Yes, so the origin may correspond to that of the sheet metal development and not to the bent state
I just tried it and everything fits correctly at home (see attached file).
I'm really thinking of a bug or a hidden option...
EDIT: @Tomalan: Uh, the origin of the sheet metal remains the same unfolded or not or am I wrong?
origine.jpg
Which SW version are you on?
Otherwise you're in luck!!
Version 2013 SP3, I can publish the correctly placed assembly if you want but it won't solve the problem...
it's not a question of luck
what version are you in SW?
If your constraints are good from the start and you save in assembly (or if no more modification in parts) nothing will change even if you integrate it into another assembly or sub-assembly
How do you manage your constraints of fixations or references via the origin?
post your file
@+ ;-)
@gt22: - SW12SP5
- This is the PB, the constraints are not good at the beginning. They are correct when I view before validation. i.e.: the 2 origins are positioned together and the planes aligned. But then it goes live when I validate.
-file already posted.
@jose: not useful since I reposition it manually. It comes down to the same thing.
well I downloaded the 4 folders and everything is OK at home I am under SW2012
The rivet ok
P3 OK
ens2 ok
ENS 2.2 OK
@+ ;-)
@gt22
On the ens2-2 you have all the coincidental origins when you open the file? From the right view, this is not the case.
2014-01-31_position_origine_test_ens2-2.png
I don't understand what you want
It's the same room and you have fun taking the measure tool to check what
Of course the origin of ens2 is not the same as ens 2.2
If you want it to be in the same place make a coincidence of origins but it's strictly useless at all
Then to position your ens2 in your ens2.2 assembly it's up to Roto to position it in the place of your choice
but it will never come to put itself on the origins of a new assembly
esceque it's clear
@+ ;-)
I also did the assembly a little higher and everything agrees with me, the origin of the sub-assembly with the origin of the new assembly.
Matching the origins is, on the contrary, very important if you work with a lot of symmetry, modifications of parts in an assembly, etc...
It is certainly possible to do everything manually, but it is not normal that when the subset is inserted into the set, the origins are not matched and located in the same place.
This is the whole basis of the question.
I'm showing you that the origin of the ENS2 assembly doesn't position itself correctly in a top assembly when it's inserted first. (and that's the PB I have)
Obviously here on this ex, you may not see the use. But when you make a system you have different parts/assemblies/sub-assemblies, right?
And why would it be obvious if the origins were not coinciding?
The default location when inserting a part or assembly is on the origin and not at perpet.
"But it will never come to put itself on the origins of a new assembly". Ah, that's new! For me, the parts are all positioned at the origin when I validate without going into the 3D window (same for the assemblies normally).
What I don't understand is when I validate (insert in ens2-2 which is an ex!), the ens2 assembly rotates + shifts in all axes.
2 Likes
I do not have the impression that the following question has been asked:
_ Has it always been that way or did it start all at once? If it came suddenly, maybe try reloading the sldreg by the "wizard to copy settings". It sometimes solves problems.
For each part I insert in an assembly, I take the specimen, I put it with my mouse in the most judicious place, turn it, position it as best or not and then I put my coincidences.
This is my way of proceeding
@+ ;-)
@gt22: Yes, except the first one! If the parts are well designed, without clicking on the 3D, the parts are positioned on the same origins, which has the advantage of matching the origins AND the plans.
It's simpler and faster.
I tried again and everything works very well... To see if Benoit's method works but very clearly, it's 99.9% a configuration problem of some kind (and I think untraceable except by someone who has already had the problem and who would have already manifested himself :), known by a bug since obviously, usually, it works very well with you.
Good luck
Hello
One question: does displaying the origin of the assembly (and/or part) change anything?
@lucas.prior: well done! Indeed, when creating the new assembly, by removing the display from the origin before inserting the subassembly, it is correctly positioned on the default origin.
I don't know where you saw this info, but thank you.