Dynamic Enclosure

[dirtychinchilla]

Morning all,

 

In my job I have to draw quite a lot of metal enclosures (basically boxes), which are always very similar, with standard features i.e. flange and mounting holes, but with major dimensions that always change.

 

Generally, the way that I create these is that I take any box, and then slice it and use solidedit to extend the faces is necessary. As you might imagine, this is a little tedious, and open to error.

 

I'm wondering whether anyone has any ideas on how I could make a sort of dynamic box, where I could input the dimensions, and AutoCAD could carry out the process for me. I'm guessing, therefore, that this will require some sort of LSP routine, but I must admit that my knowledge of LSP is substantially lacing.

 

I've attached a generic picture of the box just to clarify. Any advice you have would be greatly appreciated.

 

Thanks in advance,

 

dirtychinchilla

 

[JD Mather]

Sounds like Autodesk Inventor to me.

No Lisp needed.

[dirtychinchilla]

Could you expand on that? I'm not very familiar with Inventor and only have Inventor Fusion, which I believe has reduced functionality.

[JD Mather]

Inventor Fusion was a Technology Preview that has been discontinued. (I don't know where they got the name - it was nothing like Inventor.)

 

Inventor has intellegent iFeatures, iParts, iAssemblies and iLogic functionality.

... and much easier to use than AutoCAD (even for something as simple as a box).

 

In the most simple adaptation to your problem statement (not even using the iFeatures), I would simple edit the dimensions.

(Dimensions are parametric in Inventor - that is - they control the model.)

[Denimoth]

The big problem you have is that right now, AutoCAD doesn't have much in terms of 3D geometric and dimensional constraints. There's lots for 2D, but that's it. Solid modeling in AutoCAD is notorious for not being easy to modify once created as you have no doubt discovered. You can't use Stretch on a box to make it longer or shorter. The way you described is probably how I would have gone about modifying your model. JD Mather mentions Inventor because that software does allow constraints to be applied to a model, which would help you modify your model as needed by simply changing the value of the length, width and/or height dimensions of planes you might create as guides. There are other ways as well in Inventor, too many to mention.

 

Back to AutoCAD, a Lisp could be made to help you create your model from scratch, with some user input and on screen selections, throw in some blocks for the latches, hinge, etc. This won't necessarily be faster than your current workaround. And to my knowledge, modifying an existing model can't be done via lisp, not without significant programming skills.

 

Maybe someone else could prove me wrong though.

[mikekmx]

in AutoCAD more trouble than it's worth imo.just build a library of standard blocks.

[dirtychinchilla]

Inventor Fusion was a Technology Preview that has been discontinued. (I don't know where they got the name - it was nothing like Inventor.)

 

Inventor has intellegent iFeatures, iParts, iAssemblies and iLogic functionality.

... and much easier to use than AutoCAD (even for something as simple as a box).

 

In the most simple adaptation to your problem statement (not even using the iFeatures), I would simple edit the dimensions.

(Dimensions are parametric in Inventor - that is - they control the model.)

 

I found out it had been discontinued after I posted this thread...why the hell did they include it with AutoCAD 2013 then?? Oh well. The issue here is that I don't actually have inventor.

 

The big problem you have is that right now, AutoCAD doesn't have much in terms of 3D geometric and dimensional constraints. There's lots for 2D, but that's it. Solid modeling in AutoCAD is notorious for not being easy to modify once created as you have no doubt discovered. You can't use Stretch on a box to make it longer or shorter. The way you described is probably how I would have gone about modifying your model. JD Mather mentions Inventor because that software does allow constraints to be applied to a model, which would help you modify your model as needed by simply changing the value of the length, width and/or height dimensions of planes you might create as guides. There are other ways as well in Inventor, too many to mention.

 

Back to AutoCAD, a Lisp could be made to help you create your model from scratch, with some user input and on screen selections, throw in some blocks for the latches, hinge, etc. This won't necessarily be faster than your current workaround. And to my knowledge, modifying an existing model can't be done via lisp, not without significant programming skills.

 

Maybe someone else could prove me wrong though.

 

I can understand, now, how it would be done in Inventor. Sounds excellent to me, but certainly not worth buying the software for. Nor do I have significant programming knowledge etc...should really stick with what I know and just modify the original hah! I worry that it's open to errors, but I guess I just need to be vigilant.

 

in AutoCAD more trouble than it's worth imo.just build a library of standard blocks.

 

Yeah. Unfortunately we have recently been producing a large range of different sizes of boxes and it makes it a bit tedious having to change stuff all the time. Worse things have happened though.

 

I'll just have to man up and get on with it

[dirtychinchilla]

I had an idea whilst posting that response.

 

I could make some boxes (using the box command), which would leave the dimensions editable in the properties menu, and then slice my original enclosure and put these spacer pieces in. Then, all I'd have to do is adjust the length of the spacer piece and move the other half of the enclosure as appropriate.

 

What I'm wondering now, though, is whether it's possible to link dimensions of these boxes so that I could change one, giving me a change in all of them.

 

The only issue I see with that is that it's fine for changing the dimension in, say, the x plane, but when you have to do it in the y and z plane as well, which is almost certainly going to happen, it might get a little complicated.

