Hello, I want to improve our supplies by getting out of the nomenclatures for my mechanically welded assemblies. I've thought about the simplest solution but I'm not sure if it's easy to do (that it saves me time in the end).
Basically, I pull pipes and ducts using the Mechanically Welded Elements function and 3D sketches. I would like to know if there is a way to make the software pick up when I pass over a fillet and set it to me as a 90° elbow, 45°... Is there a possibility of achieving this?
If you uncheck the merge box when you do the welded mechanic, it should automatically differentiate the straight lines of the bends but it will not be able to automatically say radius = bend.
So, yes, I know that the Piping module can do that only I only have a Standard license, I don't have access to this module...
@Coyote, it could be a good start, already if he manages to get me the straight lengths without including the length of the arcs, I could start with that and then see how to reference each elbow.
To follow up on what Coyotte says, and taking the case of a welded mechanic.
I would create a sketch (2D/3D according to your needs) taking care to separate each segment. A straight line for a pipe, a rounded one for an elbow, etc etc.
Then I would create a type/size corresponding to each module. In such a way that they can be differentiated.
And then it happens by itself.
On the other hand, where the bottom hurts in my opinion, is for the 1-way/2-way connections and the changes of sections.
I'm a little afraid that you'll create more constraint for yourself than anything else in the end :s
The mechanically welded function is based on bodies.
So to be able to differentiate an elbow from a straight element, it must be 2 independent bodies. If you're doing sweeps, you'll need to add trimming functions to separate the pieces.
Then you have to fill in the properties of the bodies (right-click on a body, property).
To complete myself, rather than doing cutting functions, I would make the straight parts mechanically welded, the bends/Y being modeled as a separate part, then imported into the part.
On the other hand, for the changes of sections, it depends on how you manage them.
I come up against a small problem: I have a lot of right pitches of the same section on each network. For the elbows, he manages to differentiate them for me, if I have 8 identical elbows, he puts me a line with 8 elbows because they are the same length. However, if I have a lattice with 50 straight lengths, it outputs me 50 lines with different lengths corresponding to my straight lengths. Is it possible to bring these lines together? That he gives me a straight cummulated length? Because with so many lines, I might as well say that nomenclature is of no use to me...
@stefbeno, yes, my bodies are well separated, but if I have to enter a property for each elbow, I will lose a lot of time, I might as well count them by eye, it's faster.
@stefbeno, I opted for a quick design method, since I manage the 3D sketch quite a bit, I do everything in 3D sketching and for a section change, I make a piece of construction line the length of my section change and I click on the faces of my two sections: Convert to sketch and smoothing with slim function.
After that, it's the same, if I have to insert each elbow one by one, it's going to take me a long time... I have already tried and I have also noticed that if for example my elbow no longer points to the right but to the left, the modifications are very heavy to make with this method.
@Joss.G: You must have a "list of welded parts" just under annotation in the build tree.
If you develop it, you will see "items-list-of-welded-parts" (if not, right-click on list of welded parts => update.)
These are your pieces grouped together.
You can put them all in the same "items-list-of-welded-parts" by clicking-dragging them from one to the other. All your lengths will thus fit in the same nomenclature line.
You can even go a little further by right-clicking on the "items-list-of-welded-parts" => property and thus modify what appears in your nomenclature
I agree that you're wasting your time a bit (although it's relatively quick to do) but I don't have any other solution :s