I've been using cadkey 2D for designing product, mold assemblies, and mold
inserts since 1996. Our largest mold frame is a t-series dme mold 15 X 18 ,
two cavity. I will be switching to a 3D software, which one I do not know.
that's why I'm looking and trying to get some questions answered.
1] what was it like to switch over to SW. The time frame, converting old
files that you already had over to SW.
2] how long before you seen that you were using part/assembly/drawing files
from SW in a reasonable amount of time.
3] how about revisions, i know with 2D it takes forever in a days age to do
revisions.
4] can you use variblies instead of actual dimensions in excel that will
control a given shape. example say i have a standard block with a length,
width, and height. i will use this block alot for certain products. the
length may change or the height. can i set the length to X and the height to
Y and than input any numbers to get what i want?
5] the most important question. the thought process in a mold design. i have
a product and place it in a blank mold frame and than place all my eject
pins, support pillars, springs, runner system, ect. i need to know if i can
still start out with creating an assembly to view to make sure that
everything is fine and than detail all components/inserts/mold frame later.
I know that SW works in a sketch world first, than create to final part. I'm
just not sure how?
I guess the most important thing to me is how to start a mold design,
because it seem difficult with SW. If you could add any input of how you
would go about doing this please let me know.
Thanks
I'll take a stab at this one. There is no real solid `cookbook' for how to
approach a mold design with SolidWorks. There are some examples in the
tutorial, but they are limited in scope . They also don't cover the thought
process that is involved in laying out your mold and deciding on sizes.
Rather than get more scattered, I'll continue following your numbers.
1) As I told you briefly at CADCHAT.com ,I found the switch from CK to be a
bit traumatic, but worth it. The fact that you sound like you have been
working in a solely 2-d environment will mean that most of your old files
will be nearly useless in SWX. SWX has what they call a 2-d to 3-d
conversion routine. I have not had any success with it. Perhaps if you find
a good VAR who can work with you on it, you may be able to convert some of
your library items.
2) I completed my first job in my first week. I would say that it was about
1_1-2 months before I was truly productive.
3) Revisions go really smoothely for me. This has been a process I have done
a lot of work on and I have a really solids-based way of approaching it.
This is based on having a good method and will take some time for you to
develop. Once you learn how to haqndle the 3-d side of it, the drawings do
indeed up-date automatically. It's really sweet.
4) I don't know much about this. I use what SWX calls design tables for some
of my library parts, but don't use them for mold bases. Perhaps somebody
else can comment about the ability to use variables. (I think you can.)
5) I have always started my mold designs from the inside out- even when I
was on the board. I place my part inside a block that will be either the
cavity or the core (usually start with the cavity.) That is where I do what
is called my `split' of the mold inserts. I also create core pins and slide
cores at this time. Once I have my split accomplished, I often will do some
preliminary sketches to see what my mold base size will be. I predict that
your thought process will need to evolve when going from the 2-d to the 3-d
world. As far as detailing later- you will LOVE this part. All of your
details are there, you just have to pull out each individual part and make
your views. I don't use automatic dimensioning, but I am still really fast.
Also when detailing I often find an error or something that could be done
better for the mold-maker. It is a simple matter to go back to the 3-d model
and make the required revisions. Your drawings will up-date automatically.
ALSO, there are some add-in and partner products that you may want to
consider. SWX sells what they call the SWX MoldBase. This contains libraries
of mold bases and components. I don't know much about it because they don't
include the mold base library that I use almost exclusively. (Hasco-inch) I
know they have DME, National and Hasco-metric. Some people use this with
success. A lot of people have taken the time to create their own mold base
libraries. What I use is a partner product called MoldWorks which works
inside of SWX. I like it and it has a much more extensive choice of catalogs
to use. What is nice about MoldWorks is that it really speeds up the mundane
chores such as adding fasteners, ejector pins and all other components. For
just fasteners, SWX sells their Toolbox add-in. If you were to buy what is
called SWX Professional, Toolbox is included. I don't use it.
There are also partner products available for aiding in the splitting of
core and cavities. SWX in 2004 has added mold tools to the core product. I
have not used these a lot yet. From what I have seen, they seem OK. Perhaps
immature right now, but will get more powerful, I'm sure. The same people
who market MoldWorks (R&B) also have a product which I use called
SplitWorks. It is very useful, and I am starting to use it more than I did
in the beginning. This uses a surfaces-based technique of identifying faces
which belong on the different halves of the mold. I am still learning how to
use this more productively. If you do a search of this newsgroup, you may
find some old posts of mine where I expressed some frustrations with this
way of working. I have overcome many of those problems. SplitWorks is a fine
product. I just did a really swoopy part with non-planar P/L's all the way
around. I had really good success with it and my customer was thrilled with
the result.
