Hello
The advantage of creating the implantation of the stitches in the skeleton is to direct the links only from the parts to the skeleton, not to have links between parts.
I looked for the stitching, there are two different pieces in the same place (it must not be normal)
For the cutting of the stitches there is a simpler integrated into the skeleton.
To make your tubes, look when you make an extrusion of a sketch, try the option (Thicken).
I attached the images as well
piquages.7z
I made my bearings on the skeleton. I created publications that I copied with links in the different parts on the assembly (shells + tubing).
I use these markers to make my holes in the shells, it works perfectly.
I make a circle for my tubing, placing it with these markings, and doing the extrusion to the next one, it gives me an error message "you cannot specify a limit of the type "until the next" for the first component of the current part body"
I have the impression that I want to make my parts separate but still connected to each other.
Hello, it's normal, the extrusion you want to do is the first volume operation in your file, so there is no "next" (meaning to go to the next geometry (solid) in one direction).
In your case you have to take up to the surface and select the surface of the imported sphere with link in the geometric set above.
EDIT:
Your skeleton is not in the right place, it should be at the top of what it is piloting, it is stored in the sphere component, it would be okay if links didn't come out of the sphere component to drive other parts.
I advise you to be rigorous, you have to rename the elements with an implicit name (in some time it will be difficult to remember that Symmetry .3 is the spherical surface of the " Central Lower Pole").
Be careful, there are several inactivated formulas, if it is not voluntary (controlled) they must be destroyed.
There are also 6 default parameter tables?
Many imports with links are found out of context of creating their links.
Many formulas refer to the same parameter , in these cases there is the " Equivalence " function which is very handy.
http://www.lynkoa.com/tutos/3d/catia-v5-fonction-equivalences
Thank you for all these tips.
In the meantime I had managed to solve the problem. I actually redid almost all the assembly because by editing the formulas (I think) I broke the links with the skeleton. It seems that the problem has been solved. All I need to do is make the bracing between each post and if I have the courage, the access staircase (it may be a different story).
I could not be more aware of the approximate rigor of my Catia blend. By dint of experimenting I start to understand the links between the pieces and it starts to work the way I want it to. The problem is that I started the play without really knowing what I was doing... So, it's not very rigorous.
I'm going to refrain from moving my sphere component in the folders, I'm afraid that the assembly won't recognize it anymore and that I'll have to start all over again.
I also deleted the parameter tables, I saw in the meantime how to do it. At the end, I'll create all my parameters in the skeleton file and they'll drive both the dimensions of the skeleton and the assembly. I think the method is a bit boring and not approved, with a list of parameters as long as my arm, but I tested 2, 3 times, it seems to work. I think I noticed the relationships not to be touched on the assembly, those that concern the dimensions of the skeleton. I will be careful not to touch it.
1 Like
Indeed if you moved the skeleton part under the head assembly you would have to redefine all the Contextual links