Assembly3 preview

[jpg87]

Hello,

Warning :
This expresses the results of my tests. I hope that my English translation will be understandable.
I tried to find out if the existing constraints could meet my needs.
Note :
The first reflex of the designer is to use pairs of surfaces to constrain: it would be interesting for the solver to ignore Dof deleted twice (or more).

DOF expected in the desired link (support plane):

10_pl.gif (52.28 KiB) Viewed 3105 times

plan.png (23.98 KiB) Viewed 3105 times

DOF expected in the desired link (pivot):

01_piv.gif (105.06 KiB) Viewed 3105 times

pivot.png (45.6 KiB) Viewed 3105 times

To be continued ...

[jpg87]

...
DOF expected in the desired link (sliding pivot) :

03_piv_gli.gif (83.06 KiB) Viewed 3104 times

piv_gli.png (28.44 KiB) Viewed 3104 times

DOF expected in the desired link (slide) :

02_gliss.gif (24.66 KiB) Viewed 3104 times

gliss.png (66.17 KiB) Viewed 3104 times

To be continued ...

[jpg87]

...
DOF expected in the desired link (punctual) :

09_ponct.gif (340.62 KiB) Viewed 3103 times

ponct.png (30.73 KiB) Viewed 3103 times

DOF expected in the desired link (straight linear) :

08_lin_rect.gif (302.12 KiB) Viewed 3103 times

lin_rect.png (35.07 KiB) Viewed 3103 times

...

[jpg87]

...
DOF expected in the desired link (spherical) :

06_sph.gif (400.61 KiB) Viewed 3101 times

spher.png (30.8 KiB) Viewed 3101 times

DOF expected in the desired link (helical) :

04_heli.gif (141.47 KiB) Viewed 3101 times

helico.png (29.62 KiB) Viewed 3101 times

[triplus]

Hello,

Warning :
This expresses the results of my tests. I hope that my English translation will be understandable.
I tried to find out if the existing constraints could meet my needs.

Nice overview. Once things mature likely having such examples in the documentation would make much sense.

P.S. Before that happens i feel that this is still the missing part. That will likely change things drastically.

Because composite constraint removes multiple DOFs, multiple composite constraints of similar types on the same pair of parts (which have at most 6 Dof between them) will definitely lead to overconstraint. I'll add code to detect that and downgrade or (if appropriate) simply ignore extra composites.

[chrisb]

I hadn't much interest in assembly until now, but this overview is really intriguing.

[Kunda1]

ping

Check this thread out as well.

[realthunder]

I am back from the topo naming thing. I've upgraded the entire Part WB with new topo naming, and It's about to be ready for testing. But before that, let's fix something here first.

It turns out that SolveSpace allows redundant constraints. I just need to ignore the return status when it reports redundant. And once I've done that, plane constraint works much better now, although it still fails occasionally. Also, multiple plane coincidence has a much lower success rate. I may still need to add my own logic to deal with this in the end of the day.

The following screencast showed a few things,

* Multiple plane alignment now works
* SolveSpace does not care about orientation, you may have to occasionally flip the object yourself. I'm not sure if there is a solution for this.
* Negative offset now works as expected
* I have added 3D view preselection on mouse over tree view item. This is a core feature, and works in other workbench as well. To turn on/off it, use tree view context menu, 'Tree view options' -> 'Pre-selection'

[easyw-fc]

I am back from the topo naming thing. I've upgraded the entire Part WB with new topo naming, and It's about to be ready for testing.

Very nice though!
This A3 stuff will be a great enhancement for all mechanical workflow!

[triplus]

It turns out that SolveSpace allows redundant constraints.

Now plane alignment indeed works more Assembly 2 plane constraint alike. I only did a few quick tests for now. Will have more time to try out more use cases in a day or two. I can already say the amount of use cases, where before solver just failed, has reduced substantially now!