Another product is called FaceWorks. This is also a core/cavity splitting
utility based on surfaces. I have not used it.
My main gripe about people selling software for mold design is that some of
them sound like they have an automatic process. I am very sorry to report
that there is not an automatic mold design button or icon.
In all fairness, I must also urge you to consider other CAD systems. I know
of some people using Unigraphics for mold design. I don't know of anybody
using SolidEdge. One guy in the area uses VX Vision. I have seen a demo of
this and it is really powerful for splitting cores and cavities- also does a
good job of incorporating part revisions from your customer and up-dating
the inserts. The demo-jock I had didn't do a good job at showing off it's
drafting module, so I am not so sure about that. I also was not impressed
with the standard component libraries available for it. This is all part of
the big picture and must be considered. It is also more expensive than SWX
and uses a much more surfaces-oriented way of working. This can be very
powerful, but a bit intimidating if you have never worked with surfaces
before. My preference is for using solids-based methods whenever possible
because they are easier. There are some people who have been using
surfaces-based CAD systems since before solids were widely used, and they
are really good at it. I am not. They seem to look down their noses at us
`puny earthlings' that don't have the same experience with this way of
working. I suppose that is why there are different kinds of software to
serve the different sorts of needs and abilities.
I am sorry to be so long-winded in my reply. (I have been waiting for a
revised model to show up so I can complete/change my current job. It just
arrived so I may not be checking back here for a while.)
Good Luck to you.
jk
Sparky,
When you do begin this try NOT to use the cavity feature that SW has
with complex parts. I did a mold design using the cavity feature and it
absolulty killed SW & my computer. Changing a feature would cause a
35-45 minute rebuild. I went back and redid the features that I cavitied
out to use in context sketches and it made a huge difference in rebuild
times.
sparky100 wrote:
You probably had some "MAJOR" circular referances. I've been using the
cavity feature to design molds since it was introduced (SW96). In fact,
without the cavity feature SW is usless for mold design IMO. That's what
it's for, works real good to.
Regards
Mark
Yes, I'd be willing to bet Mark is right. Of all the different types of
users, mold and forming die designers seem to be the most susceptible to
this because of all the necessary incontext references. Finding circular
references can be tricky. The way I do it is to go through each in context
part and list out the references. I make a grid with a column for each
part and a row for each part. Part A references Parts B and C. If Parts B
or C ever reference back to A, you've got a circular reference. The
problem is that its not always that simple, there could be 4 or 5 parts in
the loop. Depending on the assembly, this analysis sometimes takes an hour
or more. Chances are if you've got the problem, your incontext references
are a bit out of control, and it might take a long time, but 45 minute
rebuilds that should be 15 seconds is a big deal.
I've submitted an enhancement for SW to graphically list out the in context
references in an assembly to help troubleshoot this kind of thing, but I
don't expect much to come of it. Might be a good API project some rainy
day.
matt.
You probably had some "MAJOR" circular referances. I've been using the
cavity feature to design molds since it was introduced (SW96). In fact,
without the cavity feature SW is usless for mold design IMO. That's what
it's for, works real good to.
Regards
Mark
JK's feedback was good, but I'll throw in a little from a different
perspective.
Switching from 2D to 3D is usually traumatic, no matter which package you
wind up using. It seems the longer you've used 2D, the more you have to
"unlearn". It's a completely different way of designing. Forget about
drawing lines and arcs and views, and start building parts from features.
That was the biggest hurdle for me.
You can start making simple parts efficiently in a week if you get
someone to help you with some modeling best practices. Sometimes you can
get this info in a class, and sometimes not.
Done correctly, revisions can be very easy. Or they can be frustrating.
That depends mainly on your modeling skill, whether you have created the
model in a way that is easy to change or not.
You can use "design tables" in Excel to drive part dimensions, as well as
other stuff. These are very easy to use and set up. You can also write
equations in SW to drive dimensions.
