Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Max, Oct 17, 2019.
This model is from GrabCAD. But what I want to show you is a new constraint in the works.
Indeed, great development.
I think I like that very much.
Looks pretty good, but "questions" and "polishing" will need to be dealt with. -- Lew
Based on what you've seen here, do you have any particular questions or polishing suggestions?
Hi Max -- A bit more than a year ago I sent you a "Improvements to Constraints" missive. Whereas I could easily repeat that (and add to it), that is not the basis here. The main thing I am certain is that there will be "arguments" (read: "questions") asked no matter how it comes out until we go through a couple of "cycles" of "polishing" things. Are you expecting a different process? I am not. -- Lew
Lew, I'm not sure a blanket statement on the lines of "something will be wrong, I'm not sure what, but I do know it will need fixing" on a preview video showing no UI is a worthwhile comment to make. I'm happy to discuss specifics, but comments for the sake of comments aren't a good use of anyone's time.
In any case, yes we will hopefully have more to show soon - I think we're shifting away from "Alibre makes stuff in secret then releases" to "hey everyone, look what we're thinking - tell us your feedback before we start coding" as you can see with the new constraint dialog thread(s), so hopefully the process will indeed be different.
Max -- Over my 48 years of Development experience, the first "output" of an effort virtually always hase something that had "escaped consideration" during the initial planning and design process. Whereas I expect that "we" will ultimately create an industry leader when we reach final (and "polished") implementation, I expect that it will take several "iterations" to reach that condition. That is all I meant. -- Lew
Is it a "gear"-constraint, like wheel one to wheel two has a ratio, or is it based on constraints from tooth to tooth?
Hello Max, keep the goodies coming. There is no question that there will be some changes in some items but I have over 55 years of design experience in several fields and there have been some that went smoothly and some that needed a few "tweeks". In any case, give them a try and see how they fly!
I love the program and continue to put through its paces.
It is more accurately an "axis / axis" constraint. You can use this constraint on any part, though in many cases it wouldn't make sense outside of gears or similar.
So that being said, you define 2 axes (by picking an axis, or a circular face that we can infer an axis from etc) and then you set the ratio between them, in a _____ : _____ style. So a worm gear would be 1 : 55 for example. We aren't spending a lot of time right now trying to infer the correct rotation direction, so you can easily switch it if it's incorrect with a checkbox.
Is anything planned for a rack and pinion gear set?
Harold - see menu H in this thread https://alibreforum.com/forum/index.php?threads/constraint-dialog-proposal.21307/
Yes, we are pretty confident we will fit that into v21.
This will be cool!
I trust you can chain this as long as you like? All of these could be constrained? And would it be useful to be able to specify backlash for each constraint?
What??? You think that clearance is required for moving parts? ;-) Lew
What constraint would be used to constrain then as shown in your video?
My feature request for the year. Not to lessen the new constraint - that will be awesome! It might incentivize me to model the pocket watch movement I've been pondering for a while.
You might be able to achieve this in some cases with the new limit constraint option, though they are not implemented for gears. Baby steps
Separate names with a comma.