Louis M
|
| posted on 14/4/04 at 02:16 AM |
|
|
Chassis 3D Programs
What are some good 3D programs that you can use to make your chassis?
|
|
|
|
|
mainlandboy
|
| posted on 14/4/04 at 03:06 AM |
|
|
I used Pro Engineer, and Rhino 3D to render it. Here are the results
|
|
|
e020518
|
| posted on 14/4/04 at 06:41 AM |
|
|
Any experience?
My recommendation is to use something you have come in contact with. Even if you may have a "head" for 3D it could be difficult to start
with say ProE, even though it is a fantastic tool. If you have to possibility you could get ACAD since there are so many files "out there"
that you can download and play with. Personally I think that Solid Works is good enough for anything I want to design (and it includes redering,
mapping and animation modules).
Br / J
|
|
|
Bob C
|
| posted on 14/4/04 at 09:15 PM |
|
|
I've played with autocad2000 and solidworks. At work we use ProEng.
Use solidworks - you'll be productive straightaway AND it does animated mechanisms (suspension links and gears). I have confidence that my
brakes will fit together and my IRS will not clash anywhere thanks to solidworks.
ProE does more but you'll need a fortnight training course to use it.... AutoCAD is between on ease of use but doesn't do mechanisms.
Cheers
Bob C
|
|
|
NS Dev
|
| posted on 14/4/04 at 11:06 PM |
|
|
Solidworks!!!!!
|
|
|
Louis M
|
| posted on 15/4/04 at 12:08 AM |
|
|
but solidworks is about 800 bucks... so what can i get for free 
|
|
|
turbo time
|
| posted on 15/4/04 at 12:56 AM |
|
|
I'm working with autodesk inventor professional 7 so when it's done I can run all sorts of stress and vibration analysis on the chassis. I
haven't quite got the program figured out yet though, hopefully learning how to use it will pay off.
|
|
|
Alan B
|
| posted on 15/4/04 at 02:19 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Louis M
but solidworks is about 800 bucks... so what can i get for free
$800..??????
Where from?......I thought it was more like 4 to 5 grand.....
|
|
|
Alan B
|
| posted on 15/4/04 at 02:29 AM |
|
|
Guys, as part of work changes I'm having to learn Solidworks (I'm used to Mech. Desktop)....there is a lot I like, but a few things
I'm struggling with...
You know how you get used to being able to do something in one system and then get frustrated because you don't how to do it in another...well
my question (sorry for the thread hijack... )
In Mech desktop I can move an exsiting part in an assembly to line up with another and then put holes in the other part by picking the hole centers on
the mating part as hole centres on the new part, thereby ensuring alignment....don't know how to or if I can do this with SW...if not I'll
be very distraught (but I'll get over it.. )
|
|
|
Bob C
|
| posted on 15/4/04 at 11:48 AM |
|
|
Al - as far as I know, you have to modify parts in their own window & then rebuild the assembly - but I'm an amatuer user so I probably
don't know that half of it...
Yes the pukka software is expensive but i have heard that "cracked" copies can be found on the web... I'm sure you'll know
someone who's into that kind of stuff that could source something for evaluation purposes!
Bob C
PS if Iwere a software producer I'd actually welcome amateur ripoff users so they'd insist on using my software (at full price) at work. I
reckon if this weren't their policy they'd make the copy protection a LOT tougher.
|
|
|
TheGecko
|
| posted on 15/4/04 at 02:39 PM |
|
|
I have done some renders of my chassis designs using nothing more than a spreadsheet to organise the node and tube data and the freeware POVray
ray-trace package. Here's a rough example:
Dominic
 
Rescued attachment Chassis2_partial.jpg
|
|
|
e020518
|
| posted on 16/4/04 at 06:35 AM |
|
|
Alan B hijack...
Well, I don't know if its alright to hijack threads but here is one of my approaches to SW. I sometimes generate complicated structures where
features are dependant by using a base part (general shape) and then use that base part as a "template" for further parts by inserting
them as a part in another part document. Therby I can have parametric control over multiple parts at the same time (without using
"formulas" or spread sheets that generate drawing modifications. I know that the manual is discouraging these methods but I find them so
usefull that I can't stop.
I don't know if this makes sense or if it helps but you will find the function under insert in a part document.