As far as the thought process for mold design, I would recommend you take
a look at MoldWorks. MW builds the mold for you based on your input, and
gives you the option to change things - move, add, remove standard or
custom parts. JK said correctly that it doesn't "automatically" design
your mold or even the inserts, there will always be decisions that a real
live designer who knows which end of a mold to squirt plastic into will
need to make. MoldWorks and SplitWorks, help automate some of the dull
repetitive tasks in splitting cav/core and building a mold. You will
need to understand some surfacing to make this work well, but you will
not spend your time designing pins and plates with holes in them each
time you need a new or custom mold base.
MoldWorks will even check that water lines don't run into pillars and
make 2D drawings of all your plates for you.
matt.
snipped-for-privacy@innovativemicroplate.com (sparky100) wrote in
snipped-for-privacy@innovativemicroplate.com (sparky100) wrote in message
I did the same thing you are contemplating 3 years ago. Very glad I
did. Because I had a good grounding in 2D, and had played with
various 3D CAD applications, I had a heads up on extruding, cutting &
revolving 2D shapes which is the basis for most solids work.
I'll recommend several things:
1. Do NOT attempt to learn Solidworks on standard work hours. Study
the tutorials with Solidworks at home (even on a Laptop: the single
license allows you to install at work and at home). Try the basic
standard simple part examples they show, step by step until you are
comfortable with that 50-100 page Tutorial booklet. It covers the
basics including making a scaled up (for shrink) cavity set from a
part solid.
2. If you feel you need further training after the tutorial, then get
it from your Solidworks dealer, but that training will go much faster
if you have the tutorial's basics down pat, and you can then ask more
profound questions of the teacher. I found the tutorial relatively
easy to do in a few days on my own.
3. Organizational issues of running Solidworks in a multi-user office
needs some thought on how to control drawings, etc. PDM works in the
SWKs Office Pro may be worthwhile eventually.
4. Learn how to build up assemblies correctly using sub-assemblies
with proper mates & configurations in both parts & assemblies. It
makes doing changes and fixes easier and allows faster rebuilds &
screen redraws in complex situations to keep your work speed up.
5. Do learn all the basics and construct a mold on your own, even if
it is just a little 5x8 DME base for practice before you look at the
various add-on "Mold Works" type packages. Various users have had
both good and bad to say about the packages. I don't use one of those
packages, as I don't do that many molds.
6. Give yourself time to learn, before you give in and promise to
meet deadlines! With 2D, it tooks me 6 months to get reasonably
fast, and similarly, it took me 6 months to get up to speed in 3D on
SolidWorks. I produced my first simple molded parts inside of a week,
and my first complex plastic part in a month, but it was laborious as
I learned a lot of things the hard way.
7. Come back to this group and ask lots of questions once you have
done the tutorial work.
Good Luck - Bo
Bo
i'm still trying to under stand the design intent of creating a mold
assembly. wear would i place a blank mold from Mold Works , say 12 X 10 six
plate stripper mold in a part file or an assembly file. i will most likely
would create each mold plate to get use to SW. from there do i create all my
components on part files than place them into assembly or can i create all
my components in the assembly with the blank mold frame.i like to see if
ineed to move or resize the components to make it fix, form, and function.
if you do not mind that you e-mail me your e-mail address if i have anymore
questions. my e-mail is snipped-for-privacy@innovativemicroplate.com
thanks scott
Scott
I found the problem with Mold Works is where the initial Assembly mates are.
One thing you might consider is redefining the mates using the parting line
as the initial mate.
Another thimg to consider is to replace the screws with you own library to
save on space. Make sure your screws and other common components are set to
read only.
Make an Assemlby file for all of the components. and a part file for each
plate. and cavity component.
Kevin
There are many ways to do a mold layout in the planning stage.
The "blank mold" from Mold Works or other sources is a SolidWorks
Assembly File, where the individual part files are also supplied.
Typically, you will design the cavity differently depending on whether
the cavity is embedded directly in a cavity plate or in/on an insert.
Then the cavity inserts would be placed in the mold assembly drawing
and located with reference to the parting line and the center of the
mold.
It is often desirable to do layouts of the cavity inserts/parts before
"cutting" holes in the cavity plates, so you can move them around and
get your positioning right for details like slides and cooling lines
approximately right before modifying the cavity plates with insert
holes.
If we reply to each other here, then other people get the benefit of
the questions and answers. Makes the forum really worthwhile.
John Kreutzberger is a full time mold designer who replies here on the
forum, and he has a boatload more experience than I do. I do more
part designs than molds. I still need to mock up a preliminary mold
design, even if I send it out to a toolmaker who will do the design,
as I need to confirm basic sizes, functions, and fit with various
molding machines.
