I was wondering if there is any good references on proe2001 animation.
I was wondering if there is any good references on proe2001 animation.
The only one on this NG who has done anything with Animation that I'm acquainted with in Martin Joergensen at the following website:In his Download directory is a pretty nice piston/rod/cam mechanism which not only moves (also possible with Mechanism Design) but spins around, 'explodes' while moving, and reassembles. He said he learned this from a PTC course on Fundementals of Design, the basic intro course. I don't know enough about the book market to say whether there is a chapter on Animation in one of the new ones, but worth checking out if you can't get to a community college with some Pro/e training. If they have a 'Universities Plus' license, they have all the courses, manuals in pdf format and training parts.
I read the thread and I think, now it´s time for me to contribute with some knowledge :-)
"David Janes" wrote in news:Al66b.127283$ firstname.lastname@example.org...
Yeah... And I still feel like I´m a newbie to the rest of Proe :-)
Yeah, it´s correct. To be more specific:
If you open an assembly, then it´s possible to choose "Animation" in the "Applications" toolbar. Do that. In the bottom you see a timeline. Start by pressing "Body definition in animation" and select one part per body. Next thing: Press "Animation icons display" and select LCS (local coordinate system). Then select "Drag model and create snapshots"... This is the essential part of making an animation. Proe interpolates between snapshots on the timeline.
So, by using "Drag" it´s possible to rotate and translate bodies (parts) around a coordinate system you choose. By choosing the "Constraints" bar it´s possible to "Enable/disable connections"... That´s how I made my piston/rod/cam mechanism which not only moves but spins around, 'explodes' while moving, and reassembles. While the constraints are disabled I make my snapshots... And put them on the timebar.... As you can see - this is "the trick"... Go back to the "Snapshots"-thing and press the camera: "Take a snapshot of the current configuration".... The rest, I think you´ll find out yourself...
Once the snapshots are made, you close the "Drag" dialog-box and choose "Create new Keyframe sequence": Here you choose where the snapshots should be on the time-bar. You also choose linear/smooth translation/rotation... Try both of them and see the difference. Once all the snapshots are on the time-bar, you´re almost finished (press + to place them).
You create a drive as in MDX by choosing "Create new driver". I also think you can import a driver by going to the "Animation" menu and choosing "Driver"... To change the viewing angle, while the animation is in progress you choose "Create new View @ time"... Here, you can both use your own predefined views and the standard "top, right, bottom, etc.." (if you have these)... It works the same way as with snapshots: You enter a time-value and the name of the view and after you press "Apply" you see the new view on a new parallel timeline......
Last, you press "start the animation" and see if it works.
That should be everything... Try everything out... I hope i didn´t forgot anything... This should be enough to get you started... I was really amazed, when I created my first animation :-) Trying to get the correct view and taking the correct snapshots can take a very long time, but it´s fun :-)
If you get stuck, you can ask me again... And tell me if it works :-)
Best regards, Martin Joergensen
Thanks, Martin, that's plenty to get us started. One question, though: does the assembly have to be made with 'connections' (packaged constraints) v. the normal, complete constraining of components? It seems like it from your description, but you say nothing about how the assemblies are made in the first place.
"David Janes" wrote in news:Dns6b.136365$ email@example.com...
Good question, David:
I think it has to be made by using the "Connections" pull-down-menu and not by using the normal "Constraint"-thing... This is important, I think (anyway, this is how I did it)...
You must be talking about the "Component Placement"-menu, right? I think it´s important to use a connection like a "pin" (objects rotate about the pin-axis - this connection has 1 degree of freedom), a "slider" (objects can "slide", one-dimensional - connection also has 1 degree of freedom, but this object translates), a "cylinder" (combination of slider and pin - this means it has 2 degrees of freedom).... The rest of the types, I´m not sure at...
In the animation I made on my homepage, I use only "pin" and "slider"-connection. The pin connection makes the objects rotate and to be sure that my piston moves only up and down, this is attached using a "slider"-connection and by letting a plane be the reference (if I remember it correct)...
Yeah, you´re right... And ask again, if the you get any problems... I hope the above answer, was what you asked for :-) I often read much more in the NG´s than I can post (because of lack of time)...
