Alibre - A First Attempt

Nigel,

No need to re-model those parts, they look fine. A part being 'on its side' is not a big issue, you can still apply constraints that will position it 'correctly'.

Either there is something amiss on your system, or there's some small step you are missing out or not quite grasping.

Offer of help still stands - have you read my comments about how to rotate/roll parts in assembly space ?

I've checked your computer spec - it isn't great, but should cope with models like this. If it is being sluggish to update screen, try turning off Ambient Occlusion on the View tab of the Ribbon in 3D workspaces - that will significantly offload the demand on the graphics adapter. There are other settings that can be tweaked to help further if needed.

When things get "slow to respond" as it were, I run the CCleaner (free) software that will remove gremlins. A few weeks back, I noticed a significant reduction in speed and ran CCleaner. It found over 20,000 trackers. The computer was a lot faster after removal. The delay you describe sounds like either the computer spec, or trackers. My cad computer runs things just fine. It isn't high spec, but it has a separate graphics card, and no internet connection. I installed the latest version of Solidedge on the computer I am using now. An old Win10 all-in-one Acer with 8gb of mem and no dedicated graphics card. Running SE or Designspark is slow. I could make a cup of between clicking the mouse and it doing something. A little HP laptop I was given last year also runs Win10, has no graphics card, but it does have a solid state drive. So, much, much faster than the poor Acer, but not as fast as my cad computer which also has a SSD with Win11. I don't think the version of Windows matters too much, so long as it is 64 bit.

A bit off topic but refering to your comment about how things were designed in years past. I know the man who restores and rebuilds the ancient machinery for The National Trust here in Cornwall. When I went to his workshop last year he showed me what I will call a con-rod in my ignorance of correct steam engine terminology. It's the rod that runs alongside the actual con-rod and I believe it fits on an eccentric big-end wise. The rod was made in the late 1700s, and the little end had been hammered out, bent over a mandrill to form the eye, and then hammer welded back onto the main rod. The were no visible signs of any of this work. And the engineer restoring the rod, and others who had examined it, didn't think it could be replicated today. A skill long gone.

Most likely I'm just not grasping most steps, not just some small one.

This Forum and the two magazines shows so many others have tried 3D CAD have mastered it to advanced levels, and probably quite rapidly; regarding it as simply a "machine tool" like their lathes and milling-machines.

I knew from the start several years ago now, I would take a long time to learn it to anything useful for model-engineering level; simply by my naturally low learning speeds and capacities, specific to subject.

Eventually I doubted I would reach more than a basic level, perhaps rough images of very simple, single parts.

I now doubt I can learn it at all.

'

I would be surprised if my computer cannot handle Alibre Atom as it can run the far more complicated TurboCAD, which has at least two mathematically different classes of "solid" and very powerful rendering routines. Though I noticed that in Alibre, closing the file, and re-opening it, sometimes cleared the jam.

I wonder if I am jamming it by repeated button-presses stacking up a lot of hidden data. Or does the trial edition and its exercises run on-line so susceptible to broadband speed variations?

The PC is a Dell, factory rebuilt Desktop.

2.3GHz processor, x64

8Gb RAM (7.77 useable)

Nigel - if you'd only accept some help we could sort out what the issues are. At least you'd then be in a better position to decide if you want to go any further...

As I've already said, your computer spec is not great on the graphics side, but should cope with these simple models (disabling Ambient Occlusion, Ground Shadow, Ground Reflection, Model Shadow reduces significantly the work the graphics adapter has to do and hence will make things smoother).

Going back and forward causes issues and I do what you do, save the file and reopen it to clear the cache

Nigel,

The trial version does NOT run 'on-line'. All Alibre software is installed locally and runs locally. The only 'on-line' aspect is a check of licence status - this also feeds back some basic information about your installed version of the software and your computer hardware (which can be very helpful in diagnosing problems).

If you don't believe that, simply disconnect your computer from the internet - Atom3D will still run.

Nigel.

If you won't accept help, then you are beyond help.

At this point, what do you suggest that someone could say to you, that will help you move forward?

Martin.

