What's new

How to read mass? [fixed]

HaroldL

Alibre Super User
I have a simple assembly, consisting of native Alibre parts, that appears to not be correct. Before the 'update' only the weight of the center brace did not match the mass. Now it looks like all parts except the leg don't match. This is confusing. o_O

Mass - BOM.png
Mass -Shelf.png
Mass - Brace.png
Mass - Leg.png
Mass -Top.png
 

Alexander

Senior Member
Same problems here, mass way out.
I have imported a coupling design into an assembly, the coupling has 5 parts all with the correct materials. When you look at the summary BOM all looks ok but when you turn the summary of it ways 130kg, should only weigh 40grams.
 

sz0k30

Senior Member
I have a simple assembly, consisting of native Alibre parts, that appears to not be correct. Before the 'update' only the weight of the center brace did not match the mass. Now it looks like all parts except the leg don't match. This is confusing.

3 of your parts are in lbs & 1 part is in Kg?
 

HaroldL

Alibre Super User
3 of your parts are in lbs & 1 part is in Kg?
I thought I'd changed them all to lbs. But it is interesting that the one part in Kg is showing correctly in the BOM. All the lbs parts are wrong or at least not showing the lbs value and showing Kg instead. Is there a setting I'm missing somewhere?

Never mind... I forgot to set the assy to lbs. Doh...:oops:

So now how do you get the total of all weights in the BOM? Is there a Sum function for the table?
 
Last edited:
I just downloaded & installed "Version: V22 64-bit [Build 22051]" and find no improvement in Assembly Weight. An Assembly I have still reports an Assembly Weight of 415.956 lbs when the individual components add up to 386.336 lbs. ??? -- Lew
 

Max

Administrator
Staff member
We've identified a bug in some logic surrounding assemblies that contain imported components in certain units giving odd behavior in downstream queries of mass. A fix is incoming quickly. We have not seen any issues where there are no imported parts. We'll be releasing a 2nd SP in days not weeks to address this.

I just downloaded & installed "Version: V22 64-bit [Build 22051]" and find no improvement in Assembly Weight. An Assembly I have still reports an Assembly Weight of 415.956 lbs when the individual components add up to 386.336 lbs. ??? -- Lew

Lew - can you send me your assembly so I can verify our fix?
 

sz0k30

Senior Member
For what its worth, I'm the guy that started this post. All my parts and assemblies are native Alibre, no imported parts. I rechecked my original files that showed the incorrect weights and they all appear to be correct!
 

beastro

Senior Member
We've identified a bug in some logic surrounding assemblies that contain imported components in certain units giving odd behavior in downstream queries of mass. A fix is incoming quickly. We have not seen any issues where there are no imported parts. We'll be releasing a 2nd SP in days not weeks to address this.

I also noticed some discrepancies and attach one of the assemblies in question. While the BOM shows correct masses for all parts, the total mass given by ispect->physical properties returns a mass that is incorrect. Only if I supress three hexagonal nuts, do I get the correct mass.
I attach the files, if you want to check for yourself

Regards
 

Attachments

  • SecondaryHolder_V4.AD_BOM
    18 KB · Views: 3
  • SecondaryHolder_V4.AD_PKG
    1,005 KB · Views: 4

DavidJ

Alibre Super User
Staff member
Those 3 nuts have different model units, so we'd expect the forthcoming fix to resolve this. Here is the report from our current test build...
Clipboard01.jpg

Does that seem correct?
 

ROTTER

Member
We've identified a bug in some logic surrounding assemblies that contain imported components in certain units giving odd behavior in downstream queries of mass. A fix is incoming quickly. We have not seen any issues where there are no imported parts. We'll be releasing a 2nd SP in days not weeks to address this.



Lew - can you send me your assembly so I can verify our fix?
Max thanks you. After the last correction, it seems that the mass count is correct.
 
We've identified a bug in some logic surrounding assemblies that contain imported components in certain units giving odd behavior in downstream queries of mass. A fix is incoming quickly. We have not seen any issues where there are no imported parts. We'll be releasing a 2nd SP in days not weeks to address this.
Hi Max -- I just installed the "fix" and, testing it on 3 Assemblies, the "Mass/Weight" is consistently 20%-25% low as calculated. -- Lew
 

Max

Administrator
Staff member
Hi Max -- I just installed the "fix" and, testing it on 3 Assemblies, the "Mass/Weight" is consistently 20%-25% low as calculated. -- Lew

Hi Lew, this fix has apparently fixed the majority of issues on here. It is possible you have a separate issue. I would need your files to take a look.
 
Hi Lew, this fix has apparently fixed the majority of issues on here. It is possible you have a separate issue. I would need your files to take a look.
Hi Max -- One "set" was sent to you "a few days ago." Do you need more? -- Lew
 

simonb65

Alibre Super User
Are you sure you have build 22053?
Just noticed the update, but why is it still called 'SP1 update' (v22.0.1 [22051] was SP1) when the release version is actually v22.0.2 [22053], suggesting its actually SP2 !! Need to be a bit more consistent with numbering and naming as it is going to cause confusion with many users!
 

Max

Administrator
Staff member
Hi Max --
Date: Wednesday, November 18, 2020 1:04:55 PM
Alibre Design™ Expert
Version: V22 64-bit [Build 22053]
-- Lew

Lew,

For your 10 ft. version - your Excel has the NTM3004011 Rotor Shaft – Rev B part listed as 1.3404 but the physical properties is 1.3404 E1 and so the actual weight should be 13.404.

Changing this in the Excel gives a total weight, by manually summing each component in Excel, of 534.3038. Checking Physical Properties in the assembly gives 534.3 as well.

I think you had an oversight of the scientific notation on that one part during manual entry into Excel and then perhaps copied the data into other Excels, but the root cause is you’re off by a factor of 10 for the weight of the rotor shaft part in your Excel. It isn't a software issue - except that scientific notation is unnecessarily confusing and we plan on fixing that shortly.


Max
 

simonb65

Alibre Super User
It isn't a software issue - except that scientific notation is unnecessarily confusing and we plan on fixing that shortly.
If your changing this, could I suggest (if your not already) that it's an option as to what the display format is (and possible decimal places for non-scientific). I say this as non-scientific is easier to interpret, but scientific gives higher accuracy (by it's nature). So having the ability for the user to decide what they want to see is the best of all worlds.

Possibly a 'Format' selection and 'Number of decimal places' on the Physical Properties dialog which is saved between sessions would be truly magical! :)
 
Top