 

Anyway, if I can work out some sort of link or constraint method between different boxes, I think I could get it working how I'd like. After a quick Google, I think this can all be done via parameters??

[JD Mather]

..... After a quick Google, I think this can all be done via parameters??

 

Parameters only work for 2D in AutoCAD (work in 3D in Inventor).

You could probably use parameters to control 2D profiles that you then extrude when needed.

 

I think I would reach into my own pocket for the cash for Inventor rather than fight with an antiquated program like AutoCAD.

Maybe Inventor LT and then push out to dwg.

[dirtychinchilla]

Hah well the money part will remain up to my bosses. They don't pay me enough for that by any means.

 

The result of my search was this video, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9sQ5mi_k3k in which the chaps appears to be able to do what I'm thinking of, although i'm not sure how well it would actually apply to lengths of materials etc. It looks rather complicated though.

[JD Mather]

...They don't pay me enough for that by any means.....

 

Look at it as an investment in your education in preparation for your (better paying) next job.

[dirtychinchilla]

Haha! I've already paid a lot for my education

[neophoible]

Look at it as an investment in your education in preparation for your (better paying) next job.

If it qualifies as education, then perhaps get the Student Edition and use it to show the bosses what the difference is. If they don't care, then it really doesn't matter, as they are the ones paying for the time and effort to do the work.

[JD Mather]

Haha! I've already paid a lot for my education

 

I tell my students to expect to continue their education throughout their working lives. Technology (especially in this field) changes so rapidly.....

 

I've met a few professors who stopped their education the day they walked across the stage and got their sheepskin.

[mikekmx]

imo college etc is the very beginning of your 'proper' learning, giving you a good foundation of understanding and developing your learning skills.

 

amazingly in the company i work with at the moment, some (most) people haven't learnt ANY cad system and are drawing freehand on squared paper,scanning it and sending it to customers! Apart from all the other advantages of drawing in CAD, they don't believe it's quicker to draw in autocad than with paper and pencil. cba to show them.

 

likewise, ALL our office staff fill in the same details in multiple documents all day long, all their lives. Took me a week or 2 to get bored with that,another week or 2 to learn/hack some vba stuff, and now the forms i have to fill in almost write themselves. No-one in the entire dept has even enquired about doing the same. *shrugs* can't understand it.

 

you learn stuff yourself, but i do believe that employers have a duty to at least keep their employee's skills up-to-date with relevant approved training, it benefits both parties.

[dirtychinchilla]

If it qualifies as education, then perhaps get the Student Edition and use it to show the bosses what the difference is. If they don't care, then it really doesn't matter, as they are the ones paying for the time and effort to do the work.

 

I do actually have the student edition, but I'm not sure that the occasional (maybe once a week) box justifies a whole new piece of software. I was just looking for a quick solution.

 

I tell my students to expect to continue their education throughout their working lives. Technology (especially in this field) changes so rapidly.....

 

I've met a few professors who stopped their education the day they walked across the stage and got their sheepskin.

 

I have a degree in Mechanical Engineering from a reputable uni here in the UK. Admittedly, I'm not a mechanical engineer at work, and was never a good engineer in the first place, but I love CAD work and design, and really feel like I took the wrong course. Having said that, I've learnt a hell of a lot since I started working after finishing university last year.

 

At uni we only used Solidworks (and Abaqus), so AutoCAD has been entirely new to me for the last six months. But, as with most CAD packages, I think it's more about logic than it is about the software. obviously you can be limited by software, but if you can't work out how to do things and visualise them properly (which a lot of people on my uni course struggled with), you'll never quite get it, or spend ages trying to find a reasonable solution.

 

imo college etc is the very beginning of your 'proper' learning, giving you a good foundation of understanding and developing your learning skills.

 

amazingly in the company i work with at the moment, some (most) people haven't learnt ANY cad system and are drawing freehand on squared paper,scanning it and sending it to customers! Apart from all the other advantages of drawing in CAD, they don't believe it's quicker to draw in autocad than with paper and pencil. cba to show them.

 

likewise, ALL our office staff fill in the same details in multiple documents all day long, all their lives. Took me a week or 2 to get bored with that,another week or 2 to learn/hack some vba stuff, and now the forms i have to fill in almost write themselves. No-one in the entire dept has even enquired about doing the same. *shrugs* can't understand it.

 

you learn stuff yourself, but i do believe that employers have a duty to at least keep their employee's skills up-to-date with relevant approved training, it benefits both parties.

 

That sounds rather tedious. The people I work with, if they need a drawing that requires describing, will sketch me something and I'll take it from there. I am the only CAD guy in the company (about 30 employees), so they have to come to me. They know that a CAD drawing is much better than a dodgy sketch that they've done!

 

They've offered to put me on any courses that I need to do, which is great. I just haven't found any that I feel I actually need to do, yet. It's so easy to pick up AutoCAD from tutorials and just playing with it. I guess if I wanted to take it up a gear, I could go on some courses, but I'm not convinced that work would see any value in those, as I already have the CAD skills that I need for this work.