Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Do you mean 
Reply

Assembly vs. Part Files

Hi!

 

Short version:

Is there a preffered way to set up the Part Family Tree in Rulestream? Should assemblies be constructed externally and imported, or are assemblies meant to be defined in Rulestream?


Long version:

I've seen a few different approaches of adding CAD files to part families in Rulestream. My initial idea was to build the part family tree to mimic the CAD assembly tree, add the assembly file to the top level part family and the part files to their respective (sub) part families. I then mapped all the user input properties in top level part family to properties in lower level part families, and then to CAD part expressions. However, changing parameters on the UI didn't update the assembly correctly, instead new instances of the part files was now added to the assembly (and they we're the ones being controlled). I could just control the assembly directly, but I guess the part files are necessary if I want to generate engineering drawings for individual parts.

 

 

Are any of these preffered?

  1. Import assembly file only (whats the point of subparts then?)

  2. Import part files only and build assembly using Rulestream (advanced programming?)

  3. Import part files and assembly file

 

 

 

Thanks

- Martin

 

(NX9 + Rulestream 8.10)

3 REPLIES

Re: Assembly vs. Part Files

[ Edited ]

 

 

Are any of these preffered?

  1. Import assembly file only (whats the point of subparts then?)

  2. Import part files only and build assembly using Rulestream (advanced programming?)

  3. Import part files and assembly file 

  


 

1 or 2. Depends on how you see the project.

 

 If you can easily setup a good CAD-model controlled only from the parameters of the CAD-Assembly file - you can to use the approach 1. 

 

If you can't, but need to have an automated RS model - use the 2nd approach. Yes, that could be quite advanced.

 

 

 

Re: Assembly vs. Part Files

Thanks, I have a working solution now just using the CAD assembly, controlling parameters from NX to pattern and position parts..

 

But just out of curiosity, if you were to build and constrain the assembly using RS (option 2), would you then need to add an empty assembly file to the top level part family? I've seen how I can control the quantity of subparts, but don't really understand how to position them in an assembly. Can RS create mates/assembly constraints between parts, or does it position them relative to the origin? Looking at this example they seen to be able to do something similar to what I'm working on.

 

3.PNG2.PNG1.PNG

Re: Assembly vs. Part Files

[ Edited ]

 

If you are using SolidEdge for example to create an assembly in this way:

 

Yes, you need an empty assembly.

You can specify mate constrains within the specification of template files. You can use 'matchcoordinatesystem' constraint or 'mate' or others.