Workflow for importing thread methodology

[Petertha]

This question happens to be related to threads, but maybe its a more generic question. I keep a dummy part file handy as kind of a mental reminder of how I've been making threads using a handful of dimensions from an online calculator. Its not very complex but I do it infrequently. So I just open it up while modelling a part & flip back & forth to remind me, basically replicating the steps in-situ. Is there any way in SW to 'paste' the dummy file tree into my new part or would that be a dogs breakfast because of the feature references? Is this more in the domain of macros & such (which should probably learn).

[bnemec]

Are you making custom threads? Image shows a standard UNF thread.

[JSculley]

Most people do not model standard threads. They are resource intensive and cosmetic threads are sufficient for most purposes. Having said that, if you wish to continue doing so, you can create a library feature.

[SPerman]

Are you making custom threads? Image shows a standard UNF thread.

He may want a true thread, not the SW approximation. I do the same thing when 3d printing threads.

[Frederick_Law]

I just download model from McMaster Carr and modify it.

In Cura, set Slicing Tolerance to Mid or Exclusive so thread won't bind:

[Petertha]

Thanks for comments. The example I included is indeed a standard thread profile available in SW, but that was just a sanity check to see if my methodology was yielding the same resultant values as the calculator. On occasion (unrelated to 3D printing) I do require non-standard threads, or matching a specific dimensionally driven 'fit' where the physical distances were of interest. So that's more where this is coming from. That library technique may be a good way to do it. I may have even stumbled on this utility but didn't realize its potential usefulness, so I will pursue.

While on this general topic, I had a similar dummy file for ISO threads & could fully correlate all the online parameters. But with the IMP threads I get slightly different values here & there between my model & results even though its fully defined. They are close but not exact. Like by specifying a crest flat I get a different root flat & vise-versa. Or the distance over measurement wires of a defined diameter is off by a few percent. The devil might be in the details or the web calculator itself. I'll keep plugging away.

[SPerman]

I put this spreadsheet together a couple of decades ago. SDRC Ideas did not have a thread tool. (It did have a neat feature where you could add a translate to a revolve operation, creating a helix.) This is based on the math in Machinery's Handbook. Maybe it will help you with your correlation.

https://www.cadforum.net/viewtopic.php?p=24126#p24126