Good luck now, I hope you manage to create some very nice animations (or remember to ask me) :-)
Best regards, Martin Joergensen.
: : I think it has to be made by using the "Connections" pull-down-menu and not : by using the normal "Constraint"-thing... This is important, I think : (anyway, this is how I did it)... : : You must be talking about the "Component Placement"-menu, right? I think : it´s important to use a connection like a "pin" (objects rotate about the : pin-axis - this connection has 1 degree of freedom), a "slider" (objects can : "slide", one-dimensional - connection also has 1 degree of freedom, but this : object translates), a "cylinder" (combination of slider and pin - this means : it has 2 degrees of freedom).... The rest of the types, I´m not sure at... : : In the animation I made on my homepage, I use only "pin" and : "slider"-connection. The pin connection makes the objects rotate and to be : sure that my piston moves only up and down, this is attached using a : "slider"-connection and by letting a plane be the reference (if I remember : it correct)...
Godt, tak and good luck with your studies. And wasn't it satisfying to make a contribution!?!
"David Janes" wrote in news:tcP6b.152360$ firstname.lastname@example.org...
hehe.... Very good, David :-) I didn´t knew you could write in danish :-) At the first moment, I felt like I must´ve been choosing the wrong newsgroup, since you wrote that first part of "good, thanks and good luck...." to me in danish :-)
And yeah, it feels very good to contribute to the NG... The problem is, that I don´t think there´s much more in Pro/e that I can contribute with at this moment (I guess the people in here are a lot more experienced than me)....
But, I´m still here if any questions arise, concerning the animating part of proe, if anyone needs help...
Best regards, Martin Jorgensen
: > Godt, tak and good luck with your studies. And wasn't it satisfying to : make a : > contribution!?! : : hehe.... Very good, David :-) : I didn´t knew you could write in danish :-) : At the first moment, I felt like I must´ve been choosing the wrong : newsgroup, since you wrote that first part of "good, thanks and good : luck...." to me in danish :-)
On-line Danish phrase book ~ isn't the Internet amazing! : : And yeah, it feels very good to contribute to the NG... The problem is, that : I don´t think there´s much more in Pro/e that I can contribute with at this : moment (I guess the people in here are a lot more experienced than me)....
You're ahead of most, using this NG and contributing. Keep following it, you'll learn a lot. Everyone has particular strengths to share and weaknesses to work on. : : But, I´m still here if any questions arise, concerning the animating part of : proe, if anyone needs help...
Thanks again, but I want to make something very clear. Your contribution is the first on the current meaning of animation within Pro/e. This was emphasized to me recently by a visit to Google Groups. Because of Google's amazing search engine, they have harvested 'threads' on numerous topics, 'conversations' which are completely concocted and never took place. This thread of conversation was the latest in a series of conversations that have taken place in comp.cad.pro-engineer over the years. The interesting (and confusing) thing was all the different interpretations of what animation is. It was described in terms of Maya-like NURBS surface movement, such as the plastic doll animation of Laura Croft in Tomb Raiders; it was described as the changing viewer perspective of Pro/FLY-THROUGH (now available in 'View>Model Setup>Perspective'); it was described as the movement available to assemblies through Mechanism Design and Mechanism Dynamics (Mechanica Motion being moved into Pro/e) and finally, we have gotten to an actual animation menu, as specific as it's been ('Applications>Animation').
The current Animation takes elements of Fly Through (changing camera perspective, key frames and interpolation between them) and elements of Mechanism Design/Dynamics (flexible joints in assemblies, like packaged constraints; motors which define and program movement at flexible joints) and the capture of motion sequences to mpeg. What is different in Animation is the ability to do something like an animated 'expode view' to show how the mechanism not only moves but comes apart and goes back together. Any of you writing User's Manuals, Repair or Maintenance Manuals or Product Catalogues could find this infinitely valuable. If you already know Mechanism Design/Dynamics, it's a fairly short jump to animation. And Martin Joergensen's last couple posts give a pretty good idea how to go about it.
Based on my experience using Google's archives, it simply groups messages into 'threads' by subject line (thread title). Naturally, 'animation' has appeared several independent times over the years, and Google's search retrieval groups all of them together. I suppose it might appear concocted. A quick check of the message date should clear that confusion.
ps: I use newscene for posting, not google.
PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.