The coaxial stress is to coincide the 2 cylinders and the tangent is actually to block it on the big cylinder. So, for the 1st it works but not for the second.
capture.png
capture.png
You have to select the two edges, the one at the end of the spindle and the one at the through hole
Note that you could also do it on a point if you don't want the pin to protrude on the other side
Simple no!
contrainte_de_tangence.jpg
1 Like
In that case
large cylinder draws a sketch which would be the axis of the small cylinder in place.
in the assembly, constrain the end of this sketch with the face of the small cylinder.
may the force be with you.
obiwan.jpg
Zozo_mp, I have already selected the edges of the pin and the hole, for the 1st it works, but for the second pin no. I'll zip the assembly, try to put tangent constraint on the 2nd, it won't work.
assemblage.rar
There are three ways to go about it and in all three cases it works perfectly
Edge on Edge
Edge on a plane or vertiacal plane be an inclined plane
Point on the pin and tangency with the tibia cylinder
Point and central axis of the tibia with a dimension
Etc... Etc
contrainte_de_tangence_3_facons_de_faire.jpg
1 Like
As already said,
It 's a shame to create 10 different topics for questions that could be only in one and the same topic...
2 Likes
the simplest it seems to me as already said (for me)
is to show the axes and constrain them with a distance
endpoint pin axis on shin axis distance x to be repeated on all pins
After coaxiality
such as the answer @Zozo & @OBI WAN
@+ ;-)
2 Likes
Paf Pif Pouf
This comes from the way you build all of your pieces, which is unorthodox to say the least. You like to complicate your life :-)
1°) For the tibia, instead of making a sketch with a circle and an extrusion to the desired length, you make a thin function around an axis (not even a revolution which would have been the second possibility.
2°) for oblique holes you make them with a material removal - revolution (it's not a big deal this way but good since the drilling assistant tool works like that) instead of making a hole from a plane.
From my point of view, it's not the 2nd that is causing a stir but the 1st with your slim revolution. On the other hand, I don't know why this way of doing things bananas the constraints.
Which version of SW do you have?
@ All
We can often discuss how to do it but surely because I have been wired machining in the workshop since I was a child and I always build my parts with removal as the machine would do (like a fitter or a miller) hence the sketches from the plans very often. I only use revolutions for the axes (like a turner).
On the other hand for additive manufacturing I have completely changed my method but that's another subject :-) :-)
1 Like
Thanks for the answer, I'll try what you say. I have solidworks 2014.
No training, I'm really struggling
you should even be able to see the axes of the holes
tool bar at the very top
display/show hide/axis (and axis temp if needed)
and you'll see all your axes
by having displayed your axes
you'll just have to make coincidences
line spindle axis/ line axis pin hole on shin
After the endpoints
and c closed
@+ ;-)
1 Like
@ GT
the problem is not on the coaxiality whatever the method but on the tangency Edge => Edge or Edge = > surface to block the spindle slippage.
The PB comes only from the way it made the big cylinder.
Otherwise I tried four methods and all of them work normally if you build the big cylinder (the tibia) correctly.
In his way of assembling he over-constrained these parts several times (like two planes to avoid rotation) but it didn't come from there, even after cleaning up.
Its lack of training is a handicap !especially for pins in a tibia it's handicapping :-)
To constrain everything I used the temporary axes, the planes in the parts and I tangentized the face of the femur part with the edge of the spindle and it works very well.
assemblage.jpg
2 Likes
@Zozo I know I read your answer thread ;-)
but it is true by displaying the axes of each function
It's simpler for anyone
to put a coincidence
and side after the distance from the end points
at least it seems to me ;-)
@+ ;-)
I tried the technique of ac_cobra, by doing this, I managed to retract the cylinder but during the simulation, a problem. So, I'll review your comments and reassemble it, I'll keep you posted on Monday. 
me on SW 2017
If I only put a tangent constraint stops the spindle
The workpiece can move since the angle of the spindle
then all the elements must be fixed in the assembly
To do this, select all the parts and fix them
@+ ;-)
It's normal that you can't do it in your own way, the Ø in the femur are different 1x 15.9 that you constrained and the other 16.1 that you can't constrain in the same way as the other. If you set it to 15.9 it will work fine...
@ AC Cobra 427
Okay this is one of the 5 ways to do it that I described and it's the easiest in time for sure :-)
1 Like
@ snouzy13
It is important to understand that the constraints of assembly and simulation have nothing to do with each other.
Assembly constraints are only used to place the parts together.
When you are in simu you have to redefine a good part of the constraints in particular by indicating the desired or authorized movements the penetrations or not, the way with which the efforts, forces, pressure are applied
Etc...
This is the main difficulty in simulation and you have to understand the logic and it's not that intuitive
2 Likes