Nigel as I said yesterday the way items first appear on the assembly screen has little effect on how they are assembled.

You can see here that the column was on its side but as soon as I applied a constraint to the hole in the base and the column it jumped to the right way up.

Same with the clamps, I purposely made two files one with it the right way up and another of it on it's side. For each I apply a single constraint to the column and the column hole in the clamp as they are what I want to line up and in both cases they go straight to where I want them, the right way up one just move sideways but the other both sideways and rotates itself to be the right way up.

No different to you picking up the parts from a pile on the bench and manipulating them the right way round so they slip onto the column. Hopefully you would not say that you can't assemble the pile of parts if they were actually on your bench just because one were laying on it's side rather than on it's bottom.

JasonB,

Does Atom 3D do what you show? That is a very neat way of aligning objects.

Lee,

Yes assembly constraints in Atom3D work the same as in Alibre Design (there are just some extra constraint options in Alibre Design Expert - for gears/pulleys/screw drives/racks).

Both Alibre Design Professional and Design Expert offer a 'fastener' constraint - this speeds up placement of screws etc. by using a single constraint in place of the 2 constraints that would be required in Atom3D. You can achieve same result in Atom3D, just a bit slower to do.

Aligned, Offset, Concentric, Tangent, Angle are available in all levels of the software.

Edited By David Jupp on 03/05/2023 13:58:49

Edited By David Jupp on 03/05/2023 14:00:21

That's why I got Alibre Atom, the assembly-movement function takes you to the next level and it works really well

David -

Thank you clarifying that.

.

Martin -

What would help? Goodness knows. I don't.

'

Jason -

Got there eventually but what an exhausting, disheartening process (Image below).

No of course I don't think that, but when trying to follow a tutorial exercise word for word so less likely to go wrong, it is very confusing and discouraging when you can't make things work or your results don't match as it leads you to expect.

However, I was struck by your video apparently by-passing some of what the exercise test tells you, so I tried copying it and to my surprise I managed to assemble the clamp on the pole.

So I tried putting the rest together. That was one monumental battle, at one point welding the thumb-wheel inside the clamp. I had to close and re-open the file to sort that out, and eventually succeeded, leaving a trail of at least 20 constraints and any number of "Undos" just in the second attempt at what an expert would doubtless knock off in ten minutes with no mistakes.

.

I noticed this though. The instructions, if I had read them right, say you put the parts on the screen, then select:

Constraints > Enter the mating surfaces or edges > Constraint type (seems semi-automatic) > Apply > Close,

and watch it slide with eerie grace into place; solid steel through solid steel like a ghost through a wall.

Only, most of the time nothing happened, or it just aligned them in fresh air.. Finally, in desperation I grabbed the part to be added, and slid it by brute force and ignorance into place. It seemed to work, as if the Closed Constraints menu was still active out of sight.

Whether the assembly is accurate is another matter. Aligning the collar and pin-holes was very difficult, as much by eye as by constraints that did not seem to do anything. I suspect if you could view it transparently you'd see the scriber has made the hole in the pin oval.

As for what plane it's on.... More planet than plane. The two vertical planes are XY and YZ, the floor is XZ, and the little trident symbol was pointing anywhere but the normal, positive-going (x, y, z) directions. No idea why. I imagine you've no hope of depicting more complicated assemblies like engines or workshop machines, perhaps from sub-assemblies as well as individual parts, if you've no idea how to align the planes and orientations properly and coherently across all the drawings.

'

Oh, and I reverted to using the previous pointer despite it having no scroll-wheel, and this time everything seemed to respond as it should when selected.  

'

Learning 3D CAD to use to design engineering things to make? I'll be past making porridge by the time I manage to reach that level with CAD, if I ever do.

PS: I don't sharpen my real scribers to such a long point! This one is a Chamfer set by guesswork after failing to make the Revolve Cut tool work.

Edited By Nigel Graham 2 on 03/05/2023 16:48:22

Edited By Nigel Graham 2 on 03/05/2023 16:51:30

The parts may look like they are in mid air after adding a constraint but remember you are working in 3D THREE DIMENSIONS so will probably have to add an additional constraint or two to completely tie the component down into it's final position.

