation. This process repeats until the calculation balances.

The Direct Sparse solver is just that – direct. This solver will create the entire matrices used for the numerical FEA solution. This requires generating the stiffness matrix, [K], as well as the inverse of the stiffness matrix, [K]-1. Once calculated, Direct Sparse solver has to compute a simple multiplication problem, written out as: [K]-1 * [F] = [K]-1 * [K] * [U]. Computing the inverse of the stiffness matrix is resource (memory) intensive.

Now that you know what the solvers are, let’s discuss and compare the two solvers, at least as far as how they may relate to your Finite Element Model. If your problem has 25,000 degrees of freedom (DoF) or less, the Direct Sparse and FFEPlus solvers are approximately equal in terms of memory usage and solution time. For problems that approach 300,000 DoF, the Direct Sparse solver usually runs entirely in your system’s RAM, which provides for a “fast” solution. When you exceed 300,000 DoF, the FFEPlus solver is more efficient than the Direct Sparse solver in not requiring as much of your system’s RAM. There are times, however, regardless of the problem size that you may need to use one solver over another. In assemblies with a lot of contacts, assemblies with greatly varying material stiffness between components and contacts with friction, the Direct Sparse solver is usually a better choice. In frequency studies with Rigid Body Motion and problems exceeding 300,000 DOF, the FFEPlus solver is usually the appropriate choice.

What do you do now? You know what each solver is doing at the core. You have a general understanding of what each solver is good at. How do you decide? It’s actually a very simple answer – let Simulation decide for you! In SolidWorks Simulation, there is a system option to let the program decide. To access this, from your pull-down menus, select “Simulation… Options…”, then change to the “Default Options” tab and click on the line for “Results”. Then look at the section for ‘Default Solver’ – we have ‘Automatic’, ‘Direct Sparse’ and ‘FFEPlus’. Set your Simulation system options to ‘Automatic’, and let SolidWorks Simulation decide which solver is the most appropriate for your Finite Element Model. With that decision made for you, you now have time to make your products better with SolidWorks Simulation!

2011-0913 SimSolverOptions

Bill Reuss

Bill Reuss, CSWE, CSWST, CSPST
Application Support Engineer
3DVision Technologies

Simplified (McMaster-Carr) Parts in Assemblies

Wednesday, August 31st, 2011

The following golden rule applies to 99% of you out there…

Never include fasteners with modeled threads in your assemblies.

This is the reason the SolidWorks toolbox comes with three options for thread display when inserting fasteners into your assemblies: Simplified, Cosmetic, and Schematic.  The popular and recommended choice is ‘Cosmetic‘ – a healthy combination of detail and efficiency.

toolbox-thread-options

There are quite a few factors that can contribute to clunky and inefficient assembly models, but two very obvious culprits are the quantity/complexity of features and surfaces.  You can apply this concept to any type of model, but modeled threads are a perfect example to discuss both of these slow downs.  Though there are times when it makes sense to model threads within a part file, it’s rare that those threads are needed within an assembly file.

One of the coolest things about McMaster-Carr (besides their same day delivery of just about anything you can ever dream of) is that they offer 3D models of a majority of their products in a native SolidWorks file (i.e. feature tree, dimensions, and relations are included).  McMaster-Carr customers with SolidWorks have a huge advantage over the rest, because they’ll be able to quickly edit these files however they’d like.  Here’s an example…

  • Download a 1” long ¼-20 SHCS from McMaster-Carr and notice that the part comes fully equipped with modeled threads.
  • Click Tools > Feature Statistics and note the 0.80 second calculated rebuild time.
  • Right mouse button (RMB) the “Cut-Sweep1” feature, and select “Configure Feature” from the menu.
  • Create a “Simplified” configuration with the thread cut feature suppressed.

  • Run the Feature Statistics tool one more time and you’ll see a 0.15 second rebuild time. Just by removing one feature, we managed to cut the rebuild time to less than a fifth of what it was.  This goes a very long way inside an assembly where many of these fasteners can exist.

