Oh, the joys of using a really poorly modeled part and trying not to tear someone’s head off. Quell your rage with this. We’re going to deconstruct a simple part to show you exactly how to optimize part building in SolidWorks.
The part is simple but each tiny facet hold the possibilities of wrecking havoc on your assembly rebuild times. Why does how a part is modeled play such a big role? It creates a standard for you and others to maintain consistent result.
Get these basics down and your co-workers will not feel the need to smash each other. Now, let’s improve the heeeeeeee…ck out of your parts.
The parts
Here’s the parts. The original in it’s ghastly state and the new version in it’s optimized state.
Original part file – New part file
The six areas to focus on immediately for better parts are:
Origin
Original part file – The part was modeled off of the origin.
New part file – Base sketch moved to origin.
This can happen when parts are created in assemblies. For stock material or purchased parts it’s best to model them apart from an assembly so they can be used other places more easily. Setting the base sketch on the origin provides you with the ability to us the Standard Planes already in the part. These will be useful for mating the part into assemblies.
Symmetry
Original part file – The sketch did not contain symmetrical relations.
New part file – Symmetrical relations added and centered on origin.
This really bugs me when I see it. Setting up a part with symmetry aids design changes and reuse. You want to use it as much as you possibly can. Additionally, you’ll want to center the part’s base sketch (in many cases) on the origin. Just one more way to get that part dead-center.
Detail
Original part file – The sketch contains all the detail.
New part file – Detail removed from sketch.
This can be a matter of preference, but really, you want to do this and you’ll see why in a moment. It’s natural to put all the fillets and cuts into a single sketch. It seems easier. My favorite lesson to show people with this is to understand how a machining operation would happen. Cut by cut. It’s no more tedious and it can greatly optimize your part for manufacturing.
Patterns
Original part file – Holes Cut. No pattern or hole wizard used.
New part file – Holes added using the Hole Wizard.
It’s odd but things have to attach to other things with hardware. Cutting a bunch of holes makes adding hardware painful and time-consuming. Using a Sketch Pattern or the Hole Wizard makes it dead simple. Mate one set of hardware in and pattern the rest.
Configurations
Original part file – No configurations. for shame.
New part file – Configurations added.
Two configurations were added, SIMPLE and MACHINED. We separated the detail from the sketch earlier. By doing this, we can suppress those details and have a simplified version of the part. This, multiplied across all the parts you stuff in an assembly can save you considerable load and rebuild times.
Properties
Original part file – No properties. No weight. No nothing.
New part file – Properties added.
You could fill out a BOM manually but that would be near torture. Using custom properties for your parts adds value and if weight is a concern for you, it will help you confirm that weights have been added to the parts and that all the other relevant info you need to show in your BOM is there.
These are probably some of the most basic, but important, lessons to get down in part modeling. Are there practices you follow to totally optimize your part files?
Loading ...
SolidSmack is a very small behemoth of an online community about 3D CAD, technology, design, robots, and ninjas… Ok, maybe not ninjas so much, but those guys are COOL so there just might be something about some dang ninjas.
{ 17 comments }
Good stuff Josh
#1, I wish to rub out of existence the guys who plaster stuff no where near the origin. Death or at least a real good pummeling when they do this.
#2, please make it symmetrical. Do not put a piece of flat stock from the corner. See last sentence of point #1 in this comment
#3, I can argue somewhat on this on occasion, however 99% of the time I can't. Point goes to Josh.
#4, Patterns! Yes! (pumps fist). However, if you do the pattern in context, see last sentence of point #1 in this comment.
#5, I do the configurations in a similar manner. DETAILED and derived SIMPLE. The DETAILED is used for the drawings. The SIMPLE is used in the assembly.
#6,If no properties are put in, jump directly to last sentence of point #1 in this comment.
I would make them jump out of an airplane with an anvil instead of a parachute..
((That's just me though??))
Very good read. Much needed. So many think they model correctly, when they infact create more problems. Thanks we really needed this.
Great Article,
Lots of simple stuff people don't seem to follow.
Unfortunatly we don't have SW09 installed yet. is it possible to get a '07 or '08 version of the examples?
sorry there Mr. Crash. I don't have 07 or 08 installed any more. blasted backward compatibility.
