I am trying to apply constraints to a countersunk screw.
1- I apply “contact” to the conic surface of the head of the screw and the conic surface of the hole.
Afterwards I wanted to apply “coincidence” to the axis of the screw and the axis of the hole. But I am getting that they are redundant.
2- I don`t know if the right solution can be to apply
- “contact” (like in 1) and “angle” constraint to the planes of the screw, with the planes of the part where the holes are.
- “coincidendce” (like in 1) and “angle” constraint to the planes of the screw, with the planes of the part where the holes are.
Thanks a lot
Hi friend good morning!!
I dont know if you mean to this, as you can see in the picture below:
Answered with a tutorial: https://grabcad.com/tutorials/catia-counter-sunk-screw-constraint--1
Hi there Hugo,
But there are still 2 degrees of freedom.
- Linear translation in axis direction
- Rotation around axis
Don't we need more constraints?
- Rotation can I constraint using "angle constraint" between defence plane of screw and reference plane of washer.
- But Translation?
Your welcome my friend!!!
First of all, my friend what do you need to assembly, if you have a picture, please let me know!! because I don't know what you need to assembly, I reccommended you be more specific.Please send us a picture about your issue!!
Hi! I have it :)
Thank you Hugo :)
From your explanation i understood that the help you need is not in Catia.
You like to know what constraints are best suited for bodies with countersink.
Let me tell you this before hand, There is no such thing as right solution.
Any of the below 3 Cases are correct. The more the freedom you want between parts, the more constraints you need to provide.
1. Coincidence - Screw Axis with respect to Hole Axis.
2. Offset - Screw Surface/Plane with respect to part containing Hole feature.
Case 2 :
1. Contact - Screw Countersink face to Hole Countersink face.
Use 'Manipulation' to place where exactly you need the screw.
1. Then use Fix constraint.
so called "optimised solution" depends on the project you are working on and the location of the mating parts.
Hope this is the explination you are searching.
Your are the man!
Your answer is exactly what I was looking for Cheers
I agree with Bhanu Chinni.
Usually, case 2 is sufficient, if you want the conical part of the countersunk screw to be in contact with the surface of the countersunk hole.
Else, if the two surfaces should not be in contact or if the angles of the countersunk hole and screw are different, use coincidence, offset and angle.
Hi friend!! Could you send us a picture about your issue!! This is to much for all of us, I can give you a solution!!!
Answered with a tutorial: https://grabcad.com/tutorials/catia-counter-sunk-screw-constraint
If my comments dont fix your issue, please let me know to help you as soon as possible.
Have a good day,
I had worked two years using CATIA. I faced many problems like you and was not able to meet the project deadlines. After a while I switched to SOLIDWORKS and now my life has become so much easier and productive...Try to switch asap...
Catia is much better than solidworks. Just you need to analytical thinking and you must be really carefull with Catia. It's more Professional.