Obviously, you can make “Simplified” configurations for any type of model (not just threaded fasteners).  You can suppress any type of feature that is not required to be present in the assembly (complex features, fillets, chamfers, etc.).  This is a great way to speed up large assembly performance.  All you have to do is activate the “Simplified” configuration of all the part files within an assembly.  “How?”, you might ask…

  • Click File > Open within SolidWorks and browse to an assembly file.
  • Before opening it, click the “Advanced” check box.
  • When you click the “Open” button, select the following options on the pop-up menu.

simplified-configurationOnce you click OK, SolidWorks will find any part within the assembly (regardless of the levels of sub-assemblies) that has a “Simplified” configuration and activate it.  Simple (no pun intended)!  Why not create a simplified configuration for every part file?

Jordan Tadic

Jordan Tadic

Application Engineer, CSWE

3DVision Technologies

follow me @TadicWorks

Free Weldment Profiles!

Tuesday, August 30th, 2011

Back in January, when Jordan Tadic published his cut lumber library for use as weldment profiles, the CAD community went crazy! For a brief period of time there was concern that we may need to get a larger server to help handle the additional page requests.

Did you know you can get weldment profiles from SolidWorks? – significantly more than the few you get by default when you install SolidWorks.

Go to the design library, expand “SolidWorks Content” and browse for all kinds of free goodies to make your life easier!

DownloadProfiles

(You’ll also find drawing blocks, standard parts and Unistruts here too.)

Jeff Sweeney

Jeff Sweeney
Engineering Data Specialist
3DVision Technologies

Model Aircraft Control Surface Spacing and SolidWorks Flow Simulation

Saturday, August 27th, 2011

June 2011 AMA (Academy of Model Aeronautics) Model Aviation magazine had an interesting article Titled “Two of the Big Five model misadjustments” written by Dean Pappas. The two misadjustments were Hinge Gap, and Lateral Balance.

The article caught my attention specifically due to the “flow” diagrams drawn in the article explaining airflow over the wing section and aileron control surface. In the below diagram, taken from the article, Dean explains three cases of air flow relative to a control surface.

  1. Clean airflow at the neutral control surface desired for level flight.
  2. When up or down direction is applied to the control surface the air opposite the control surface direction of travel redirects the flow to reattach. This case shows a tight fit between control surface and main structure.
  3. Hinge gaps allow high-pressure air to leak from one side to the other. This weakens airflow on top of control surface partially destroying the bottom airflows ability to rejoin it. The result is poor control surface response during slow speeds.
AMA Article Diagram

AMA Article Diagram

According to the article ”The high pressure on top, as shown would leak through, given a chance. That chance would be a gap in the elevator and control surface. The result is a flat sheet of air that squirts through the gap and distorts the outside of the hinge line. This reduces the effectiveness of the elevator and creates extra drag.”

This section piqued my interest as the hinge gap shown is very large, probably for demonstration purposes. Being an avid RC aircraft modeler I suspected that the small gaps I have in my personal aircraft’s control surfaces may not cause this affect. My hypothesis is that a very large unrealistic gap will cause this affect however using standard hinge techniques this affect will not be as dramatic as the article states. According to the article large hinge gaps can be sealed with strips of MonoKote covering resolving the problem. MonoKote is a heat shrink Mylar covering that is a standard in RC Aircraft construction.

This blogs purpose is to investigate the hinge gap spacing required to cause an airflow disturbance and air leak through the gap area.

Before we get into the model specifics let’s talk a little about aircraft wing terminology. Below is a diagram explaining common wing dimensions and terminology. The chord length is the distance from the leading edge of the wing or elevator to the trailing edge. The model used in this Flow Analysis is a 5.5″ main wing chord. 0.5″ of the chord is the control surface . The airfoil is symmetrical so the upper and lower camber are equal. The model consists of an extruded wing section with one hinge placed in the middle of the wing.

Airfoil.svg

Three hinge types are standard in the RC modeling community. All hinges are typically spaced evenly across the control surface.

  • Standard plastic barrel hinge comprised of two halves held together with a pin. The hinge is typically screwed or glued into place with the barrel tight against both mating sections. Hinges are typically 0.25″-0.5″ wide by 0.5-1″ total length. The barrel typically ranges from 0.0625″-0.125″ in diameter.
  • CA hinges are flat woven wicking material that is inserted into a slot cut in the components. No or little gap is present with this style hinge. CA or Cyanoacrylate glue is used to wick through the hinge and bond with the hinged components.
  • MonoKote hinges are seldom used in modeling except for small aircraft. The MonoKote hinge is typically a strip of MonoKote that is applied to the top and bottom of the hinge area.

