Hello
with SW2013, I need to assign to a part its mass which is a function of its length.
Problem: when in the mass property panel, if I enter ="masse_calculee" in the box that is fine, SW doesn't agree.
Does anyone know how to do it?
Hello
with SW2013, I need to assign to a part its mass which is a function of its length.
Problem: when in the mass property panel, if I enter ="masse_calculee" in the box that is fine, SW doesn't agree.
Does anyone know how to do it?
Hello
The easiest way is to make a family of parts (even with a single configuration, so only one line in it):
http://help.solidworks.com/2012/French/SolidWorks/sldworks/Creating_a_Design_Table.htm
Then, by editing the part family in Excel, you can create your equation however you want.
I believe that it is not possible in the assigned properties to use the equations.
I don't really understand, the mass is recalculated according to the dimensions and thickness of the part. So if you change the dimensions the mass changes too... ($PRPVIEW:"mass")
I think that if it's an assigned mass, it may not respect linearity: for example, a rail with bearings every X cm.
It's true that you may be able to calculate the density of your material:
by calculating the ratio of volume and weight of the shortest and longest piece and you can have an average density, which will probably never be very wrong (so never very accurate either!).
The goal was indeed to avoid the step of calculating the average "density", since the linear mass value is given to me by the manufacturer.
I leave it open a little longer, sometimes...
Pretty much agree with AC COBRA 427
There is a permanent link between material, volume, density and the size of your room!
Design software calculates this according to these parameters and the material you have defined.
Cedric.
PL has understood the problem well.
A classic is the rod of a cylinder whose mass is given by the manufacturer in the form ax+b, x being the stroke, b a fixed and a coef.
We can find the density but since the manufacturer gives a formula, we might as well avoid a risk of error.
Hi, so what doesn't suit you in my proposal to use the parts families?
It's very simple to create, and you manage your equation in one place for all your configurations.
basically nothing, it's just that in the study phase, we are sometimes forced to test different values and create configs just for that, it lacks flexibility.