AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |
Back to Blog
Cad assembly11/3/2023 Rarely does this process work out correctly the first time. With a part-driven approach, you won’t be able to do this in the assembly file seamlessly - you’ll have to find and alter the enclosure part file where you have limited ability to refer to other parts/sub-assemblies and hope that the updated assembly design doesn’t break during this update. As you create the assembly, you may need to change the size of the enclosure that surrounds the motor. While this makes sense from a certain perspective (e.g., during manufacturing the assembly will, in fact, be built out of parts), this setup limits a user’s ability to work on the assembly in its entirety and stunts assembly design work.įor example, say you want to be able to create an assembly that accommodates different-sized motors. The assembly itself is built in the 3D environment through a tedious mating process that joins these constituent part files. These parts live in their own files, which are then linked to by the assembly file. The Two Main Setups & Their Consequences for CAD Assembly FilesĪ traditional approach to building CAD assembly files is to start with a group of preexisting parts. The IronCAD Design Collaboration Suite’s Unified Design Environment lets you freely work back and forth between approaches, giving you the flexibility to decide how you’d like to go about creating and changing your assembly, no matter where you are in the design process. The downside of this approach is that it limits your ability to make changes that apply to all shared locations where a part or sub-assembly design is used.įortunately, there is a platform that doesn’t force you to choose between approaches when building and managing your CAD assembly file. With a single design file approach, which puts all parts of an assembly in one file and lets you alter parts directly, you can freely change parts. With traditional CAD design systems, which construct assemblies out of separate part files, it’s nearly impossible to make any fundamental changes to a CAD assembly file without also modifying constituent part files, re-linking to the assembly file, and then re-mating parts within the assembly. Many designers working on large assemblies sometimes encounter strong disconnects between how they’d ideally like to handle their CAD assembly file and how their chosen CAD platform encourages them - or even forces them - to work. Finally, we demonstrate the compatibility of our model with an existing commercial CAD system by building a tool that assists users in mate creation by suggesting mate completions, with 72.2% accuracy.Flexible CAD Assembly and Part File Management | IRONCAD, Machinery Design, Modular Design, CAD, Equipment Design, MCAD, Assembly Management To train our system, we compiled the first large scale dataset of BREP CAD assemblies, which we are releasing along with benchmark mate prediction tasks. We propose SB-GCN, a representation learning scheme on BREPs that retains the topological structure of parts, and use these learned representations to predict CAD type mates. CAD assembly modeling defines assemblies as a system of pairwise constraints, called mates, between parts, which are defined relative to BREP topology rather than in world coordinates common to existing work. Optimizing this process therefore represents a huge opportunity in the design of a CAD system, but current research of assembly based modeling is not directly applicable to modern CAD systems because it eschews the dominant data structure of modern CAD: parametric boundary representations (BREPs). Download a PDF of the paper titled AutoMate: A Dataset and Learning Approach for Automatic Mating of CAD Assemblies, by Benjamin Jones and 5 other authors Download PDF Abstract:Assembly modeling is a core task of computer aided design (CAD), comprising around one third of the work in a CAD workflow.
0 Comments
Read More
Leave a Reply. |