Model relationships
Robust CAD captures relationships between features rather than isolated dimensions.
Explore one calculation at a time. The section properties, fits and engagement checks connect the model to mechanical design.
The dimensions establish geometry. Section properties, load paths, engagement and tolerances establish the questions that an engineering design must answer.
For a solid circular guide with d = 25 mm:
Area A comes from the circle’s geometry. The second moment I is the area integral of squared distance from a centroidal bending axis; it describes how effectively the section distributes material against bending. Section modulus Z converts bending moment to maximum nominal stress. Radius of gyration r connects area and bending distribution.
These geometric properties provide the link between the CAD dimensions and analytical stress/stiffness calculations.
The geometric slenderness ratio is approximately 32 for the full 200 mm pillar. This is not a highly slender member, so a simple Euler result should not automatically be treated as the governing compressive capacity. Material yielding, actual effective length, end restraint and contact conditions must be established before a column capacity is claimed.
The effective slenderness for a column model is KL/r, where K represents its end restraint. The calculation above uses geometric length only; it is not an allowable-load calculation.
For one bush, d = 25 mm and L = 60 mm. The projected cylindrical interface is a rectangle d wide and L long.
The pressure expression applies if a total lateral load F distributes equally among all four bushes over the full contact length. With F in newtons and area in mm², pressure is in MPa.
This projected-area calculation provides a first screening method for interface bearing pressure. A production design would additionally require bush material, clearance, lubrication, loading distribution and wear criteria.
The diagonal follows the Pythagorean theorem. The reaction relation follows moment equilibrium: two equal and opposite forces separated by s create a couple M = Fs.
A wider guide spacing reduces the reaction force required to resist the same overturning moment. The actual force distribution among four guides depends on the direction of loading, clearances and structural stiffness. Use the separation perpendicular to the force couple; the diagonal is not automatically the governing lever arm.
The source geometry defines both mating diameters nominally as Ø25 mm. Nominal CAD dimensions alone do not define a manufacturable sliding fit. Production design would require an intentional tolerance class based on accuracy, lubrication, temperature, manufacturing process and service conditions.
ISO 286 fit selection would be a logical next design step.
einitial = initial pillar/bush engagement
S = upward stroke
eremaining = remaining engagement
This relation describes withdrawal where overlap reduces one-for-one with upward travel. While a pillar still extends fully through a bush, its full bush engagement can remain constant; use the actual endpoint geometry to identify the applicable travel interval.
The animation stroke should remain within the geometry that maintains pillar/bush engagement. The website does not claim a design stroke until it is measured from the actual CAD configuration.
Illustrative steel-density calculation only. Material was not specified by the original exercise.
Steel density ρ = 7,850 kg/m³. Chamfers neglected in hand calculation.
| Component | Qty | Mass each |
|---|---|---|
| Bottom Plate | 1 | ≈ 7.91 kg |
| Top Plate | 1 | ≈ 9.03 kg |
| Guide Pillar | 4 | ≈ 0.771 kg |
| Guide Bush | 4 | ≈ 0.361 kg |
All dimensions below are in mm. The Bottom Plate has four Ø25 guide holes and a Ø50 central hole. The Top Plate has four Ø40 bush holes and an integral Ø50 × 90 boss.
The totals use unrounded component values. The source drawing is used privately for dimensional checks and is not distributed with this study.
≈ 21.47 kg
Both plates + four pillars + four bushes
≈ 10.48 kg
Top Plate + four Guide Bushes
Moving weight is a gravitational force, not the press force or an actuator rating. Actual SolidWorks Mass Properties should be used for final CAD verification after the intended materials are assigned.
FEA verification — planned extension
A Guide Pillar lateral-load study provides a focused verification exercise. For a prismatic, linearly elastic pillar idealized as a fixed cantilever with an end force F, use effective unsupported length Leff:
Moment follows equilibrium; stress follows elastic beam bending. Integrating beam curvature M/(EI) with zero deflection and rotation at the fixed end gives the tip-deflection expression. E is Young’s modulus. Use consistent units: F in N, lengths in mm and E in N/mm².
This cantilever is a comparison model. Actual bush contact, plate restraint and guide engagement can change the load path. Match the analytical and simulated boundary conditions before comparing their outputs.
Compare the same quantity at the same location using a nonzero hand value. Evaluate nominal bending stress away from an idealized fixed-edge singularity; demonstrate convergence rather than interpreting a single peak. No stress, displacement, safety factor or mesh result is claimed here.
| Item | Component | Qty | Function |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Bottom Plate | 1 | Fixed structural base |
| 2 | Top Plate | 1 | Guided moving member |
| 3 | Guide Pillar | 4 | Linear alignment |
| 4 | Guide Bush | 4 | Sliding guide interface |
4 unique part designs · 10 component instances
The next step from a parametric model is controlled engineering communication: orthographic views, dimensions, tolerances, assembly balloons and a bill of materials.
The component structure and calculations above establish the basis for that drawing set. A finished drawing gallery can be added when the project’s own engineering drawings are available.
Robust CAD captures relationships between features rather than isolated dimensions.
Assembly constraints should represent the mechanism rather than merely remove every degree of freedom.
Analytical calculations provide an independent check on CAD and simulation results.