Thank you Jeff. I've had discuss basics repeatedly lately. It's always good to get one good way of doing things down than a bunch of less efficient ways.
at first that may seem appropriate, especially when having to redo all their parts, but I would just strap them to an anvil, that's strapped to their desk and make them do it right.
Rod, EXCELLENT way to put it all! ha!!
My only objection is to the Details tip.
I would say the exception to this rule are components that are extrusions. An extrusion, even with secondary operations, is based off of the main profile. Making sure all the geometry is spot on, in the profile sketch, will make sure there is no confusion when the print gets sent out to the guys that will make the dies. Plus, having all the dimensions in there will make it so much easier when creating the drawing.
Also, the skill you REALLY need to develop is how to work AROUND the crappy models you're given to work with. Trying to remake all the crappy models that come your way will eventually become an exercise in futility; the endless supply of crappy models never seems to cease, especially when you have a tight deadline to meet it seems. Some models, just simply can't be used, period, and need a complete makeover, but try to resist the temptation to “optimize” every single one that comes along your way.
The simple things in parts (done correctly) like the simple things in life are always the best. As always your instruction / tutorials are spot on
Very hard to resist the dark side to make all the models correct. I do agree with the extrusion comment Bruce. Those have to be set in stone or someone will piddle with it and muck it all up.
Well said Bruce. Thanks! perhaps I should have used a part that wasn't like an extrusion, cause you're right, some prints require that level of detail and on that point I would say it's better to leave those in the sketch or unsurpressed if created as separate features.
True also, no ones time should be spent piddling with other users models, trying to make them better. I draw the line at the level of rework, then sit down and show the person what needs to be done and how they need to go about it in the future.
Josh,
Agree with all points with a condition: there is no restricting rebuilding time requirement. I mean, for models posted on web sites (web2cad, partserver, 3dcontentcentral, etc) all models should be highly configurable, yet simpler and lighter as possible – chamfers instead fillets, no internal geometry, less details.
I would add :
7. Link values for similar dimensions if constrains between sketches are not allowed.
8. Use of equations with comments.
9. Imported 3D geometry parts (from suppliers with other CAD platform) – heal geometry -> reposition it on the origin -> export it again -> imported -> add configs and params -> save as SoWo parts.
10. Imported 3D geometry assemblies : similar with above, but export the assy as a multibody part – in that way in resulting part some configs could be added.
11. Name the features,planes and axis.
12. Group features used for a technological step in a folder.
13. Group assy mates in folders.
14. Put fillets and chamfers at the end of the geometry to avoid wrong constrains or relation to major features.
What you feel about all of these?
I spend a lot of time fixing models from another guy but the problem is that he was fired over six months ago. Everything he did from his whole year here seems to be messed up and cause a lot of issues when parts are ordered. Unfortunately I have no other option than to rework it.
I spend a lot of time fixing models from another guy but the problem is that he was fired over six months ago. Everything he did from his whole year here seems to be messed up and cause a lot of issues when parts are ordered. Unfortunately I have no other option than to rework it.
Josh,
Agree with all points with a condition: there is no restricting rebuilding time requirement. I mean, for models posted on web sites (web2cad, partserver, 3dcontentcentral, etc) all models should be highly configurable, yet simpler and lighter as possible – chamfers instead fillets, no internal geometry, less details.
I would add :
7. Link values for similar dimensions if constrains between sketches are not allowed.
8. Use of equations with comments.
9. Imported 3D geometry parts (from suppliers with other CAD platform) – heal geometry -> reposition it on the origin -> export it again -> imported -> add configs and params -> save as SoWo parts.
10. Imported 3D geometry assemblies : similar with above, but export the assy as a multibody part – in that way in resulting part some configs could be added.
11. Name the features,planes and axis.
12. Group features used for a technological step in a folder.
13. Group assy mates in folders.
14. Put fillets and chamfers at the end of the geometry to avoid wrong constrains or relation to major features.
What you feel about all of these?
I spend a lot of time fixing models from another guy but the problem is that he was fired over six months ago. Everything he did from his whole year here seems to be messed up and cause a lot of issues when parts are ordered. Unfortunately I have no other option than to rework it.
Comments on this entry are closed.
{ 2 trackbacks }