cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Community Tip - You can subscribe to a forum, label or individual post and receive email notifications when someone posts a new topic or reply. Learn more! X

Subassemblies simulation features not visible at upper level

tleati
10-Marble

Subassemblies simulation features not visible at upper level

Hello,

 

I am trying to simulate an assembly (composed by subassemblies), but I don't see, at the upper level, the simulation entities which were defined in its subassemblies (rigid links, points...ie simulation features).

 

It seems it doesn't even recognize them, as the icon of the sim features is not even visible at upper level.

 

I enclose (and attach) a video to try to make it clearer:

 

 

If it may make a difference, the asm is structured with simp reps both at subasm level and at master level.

 

Anyone has experienced this issue? how could I solve this?

 

thanks

1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION

Accepted Solutions

Two simplified Reps, exactly the same parts excluded and included as master, but defined two different ways.

Derived = use Def: (abbreviation for default)

 

THIS REP WILL PROMOTE SIMULATION ENTITIES UPWARD

.Simplified Rep Definition.JPG

 

THIS REP WILL NOT PROMOTE SIMULATION ENTITIES UPWARD


Simplified Rep Definition way 2.JPG

View solution in original post

6 REPLIES 6

I don't know if this is something new in the functionality because I don't remember having this issue but I was able to re-create it.  I found that the DEF: EXCLUDE was the problem (in the sub-assembly REP) and changing to DEF: MASTER REP corrected the issue.  This way can be a little tedious if you have many excluded items but you can multi-select and right click to change the state.  This behavior is good to know because it is a way to control the propagation up to an assembly.

Hi SweetPeaHub,

 

thanks for your reply.

I don't exactly get what are you meaning with changing to master rep and how could I do it. If I got well, should I remove the simp rep for the subasm and work just with the master rep?

My intention at the beginning was to define simulation features and entities on each subasm (defined inside its own FEM rep), and then work at the master level with almost just constraints and loads to define.

 

 

Two simplified Reps, exactly the same parts excluded and included as master, but defined two different ways.

Derived = use Def: (abbreviation for default)

 

THIS REP WILL PROMOTE SIMULATION ENTITIES UPWARD

.Simplified Rep Definition.JPG

 

THIS REP WILL NOT PROMOTE SIMULATION ENTITIES UPWARD


Simplified Rep Definition way 2.JPG

Hi SweetPeaHub,

 

Ok, I got what you mean!

thanks a lot for your tip, it solved my problem and you made my afternoon Smiley Happy!

didn't know about this big difference the default is making...

 

thanks again and have a nice day!

I did not know this either and I am glad your question came up!

I am pleased to help your day go well also! Smiley Happy

 

Smiley Happy thanks.

yes..in the community one learns many things Smiley Very Happy

Top Tags