Has anyone run into thus issue? You have completed a model it is working fine no interference then come back to it after a few months and now it is full of inferences? The models were created and step out with the previous Alibre version and the step and Alibre files were read in using the current version.
Interferences
- Thread starter fitzbond
- Start date
I might have recently had the same problem with two different files. So far as I can remember neither assembly had constraint issues when I last touched them a few months ago, but both had several "red" or italicized constraints when they were opened within the past week. One of them seems to have mostly fixed itself on it's own. The other was too extensively modified to tell.
Mike
Mike
RCH_Projects
Alibre Super User
Just MHO.
As an assembly is re-constructed from scratch each time it is opened. There seems to be a small margin where a reconstruction occurs with initial placement and realignment of parts ever so slightly different from the last save.
On a prior release where I use Excel macros (VB) to move alignments I went crazy having to use a "jiggle" subroutine to clear invalid constraint errors that popped up and as quickly disappeared usually after 3 clicks of "Regenerate assembly (F5)".
As I recall Alibre adjusted "something" in a maintenance release and the problem practically disappeared. I "assume" adjustments on some factors might cause a prone condition to some other problem so I don't know how or where a tradeoff occurs. I also "suppose" new releases (and some processes come from and updated by another Vendor) might vary slightly in sensitivity.
So maybe try the regenerate 3 or 4 times.
Maybe try to "drag" some part(s) even if stationary but not anchored.
Just my two cents worth. Good luck.
Edit --- (All of this assumes none of the files involved has suffered corruption from a hard drive/hardware or OS failure along the way - detected or not).
As an assembly is re-constructed from scratch each time it is opened. There seems to be a small margin where a reconstruction occurs with initial placement and realignment of parts ever so slightly different from the last save.
On a prior release where I use Excel macros (VB) to move alignments I went crazy having to use a "jiggle" subroutine to clear invalid constraint errors that popped up and as quickly disappeared usually after 3 clicks of "Regenerate assembly (F5)".
As I recall Alibre adjusted "something" in a maintenance release and the problem practically disappeared. I "assume" adjustments on some factors might cause a prone condition to some other problem so I don't know how or where a tradeoff occurs. I also "suppose" new releases (and some processes come from and updated by another Vendor) might vary slightly in sensitivity.
So maybe try the regenerate 3 or 4 times.
Maybe try to "drag" some part(s) even if stationary but not anchored.
Just my two cents worth. Good luck.
Edit --- (All of this assumes none of the files involved has suffered corruption from a hard drive/hardware or OS failure along the way - detected or not).
Sorry to say the refresh does not work I have noticed that the assembly when I pull it up refreshes about five times before it allows me to access it. It must sometime to do with the latest version because when I work with constraints in Alibre once I get a part where I want it I remove the constraints and anchor it down because the constraints are so flaky do don't know how they are to behave from day to day. In order for me to import this assembly into an FEA tool to create a report there has to be no interference so few month ago the model was fine and now it is not even the emailed step file that was use to create the report shows the same issues and well as the backup copy so this is a new version issue.
Lew_Merrick
Guest
1) Let me state clearly that I have had no issues with constraints or interferences once an assembly is properly assembled. I have serious thousands of Alibre or Geomagic installations, assemblies, & subassemblies reaching back eight years that get opened and walked through on (at least) a half-yearly basis. I have a couple of installations that may take more than 30 minutes to resolve out once loaded. But then (A) I have 64 GB of RAM and (B) a 32 GB SSD swap drive.
2) STEP (ISO-10303) today has no mechanism for conveying part relationships in an exchanged file! This ability was removed sometime between 1994 & 2000 (as part of what I noted in another post today). All parts in a STEP assembly are merely located in space and may be moved at will (consciously or unconsciously).
3) Those areas where I have seen such problems in the past all related to over-constrained parts or subassemblies. It is very easy (especially in SolidWorks) to have some tertiary & unneeded constraint (such as fixing rotation of a screw or bolt type part) much later in the assembly process.
This is a summation of my experience on the subject...
2) STEP (ISO-10303) today has no mechanism for conveying part relationships in an exchanged file! This ability was removed sometime between 1994 & 2000 (as part of what I noted in another post today). All parts in a STEP assembly are merely located in space and may be moved at will (consciously or unconsciously).
3) Those areas where I have seen such problems in the past all related to over-constrained parts or subassemblies. It is very easy (especially in SolidWorks) to have some tertiary & unneeded constraint (such as fixing rotation of a screw or bolt type part) much later in the assembly process.
This is a summation of my experience on the subject...
RCH_Projects
Alibre Super User
What Lew says, plus
Are the interferences a very small volume?
Any consistent observations about their positions?
Are any actual dimensions changed?
I use Dynamic motion. Therefore I suppress (but never remove) redundant constraints before transfer to motion. In fact I have a configuration with all constraints applied and a configuration with them suppressed. You could anchor them in the second configuration. But you have to study configurations if you even have that option in your version. The only better solution will be when I have time to learn WizoScript to suppress or unsuppress constraints tagged with "suppress" in the name (Andy?). Restore constraints appears the only resolution.
Different users here use different approaches to defend against software update/loss. Sometimes it actually works. If I were quoted for my most profound professional, (heh,) thought - it would probably be "I was this close...".
I'm afraid I'm a zagger (when everyone else is zigging) so best wishes.
As Lew explains - with these "Standards" organizations the tail is wagging the dog so everyone gets burned. It could even be a case of Geomagic doing something right now that it was doing wrong.
Are the interferences a very small volume?
Any consistent observations about their positions?
Are any actual dimensions changed?
I use Dynamic motion. Therefore I suppress (but never remove) redundant constraints before transfer to motion. In fact I have a configuration with all constraints applied and a configuration with them suppressed. You could anchor them in the second configuration. But you have to study configurations if you even have that option in your version. The only better solution will be when I have time to learn WizoScript to suppress or unsuppress constraints tagged with "suppress" in the name (Andy?). Restore constraints appears the only resolution.
Different users here use different approaches to defend against software update/loss. Sometimes it actually works. If I were quoted for my most profound professional, (heh,) thought - it would probably be "I was this close...".
I'm afraid I'm a zagger (when everyone else is zigging) so best wishes.
As Lew explains - with these "Standards" organizations the tail is wagging the dog so everyone gets burned. It could even be a case of Geomagic doing something right now that it was doing wrong.
I should have said the Alibre step file so all of the anchor were intact but now it shows interference. I have stated to troubleshoot at it seems for some reason all of the parts shifted about .125. The assembly is big with only about 200 or so parts hopefully it wont take too long to correct.