Hello
I have a small problem, but very annoying. I am looking for a modeling method that is as light as possible for this type of spring.
I managed to find a solution, but if I increase the diameter, the number of repetitions of the function increases and the reconstruction time of this spring (in addition to the parts next to it) is very important.
I use function repetitions to have only one volume field.
I forgot to mention that I attached to the question a file with the part and the step.
Thank you in advance for your answers, have a good day.
Principle of bookcase pieces with heavy details or repetition:
to make a section in true representation,
do the rest in simplified (in your case, a cylinder)
pay attention to the total mass (manage either the density or by managing the mass (I prefer the density))
If necessary, include a "very detailed" configuration
Note for this configuration : knowing how to build in "positive" so as not to break the constraints, is a plus.
Thank you olivier42 for your answer.
Indeed, modeling only a real part simplifies the part, but the idea is to make realistic 3D (at best) to submit them as proposals to customers. We send steps, but with each proposal the Ø is different, and the reconstruction is really too long.
As you say, it's too heavy,
so the customer should be able to understand this small simplification,
at worst it is enough to indicate it orally, or by a note on the plan:
"Partial representation"
You can also make 2 or 3 "true" sections and the rest in simplified.
You're right, it's too heavy, I'd keep only 1/4 of the spring for the representation and the rest in cylinder.
Thank you for your help, have a good day