Assembly4: best practice

[Brutha]

Hi All,

I had tried previously to get my head round Assembly4 but for some reason I just couldn't get the concepts, and I didn't really like the idea of having to create many files for quite simple assemblies.

However, tried again this morning, and this time I understood it! In fact it's quite simple, and there is no need for multiple files in the case of most things I would design. So, many thanks for the development of this!

One question though: is there any reason to avoid using LCS links e.g. for performance etc? For example, in my little test file, I could have put the telescope and the lens into one overall telescope part and just positioned the lens manually - but it's easier just to use an LCS link!

Any thoughts?

Cheers

Brutha

Screenshot 2022-03-06 at 10.45.36.png (473.39 KiB) Viewed 966 times

EDITED to change from the word "constraint" to "link"!

[ppemawm]

One question though: is there any reason to avoid using LCS links - but it's easier just to use an LCS link!

I cannot think of any reason not to and agree wholeheartedly that it is more intuitive and easier.

When designing original assemblies from scratch create and assemble the body using the default LCS provided by the Assembly4 body before creating any features. In this manner you can then model in context where the body is located in the assembly or you can model in the body at the global origin. Proceed in the same sequence as you would assemble the hardware on the bench in the shop.

If you have a body that has multiple attachment points then add LCS's as you model the features. I usually attach the interface or attachment LCS to the sketch that creates the feature for a more robust model.

[Brutha]

Ok, thanks for the info, will keep those in mind!