bizarre question... .

[PiegatoreSolidworks]

Okay, I close all the arguments and I come back on the subject...
The zipper I meant happened to me at work. The client sent me all the dxfs for laser cutting, so I don't have to design it. My dilemma is how the designer came to the final result! It makes me curious. I made a stupid model of how it seems to be, conceptually, its beautiful zipper.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdqvo16yb8cthe video to which I referred to the "solidworks mechanical conceptual" to which I referred is this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vptzjhyqyc8this product seems suitable for the case that I have placed there, maybe you can still make the model without application (securely).

the question I repeat is: how do you "proget" such an object? What are the things to relate to?
... I need a macaronic explanation, I don't have to design anything.

Thank you and good night.

 

[re_solidworks]

Okay, I close all the arguments and I come back on the subject...
The zipper I meant happened to me at work. The client sent me all the dxfs for laser cutting, so I don't have to design it. My dilemma is how the designer came to the final result! It makes me curious. I made a stupid model of how it seems to be, conceptually, its beautiful zipper.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdqvo16yb8cthe video to which I referred to the "solidworks mechanical conceptual" to which I referred is this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vptzjhyqyc8this product seems suitable for the case that I have placed there, maybe you can still make the model without application (securely).

the question I repeat is: how do you "proget" such an object? What are the things to relate to?
... I need a macaronic explanation, I don't have to design anything.

Thank you and good night.

a zipper like your customer can be born in various ways. in an application that we have recently designed we have used many leverisms and seen as a finished project seems much more complex than it was actually realized.
in my opinion, with a traditional parametric, a lever like that is drawn from a sketch (parametric) starting from the two extreme positions (starting and coming). from there you start with the positioning of the fixed lever points, presumably at the base of the hinge and under the working plane, then draw the levers in both positions with a series of relationships.
relationships will certainly be in equality between the line drawn at the point of departure and the line drawn at the point of arrival, then maybe it will serve more, I should sketch it.
after attributing the correct number of relationships the sketch becomes defined and the length of the levers will not be assigned by quotas (at least not all) but the levers of "adapt" to the context.
it is certainly possible to draw it also with 2d not parametric, but the way to go is different (and ot).
in conceptual then does not change much compared to standard solidworks, we say that the more hedgehog in the generation of solids because you decide to create the structure of together after having generated them, and this when you start with a complex project is a good advantage.

 

[re_solidworks]

Okay, I close all the arguments and I come back on the subject...
The zipper I meant happened to me at work. The client sent me all the dxfs for laser cutting, so I don't have to design it. My dilemma is how the designer came to the final result! It makes me curious. I made a stupid model of how it seems to be, conceptually, its beautiful zipper.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdqvo16yb8cthe video to which I referred to the "solidworks mechanical conceptual" to which I referred is this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vptzjhyqyc8this product seems suitable for the case that I have placed there, maybe you can still make the model without application (securely).

the question I repeat is: how do you "proget" such an object? What are the things to relate to?
... I need a macaronic explanation, I don't have to design anything.

Thank you and good night.

Hi.

I attach a solidworks file (vers. 2013) in which cinematism is developed starting from the 2 ends of the movement of the plate. the file "guida cinematismo" contains the sketch to generate levers, in the assieme cinematismo is inserted the part "guida..." and there are the levers obtained in topdown. the mobile cinematism axieme contains all the elements again and it is possible to move the hinge to test the operation.

 

[PiegatoreSolidworks]

Hi.

I attach a solidworks file (vers. 2013) in which cinematism is developed starting from the 2 ends of the movement of the plate. the file "guida cinematismo" contains the sketch to generate levers, in the assieme cinematismo is inserted the part "guida..." and there are the levers obtained in topdown. the mobile cinematism axieme contains all the elements again and it is possible to move the hinge to test the operation.

thanks for the explanation and for the annex. Now I open it and try to understand something... .

 

[PiegatoreSolidworks]

....
in my opinion, with a traditional parametric, a lever like that is drawn from a sketch (parametric) starting from the two extreme positions (starting and coming). from there you start with the positioning of the fixed lever points, presumably at the base of the hinge and under the working plane, then draw the levers in both positions with a series of relationships.
the relationships will certainly be in equality between the line drawn at the point of departure and the line drawn at the point of arrival, then maybe it will serve more.... .

I press that I did not have time to look at it well and understand the system of "conception" of the levers, but I wondered if it could help the sketch of layout that, personally, I never used!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83nw_uvupggHave a good day.

 

[marcof]

I press that I did not have time to look at it well and understand the system of "conception" of the levers, but I wondered if it could help the sketch of layout that, personally, I never used!

Yes, the layout sketch allows you to model at the same time the 2d scheme of cinematism and at the same time verify its functioning. the advantages are that you can build on it more quickly 3d components
for relatively simple mechanisms is in my opinion more complicated than one well-made sketch like that of re_solidworks that, using the layout sketch would require the creation of numerous blocks. the single sketch allows you to check the cinematism and you can use it to model us over the components. the disadvantage is that the components themselves are bound to the sketch and if you want to make it mobile in real time or bind it to the movement of other components you have to reassemble the parts by putting the constraints they serve.
certainly the sketch of layout is less immediate and lean than solidworks mechanical conceptual, which, on the contrary, costs an exaggeration.

