Structural Member Custom Shape, Records and PIO

[bjoerka]

I am trying to get the following done.

I often have to construct sub-structures for i.e. led modules. Mostly i use profiles from a company called ITEM.

For a long time i always used simple extrudes, but i want more .-)

So the idea is to draw these profiles with the structural member tool using custom shapes.

Simple works.

But each different profile has a different weight. Ah- no problem i thought. Created a record format, attached the 2d symbols - ready set go.

No.

After drawing the structural members, the record information attached to the 2d symbols is lost.

Then i attached the record to a new and fresh structural member, worksheet opened - ready set go - works-

Cool, i´ll make a PIO of that and then i have a library of my profiles with weight and naming attached .-)

PIO generated in the OIP and record still attached and the result in my worksheet.

BUT - when i use the structural member tool and choose my plugin-style and draw a new element, the record information is lost.

The plug-in object that is now in the recource browser - there is no option to attach a record information...

 

What the hell am i doing wrong?

 

Any help is appreciated...

 

these are some of the profiles. i use simplified versions of course.-)

 

 

the screenshot show what i described above. the 3rd one ist the one that was drawn with the structural member tool.

the second one a copy of the first after the PIO was defined in the OIP

 

Edited December 11, 2023 by bjoerka

[bjoerka]

hm. no reaction from anybody.

seems i sting a bee's nest and everybody runs away *LOL*

[Pat Stanford]

Completely untested, but I think you are going to have to create a Material for each different profile that contains the weight per length (Density).

 

When the Structural Member tool uses a Symbol or PIO as the shape, it does not actually use that object. It just looks inside it for the shape and extracts the geometry. So any record attached to the Symbol/PIO still exists, but it is locked up inside the object and unused.

 

You might be able to write a script that would extract the record data from the object (probably stored in the Profile Group but possibly in the Aux list) and then put the same data on the Structural Member object. But it will not be a "live" connection and if the data changed (or even the profile) you would have to remember to run the script again to update it.

[bjoerka]

Thank you Pat for explaining.

I think i am not able to write a script .-) I stopped scripting 40 years ago in highschool using Pascal .-)

For my actual project i just used the smt as is is and attached records after i have drawn my construction.

Even without the functionality i was hoping for, a great tool!

[Pat Stanford]

I think going forward, the Material idea is probably the best.  For a dozen or so sizes having separate materials would not be horrible. And you could make different Structural Member Styles that have the correct materials assigned so using it would be automatic.

 

If you are doing this often take a look and see if it makes sense for you or not.

[Pat Stanford]

If you profiles were less complicated you could probably get away with a single material of the proper density.

 

Maybe an idea would be to generate the profiles so that the cross sectional area is the same as the full detail version, but the actual profile is simplified.  For example include the central hole, but increase or decrease the diameter as necessary to match. cross section of the detail version.  

 

Then you would be able to get the correct weight for all the profiles using a single material.

 

I still think that multiple materials are probably a better idea.