Beware just dragging something into position as it may look right in a particular view but won't be in another. Also if a part is just dragged into position there is nothing to keep it there so you could find later when adding further parts and constraining them the part you dragged will move out of that position, not what is wanted

Guesswork and your difficulty earlier positioning that random rectangle mentioned earlier can be solved by entering dimensions and constraining to an axis.

Nigel,

The constraint interface has been updated since the MEW articles - there used to be a choice of 2 assembly constraint tools - they've now been combined into a single (improved?) tool that does look different. The new tool can access all the functions of the old, but some naming has changed slightly to simplify things.

If applying constraints doesn't always work, it may be that something is wrong with your system/installation (I've offered to check this for you) - or you may be accidentally de-selecting, or even selecting a different item than intended. The constraint buttons that become active vary depending upon what is selected.

Don't worry so about planes - whilst being consistent can be helpful, it isn't a requirement. I tend to just model my parts, then sort out the orientations when I assembly things (unless I design a part 'in context' whilst inside the assembly it will be added to).

I have been following this saga with increasing interest and growing frustration but have refrained from commenting until now. It would appear to me, Nigel, that you would be advised (by me, anyway) to decide what part is going to be the basis for your assembly - in this case I would suggest the base - and choose that as the first part in the assembly view, placing the centre of the base at the conjunction of all three axes. Then ANCHOR it there. You could always place it near the axes origin and use the constraints to locate it accurately. Then place the other parts into the drawing as if assembling them as you would in "real life" as it were. Constrain each part to the base and subsequent parts to their corresponding positions using as many constraints as necessary. Depending where I drop the part, I tend to align mating faces first followed by coaxial constraints. That way you build up the assembly and the end result is achieved in a sensible timeframe. For example, today I've decided to start the 3D modelling of a race car suspension, using bought-in wheels and tyres as the starting point.

This is progress so far. The wheel was placed in the assembly file and anchored to the axes conjunction, The tyre was then adde and finally the driveshaft.

Wheel and tyre below as an assembly with the (unfinished) driveshaft as one.

Keep on plugging away, and take David up on his generous offer of help for goodness sake. I'm sure he'll get you sorted in no time, if only you'd give him the chance. Apologies if this advice is duplicating any already given. After 8 pages, I'm losing track of what has been said and what hasn't.

Assuring you that his posting is made with the best of intentions,

John

As above, you don't need the origin planes or axes to align/join parts. That's done using their own features(circle centres, edges, corners, whatever), with specific ones added just for that purpose if nothing appropriate exists already.

Part 2 of the article deals with the initial assembly and does exactly that inserting the base as the first part and than constraining it's position before adding the column. That is also exactly how I got the column and base in position before starting that latest video

Edited By JasonB on 03/05/2023 18:40:00

I always anchor the main body/base first and then bring in the parts

Jason -

Yes, I know merely dragging parts about won't guarantee they will end up where they should but in this case they appeared to have been aligned as if the constraints still applied. The constraints tool seemed to place them in line on some hidden axis but not slide them along into place.

.

David -

It did seem to run a lot better with the new mouse replaced with the previous pointer, but yes, please test my installation. There might well be something flaky in that.

'

John -

Thankyou. I take your point about anchoring some key component. The exercise does in fact tell you to do that, then goes into a routine that aligns the Part's own planes with the Assembly plane. This gave me some peculiar results like flipping the part end-over-end.

A coaxial constraint won't slide the part onto the column. Just think about it and what I said about 3D. The two parts could be a mile apart and still have the hole lined up with the column (set in two axis). it is not until you set the third position that the clamp is completely constrained either by sliding it in that third axis as you did or setting it's position relative to something else like a plane or the base piece. As an example your tailstock barrel is concentric to the lathe spindle (one constraint) but could be anywhere along the bed, it is not until you move it along and lock it down that is is fully constrained.

The "flip" icon has been mentioned several times, use that if the part seems to be up the wrong way when the constraint is applied. Even gets mentioned in the article.