SolidWorks Flow simulation was used to investigate the control surface configurations of four models.

  1. A base line neutral control surface position using a no gap CA hinge Type.
  2. Upward deflected control surface using a no gap CA hinge type.
  3. Upward deflected control surface using a Standard plastic hinge with an 0.0625″ barrel diameter.
  4. Upward deflected control surface using a CA Hinge and gap of 0.25″

All configurations have a 10 ft/second flow rate and a 0 degree angle of attack. The flow analysis was an external flow problem. A localized mesh control was used for each run to capture refined accurate results across the model boundary. All other default conditions were used for the flow setup.

Mesh

Note All plots show a Pressure cut plot and Velocity Flow Trajectories.

Results:

  • The base line model showed a symmetrical pressure on either side of the wing at 14.6 psi and a hinge crossing velocity of 16.45 ft/sec. This is expected results for the area section, hinge, and aileron placement.

Neutral Velocity and Pressure

  • Flow Run Two shows a higher pressure on top of the aileron of 14.696 psi and a lower pressure on the bottom of 14.694 psi. The flow velocity across the top of the control surface drops to 5.9 ft/sec while the bottom speeds up to 11.2 ft/sec. As the article states the air “bends” to re attach to the flow at the trailing edge. This results in a turbulence on the bottom of the control surface aiding in the force of the air on the top of the control surface to push the trailing edge down.

Aileron Up CA Hinge

YouTube Preview Image
  • Flow Run Three demonstrates the 0.0625″ barrel hinge gap and the resulting air flow. The run does show airflow across the gap boundary, however probing the area the velocity in this gap is zero. The flow does extend past the wing trailing edge longer than the non-gap position, however the flow does fully rejoin. The same recirculation under the control surface is seen . The pressure on the end of control surface is however higher at 14.699 psi and lower on the bottom at 14.692 psi. The results show negligible flow through the gap and under most circumstances(slow flight) should not cause loss of control due to bleed through.

Aileron Up 00625 Gap

YouTube Preview Image
  • Run Four had the largest gap similar to the gap in the article’s diagram. The flow results show airflow across the gap boundary and a velocity of the airflow in the gap of 3 ft/sec. The flow does extend past the wing trailing edge longer than the non-gap position and does not rejoin. The recirculation does cause a pressure equalization under and over the control surface. Loss of control surface effectiveness would occur in this scenario.

Aileron Up 025 Hinge Gap

YouTube Preview Image

Conclusions: The article is correct to a point. The gap shown in his diagram would cause a control surface loss of effectiveness, however the gap is way too large to be considered realistic. Most experienced modelers know common practice is to get as tight of a fit between control surface and structure be it a wing, elevator, or rudder. A large gap is not only detrimental but is also unsightly and most modelers avoid them for the aesthetic reasons alone. If a modeler sticks to the new CA hinge or follows correct installation practice for a plastic hinge they will be alright in their flying endeavors.

Robert Warren

Robert Warren Application Support Engineer CSWP / CSWST / CSWI / CSPS 3DVision Technologies

Update Properties from BOM

Monday, August 22nd, 2011

Here’s a tip that you might not know about.  You can update component/sub-assembly properties from a Bill of Materials.  Why would you want to do this?  Well in case you forgot to add the property when you created the component, maybe you didn’t know what it was at that time, or you see you filled out the wrong information.  Now you can add or change the property without opening it up.

All you need to do is double click in the cell of the BOM and then you will get a message about keeping or breaking the link.

Link

You will have to choose “Keep Link” to update the property.  Now whatever you type in the cell will show up in the component’s properties.

Josh Spencer

Josh Spencer
Application Engineer
3DVision Technologies

eDrawings App on an iPad/Android???

Wednesday, August 17th, 2011

Let’s face it, the world is fast paced and having data at our fingertips can be the lifeblood of our businesses. Enter the Tablet! Often times heavy computing is not necessary when we are “On-The-Go.” We can whip out an iPad or Android Tablet and effectively communicate business needs to our customers, and we don’t have to wait for the tablet to boot up, login, prepare our desktop, connect to our servers, yada-yada. The information is literally a swipe or a tap away.

eDrawings is a very effective product from Dassault Systemes SolidWorks that allows you to communicate your designs with customers, without having to transfer heavy files via email or even FTP sites. So, it seems perfectly suited to have an eDrawings App for tablets.