Maybe watch a video about the layout sketches in English, that what you found is in Arabic... :smile:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zwu3cxawsfa

 

[reggio]

I can smell a lot of controversy. I dive and try to give my best:finger:

in videos, on the solidworks website, you understand what coceptual is for

Really? ... I looked around but I didn't understand much.. .

... benefiting from conceptual functions without having to

i.e. must I have it or should I not have it to use it?

What is coceptual? a new software, an extra piece to "pagazio", a gift plugin, n'artra idea to quit in a few months? Is he? Who has it? Who uses it and who does it? (read the rhythm of Gaetano) is qlc in Italian?

certainly the sketch of layout is less immediate and lean than solidworks mechanical conceptual, which, on the contrary, costs an exaggeration.

... ah now I begin to understand ... "it's an exaggeration" ... but, only by curiosity, like how many eurines?

 

[marcof]

I can smell a lot of controversy. I dive and try to give my best

things like complaining about swx because he can't even make you the courier tape with over the corn that in time relae falls into the truck? you are able in fact on these themes to reach unreachable peaks! :biggrin:

I looked around but I didn't understand much.. .
What is coceptual? a new software, an extra piece to "pagazio", a gift plugin, n'artra idea to quit in a few months? Is he? Who has it? who uses it and chi lo fà? (read the rhythm of Gaetano) is qlc in Italian?

You and google would say you had a bad fight and don't give it to you anymore... the answer, even if I propose that you do not give it any more....the right question
http://www.design-engineering.com/features/inside-solidworks-mechanical-conceptualhttp://www.solidworks.it/sw/products/30991_ita_html.htmOh, wake up! but where do you all live on facebook?:tongue:

 

[reggio]

@marcof

hi marco, jokes aside, your links I had found them, in fact the 2nd I had found it only in uk with video, on the 1st I had not given weight and read too quickly ... rereading the 1st I understand that:

to the swx they realized that with their methods users stop to +/- stable versions and before change they think 8 times then another 4 and finally 7, then they had to invent qlc again:
a nice name change with the addition of "synchronous technology type soliedge of 2011" unpacked with the old "layout sketch",
a dust of new problems from "never to solve"
(translated carry - with the help of the google amygo)"incompatible: despite the name, solidworks mc does not work with solidworks"
"solidworks mc and solidworks use different modeling kernels"
"privacy: solidworks mc provides connection to the database enovia v6, which is located on the cloud"
"new courses: the user interface of swmc is different from solidworks"
...of course with a dust of new contracts:"swmce 'available at the price of 2.988 dollars per user, per year, and even higher outside the United States, in comparison, the basic version of solidworks is $3,995, and you pay only once."Who knows when the announcement that swx will be abandoned to go to swmc?

I'm getting more and more sympathetic.

ps: I apologize for the intromission ot, now I have vented and I go out of scene:wink:

 

[re_solidworks]

@marcof

hi marco, jokes aside, your links I had found them, in fact the 2nd I had found it only in uk with video, on the 1st I had not given weight and read too quickly ... rereading the 1st I understand that:

to the swx they realized that with their methods users stop to +/- stable versions and before change they think 8 times then another 4 and finally 7, then they had to invent qlc again:
a nice name change with the addition of "synchronous technology type soliedge of 2011" unpacked with the old "layout sketch",
a dust of new problems from "never to solve"
(translated carry - with the help of the google amygo)"incompatible: despite the name, solidworks mc does not work with solidworks"
"solidworks mc and solidworks use different modeling kernels"
"privacy: solidworks mc provides connection to the database enovia v6, which is located on the cloud"
"new courses: the user interface of swmc is different from solidworks"
...of course with a dust of new contracts:"swmce 'available at the price of 2.988 dollars per user, per year, and even higher outside the United States, in comparison, the basic version of solidworks is $3,995, and you pay only once."Who knows when the announcement that swx will be abandoned to go to swmc?

I'm getting more and more sympathetic.

ps: I apologize for the intromission ot, now I have vented and I go out of scene:wink:

solidworks will also have a sometimes hateful policy, but I want to remind you that everything in this sense is the "less worst". the only ones who do not force you to stay in subscritption.
To give you an example I wanted to suspend subscriptions for product design suites and autodesk told me that if I suspended you could no longer return to assistance unless promotions. in case the next year I had served the new release I should have paid the new license or rent the software.
the holes and requests not heard for years there are... I invite you to try inventor, you will see that there is worse.
mechanical conceptual arises from the idea of replacing the parasolid engine that purchase from their main competitor with the catia engine, which have at home at zero cost.
In my opinion they realized that it would be a bloodbath to force everyone to bear a series of inevitable heavy inconveniences for which at the moment there are both versions. I think it will take several years before there can be a change, and at that point nothing is taken. If you consider a period of 5 or 10 years there are cads that are born, who die and who resize on the market.