John has had experience dealing with the various mold & cavity add-on
software for SolidWorks which you might find useful which I have not
used.
Bo
What I usually do is create a sub-assembly of all of the molding inserts ;
slides, etc. If I am shooting for a specific mold base size, I will make
some sketches in this sub-assy to make sure it will fit. (these sketches can
be hidden later.)
Then, I'll create my mold base. (I agree with the guy who said to do this
with SWX alone before getting involved with any add-in products.) If you
want to show all fasteners and leader pins, bushings, etc.- you will have to
learn how to do a derived feature pattern- piece of cake after the first
couple. Anyway, when you have your mold base created, then add your sub-assy
to that assembly and create your pockets.
Finally, you are then ready to add your ejector pins and insert mounting
bolts,supports,etc.
Have fun,
jk
John Kreutzberger
How long have you been using SW and does it meet your requirements for mold
design. Have you looked at other software. What kind of products/molds do
you design. I have started working with SW for about a month now and it
seems to get a little easier each time. See you design molds you know shrink
factor comes into play with designing molds. Say I have a product in a Part
File, how do i add shrink to it without effecting the product itself.
After applying the shrinkage factor (always from the origin-never from the
centroid!) , I then save it with a slightly different file name. That leaves
the original part intact.
Some people do this a little differently, though and I am considering making
a change in my process. What they do is open a new part file and insert the
molded part as a base part. Then they apply the shrinkage factor and proceed
with their split. This alos leaves the original part file intact. The
advantage to this method is that any changes made to the base part will be
reflected in the part referenced in the core/cavity split. This would work
well in a situation where the part is being designed in-house. As a
consultant who doesn't do very many part designs, it's questionable whether
I will see a big advantage to this second method, but I am always interested
in finding better ways to do my job.
In that light, I do occasionally look at other software packages. In my
original post to you, I mention one that I considered and why I chose not to
investigate it any further. Being a 1-man operation, it is difficult to
justify a lot of jumping around between software platforms. The learning
curve and expense would be prohibitive. I have no second thoughts about my
move from Cadkey to SolidWorks (11/98), but I realize there are people
having good success with other software.
jk
how
&
Study
get
faster
more
office
the
if
those
week,
as
Another way is to create a config in your part file. Add your shrink to the part
in that config.
For me, this eliminates having multiple copies of parts to keep track of.
I leave the "Default" config as is, and add a config called "Scaled .012 - IN".
MT
On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 09:52:54 -0800, "John Kreutzberger"
John told me some time back that he had used SolidWorks since the late
90s. He is a contract mold designer and does all types of parts as I
understand it.
Myself, I do the application of shrink factors in the cavity cutting
process (in that dialog box). This way any change to the part is
instantly reflected in the cavity & its related parts & assemblies
which are derived from those cavity parts.
One of the key items for me is to set the center of the sprue on the
intersection of 2 primary planes (XY, & XZ) and the Parting Line on
the 3rd Primary Plane (YZ). I then design inserts or cavities so they
"start" on the YZ plane, so it is very easy to keep mates assigned to
the right places for minimum hassle, when I later change a
plate/insert thickness or such. Mates to planes result in fewer
errors in my estimation, than when you mate to plate surfaces which
sometimes get botched, with editing.
Configurations used in both parts and assemblies, helps minimize the
numbers of files and what amounts to a flow chart to keep all the
variations straight in my mind. A configuration which just shows what
you need to work on minimizes horsepower to revolve, etc.
There are lots of techniques for working with larger assemblies which
I've seen written here in the user group and you can search the past
postings for suggestions on those.
Bo
It's more predictable. Also, when inserting a revised model into my split,
it is handy to mate the planes from the new model with the planes from the
old one. This always works when shrink is from origin. It could cause
problems if the shrink was done from a centroid because this centroid could
have shifted slightly due to the revisions that will need to be
incorporated.
You know, one of the reasons I haven't responded much to general mold design
threads like this in the past is that people all have their own way of
thinking and doing things. There is no general procedure for mold design
with SWX, so we have all had to devise our own. Mine works for me, but is
constantly evolving.
YMMV.
jk
All of my plastic parts are designed with flat parting lines. Hence,
I set the parting line of my parts, specifically on one of the primary
planes when I first design my part. That way, the part, the
cavities/inserts, and the mold all have the parting line set on a
primary plane and it makes mates much more secure. I know they are
right.
Bo
Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.