Ever since the first iPad hit the market I have been getting calls requesting that Dassault Systemes SolidWorks comes out with an eDrawings app for the iPad. So far, there have been no official announcements that this is being developed. However, this does not mean that all hope is lost. There are other Apps out there that will allow you to leverage your iPad/Android Tablet into an eDrawings wielding powerhouse. Citrix Receiver is one such App. The way it works is simple, you install eDrawings on your server at work, and then through Citrix Receiver you choose eDrawings from your “company catalog” and boom you are using eDrawings over the air on your tablet! Technology is AWESOME!!!

To learn more about Citrix Receiver you can visit the following link.
http://www.citrix.com/English/ps2/products/product.asp?contentID=1689163
eDrawings Tablet

Reuben Felsheim

Reuben Felsheim
Application Support Engineer
3DVision Technologies

Turning Parts into Assemblies, Assemblies into Parts (Part 1)

Monday, August 15th, 2011

This next series of blogs from me will be about turning Parts into Assemblies and Assemblies into Parts in SolidWokrs.

In this (Part 1) of the series, we will look at TURNING A PART INTO AN ASSEMBLY.

There are many reasons you might want to do this, the MAIN reason being something called the “Master Model” approach to modeling. Many consumer product designers do this. It is much easier to build a cell phone, or remote control, etc., as a PART file to get your form/fit/function looking good and THEN worry about “breaking up” the part into the necessary pieces to actually make the thing ! (i.e. top half, bottom half, battery door, buttons, display screen, etc.)
The great thing about this Master Model approach is then you have an ASSEMBLY (and all its individual parts) that live and breathe off of the original PART file you created. If you ever need to make form/fit/function changes you just edit the PART file and all the individual parts and the assembly would update too !!

Here’s how you do it: (there are other ways but this is the best)

Take your part file and create a SKETCH, a PLANE, or a SURFACE body that you want to use to SPLIT your part up. (can use multiple combinations of sketches, planes, and surfaces too)
Then use the INSERT–FEATURES–SPLIT command.
Select your Sketch/Plane/Surface as the “trimming tool” and hit CUT PART.
If you float around on the graphics screen you get to see what the result of the cut is going to do for you.
In the property manager under “Resulting Bodies” you will also see listed all the resulting solids that you will get from the split.
Now the important part…
If you JUST put a check mark in the box under the scissors icon, and hit OK on the command, you will just end up with a MULTI-BODY part.
If you DOUBLE CLICK in the “file name” box next to the check mark (for each body) and give it a name and location where you would like to SAVE, it will actually CREATE new parts on your hard drive representing the resultant solids !
A nice option down at the bottom of the property manager is to “Copy custom properties” from the master part to the individual parts (materials, vendor, etc.) if you would like.
Go ahead and hit OK on the command now…

In your MASTER file you DO now have a multi-body part.
BUT on your hard drive will be actual PART files from the SPLIT !
AND if you look in those part files there is a EXTERNAL REFERENCE (the “->” symbol) directly linking it back to your master model !
I.E. any changes in the master will update the parts…

Now, you could MANUALLY go make an ASSEMBLY from those individual parts, but who wants to do that !?
Look in the Feature Manager Tree of the master part. There is a SPLIT feature.
Right click on the SPLIT feature and choose CREATE ASSEMBLY.
It will go out and gather up ALL the parts that were created from the SPLIT feature and put them into an assembly with fixed relations so they won’t move ! Awesome !
(of course if you wanted to be able to move the parts in the assembly you can “float” a part and mate it into place the way you want it)

There you GO ! Turning a PART into an ASSEMBLY. WITH full associativity !

The OTHER great thing about the SPLIT feature showing up in the Feature Manager Tree of the master part is that any features you insert BEFORE the split WILL propagate down to the piece parts and to the assembly, and any thing you do AFTER the split feature will NOT.

This is a SUPER useful tool that A LOT of people can use even if you aren’t designing remote controls or cell phones. Let us know what YOU can think to use it for !

Stay tuned for Part 2 where we will show you how to turn an ASSEMBLY into a PART…

Randy Simmons

Randy Simmons
Application Engineer, CSWP
3DVision Technologies