Sorry for encouraging thread hi-jacks, br / Jon
|
|
|
blueshift
|
| posted on 16/4/04 at 11:06 AM |
|
|
Cracked versions of Solidworks are easily found on p2p networks such as eDonkey.
so I've heard.
|
|
|
GO
|
| posted on 16/4/04 at 11:22 AM |
|
|
I heard that somewhere too... 
|
|
|
flak monkey
|
| posted on 17/4/04 at 02:54 PM |
|
|
I drew mine on Pro Desktop/Pro Engineer. Its easy when you get the hang of it. There are several pics in my archive of ProD drawings....
http://www.locostbuilders.co.uk/photos.php?action=showphoto&photo=3d%20Chassis%20Dedion%20Graphics.jpg
Cheers
David
Sera
http://www.motosera.com
|
|
|
Matthew_1
|
| posted on 17/4/04 at 06:37 PM |
|
|
I did all my work in Autodesk Inventor and SusProg3D. What started out as wanting a slightly longer chassis as I'm quite tall, ended up being a
basic suspension redesign which now has full anti-dive/anti-squat, inboard rear brakes and inboard front suspension. It all got a bit silly really,
but I started off with SusProg, which is excellent once you get used to it (and cheap at the moment with £/$) and ported the results to Inventor -
which I found really good for prototyping.
Took a long time to get it right, but I found it really satisfying seeing a computer model turned into a real object.
Have put a pic in my photo archive, hope to get more front suspension pics up if I can blag a digi-cam for a bit.
Cheers
|
|
|
NS Dev
|
| posted on 19/4/04 at 06:37 PM |
|
|
Although I use solidworks (and autocad, both very badly I must add!!) and I have also "heard" about strangely cheap copies....ahem.....I
designed my various cars on a piece of paper with a biro and a calculator!! If it "looks" right it usually works!! (I know this
isn't really the right approach but it is quick!!)
my most recent build project was my autograss car (for dirt track which is why it looks a mess!!) there are a couple of photo's in my archive
now (just taken a few!!)
|
|
|
Alan B
|
| posted on 19/4/04 at 07:36 PM |
|
|
Just looked at your grasser...nice..
What engine is it?
|
|
|
NS Dev
|
| posted on 19/4/04 at 07:39 PM |
|
|
It's the GM (Opel/Vauxhall) 2.0 XE 16v engine, from an astra GTE (well, actually a Cavalier GSI 16v in this case but the same engine) It's
on 48mm throttle bodies and makes about 200 hp.
|
|
|
imull
|
| posted on 26/4/04 at 10:35 AM |
|
|
for those of you who know a student, SDCR-Ideas is now offering the full Version10 to students for £20
I have been using this for my roll-cage design dissertation and it is very good. (cant stand autocad). I think that you can animate it but have never
had need to so couldnt tell you how. You can run FEA solutions etc with it.
There is also a program on the interent called Grape (free to download afaik). I have never used it but those who do seem to like it. Not sure if its
a design or analysis package though...
hope this helps
|
|
|
jbmcsorley
|
| posted on 26/4/04 at 05:39 PM |
|
|
Solidworks assembly sketching
Hi Alan,
If I understand your highjacking question correctly, you want to edit a part while in the Solidworks assembly. If the hole in one part is to be
defined or constrained by the hole in an existing part, then here is what I would do...
Create the second part with a hole that is described by an under-defined sketch (arbitrary dimensions). Bring the two parts together in your
assembly. Edit the second part while in the assembly, and assign constraints to the sketch that reference the first part.
In short, you're defining the sketch by referencing other parts in the assembly only after the feature already exists.
Creating the feature in the assmembly is a bad idea because the sketch and the feature will only exist in that assembly. With my suggested approach,
the feature will exist in the stand-alone part, but it's geometry will be defined by the assembly, which is what I think you're shooting
for.
S/W calls it an "external reference" and you'll notice on the object tree (object browser) that the feature has a
"->" symbol next to it.
Cheers,
-Jim M.
|
|
|
Alan B
|
| posted on 26/4/04 at 07:35 PM |
|
|
Hey Jim, how's going?
I tried to reply to the last personal e-mail you sent me, but it bounced back.
U2U me with your e-mail address
Thanks for the tips on SW..
|
|
|
Jo C
|
| posted on 28/4/04 at 01:42 PM |
|
|
For engineering/Design i do prefer Catia V5 or perhaps UG.
For the syling and surface design i prefer Alias. Or Rhino as a locost alterantiv.
Catia, UG and Alias are cad softvare that are extremley expensive. So hardly for the locost builder.
there are some test versions of Rhino that are avaliable for downloade, somewere.....
Well, that what i prefer.
/Johan
|
|
|
