AnsweredAssumed Answered

Imported model with same part names implosion

Question asked by Dean Long on Sep 16, 2015
Latest reply on Nov 12, 2015 by Chris Saller

Like • Show 0 Likes0
Comment • 9

All,

I had a recent incident that I was wondering how you guys handle. I have to import STEP files from Altium (electronics software) from our EE side. The imports usually go okay with only a few rebuild oddities here and there. Our EE guys use a library of parts (resistors, caps, fets, etc...) that have specified library file names. For simplification let's call them R1, C1 and F1.

I imported three PCBA's into their own folders (Parts and Assemblies) and then assembled them into my main mechanical assembly as subs from those folders. The part names were duplicate in each folder (R1, C1, F1). I ran this way throughout my development phase and all was fine. The issues began when I tried to "consolidate" everything to one folder with my new production assembly names. I used a Pack and Go from one of the respective development folders to the Production folder one of the PCBA sub-assemblies. I decided to check the Top Level assembly after the first assembly was moved. When I opened the main, not only was the Sub I moved wrong, the two others were messed up with components off in space. I did a rebuild to see it that was the issue and it was not.

So I am confused is this is 1. a "cross-folder" issue or 2. a same part, same name in different folders issue or 3. a consolidation to the same folder issue or 4. a STEP import with similar names in one folder issue.

And why would my parts (with some of the same names) suddenly go wonkey, especially if its a STEP import? I do not know off the top of my head if all the imported parts are "fixed" in the assembly. The strange thing for me is why only after the Pack and Go did it all go pear shaped?

TIA

No one else has this question

Outcomes

Brian McEwen Sep 16, 2015 12:38 PM

Not sure what the main issue is. However duplicate files names is a good candidate, because that is generally a bad practice. And because the issue came up when you combined your file locations.

2014 SOLIDWORKS Help - Search Routine for Referenced Documents

Is each R1 model the same? just multiple copies of one original? That would make it a little less horrible.

If not then when you do the Pack and Go try adding something to the filename (e.g. add suffix "-1"). So that all the inherently different models have different file names.

Actions

Dean Long @ Brian McEwen on Sep 16, 2015 1:09 PM

Brian,

I am not sure how WindChill would handle the -1, -2, -3 for write protected library parts. Meaning I am 99.9% confident it would give me a conflict when trying to check in. Or it would store and track them and the Gate Keeper would come looking for me. Because on one assembly alone I have 2000+ electrical components and I am not the only Monkey in the cage. Suddenly if -1 thru -infinity for the same part started to hit the server from multiple people, across multiple projects....I think I will be in deep.

Also...I do not have control over the part names coming from the ECAD side. I get what I get. Am I scaling a never ending mountain with regard to EE part names imported to SW?

Thanks for the help.

Actions

Brian McEwen @ Dean Long on Sep 16, 2015 2:31 PM

Hmm, I think I understand a little better. And sadly it does sound like a struggle that will continue.

So the ECAD parts are turned into Step files on multiple occasions, and then you save them as SolidWorks for a new project - so I can definitely imagine some variation - they are effectively different models even though you don't want that. The behind the scenes stuff used for mates and things like that probably have different identifiers (face1 vs face23 - for a simplistic example) for each model instance.

If you are only supposed to check-in one of each - all your new sldasm are supposed to be referencing the existing Windchill sldprt... with EPDM there is an update references tool where you can find parts that already exist (based on file name) and replace them. But you would then need to fix the mates anyway. That is a task I don't see a way to eliminate if you must consolidate.

It partly depends on what you are doing with the electronic assembly model... can it be saved as a single .sldprt file? - if you are just checking fit. Check-in a zip file? I'm grasping at straws.

By the way, Altium does advertise an add-on for SolidWorks. It could possibly make the process easier and pay for itself. But I've never used it.

Good luck.

Actions

Daniel Smith @ Brian McEwen on Nov 10, 2015 7:10 AM

Have you ever had problems saving as a single part? I can do that, but whenever I do I lose a lot of the material and appearance properties randomly around the parts. I can't figure out why it does this and how to fix it.

Actions

Brian McEwen @ Daniel Smith on Nov 10, 2015 8:36 AM

Saving from a healthy SolidWorks assembly to a sldprt? I don't think I've seen it lose material. I've seen that with various imported parts, especially with geometry errors (try Import Diagnostics for that). The appearance thing I have seen, I think sometimes it goes all one color.... But I just tried it on an assembly, and the save-as-part transferred colors applied at feature, body, part, and face.

Actions

Daniel Smith @ Brian McEwen on Nov 10, 2015 8:44 AM

Yeah, the assembly is healthy and while it was imported components there were no geometry errors. It would just lose a few random faces on some subparts. Not seemingly connected in any way. For example, the top face of one pin on a 30-pin connector would lose the gold appearance it was given in the assembly, but the rest of it would be fine. Along with about a dozen other little errors like that it can look pretty bad coming out for me.

Actions

Daniel Smith @ Brian McEwen on Nov 11, 2015 9:39 AM

Here is an example of what I am talking about.

This is the original assembly where everything is correct.

This is the result when saved as a part. I have tried all the options in the save dialogue with the same rough result. The faces that are wrong are not consistent though. Each time I save it ends up a little different.

Actions

Brian McEwen @ Daniel Smith on Nov 12, 2015 9:45 AM

Not sure Daniel.

I have not yet watched this presentation by Adrian Velazquez, but you may learn some stuff from it about dealing with the save as part.

Re: Large Assembly Performance Discussion

Actions

Chris Saller Nov 12, 2015 10:01 AM

Imported parts do not have the same surfaces/features as the SW part, although they 'look' the same. When you replace/write over the same file name, mates go wrong.

In the assy you have to repair each mate.

Actions

9 Replies

Brian McEwen Sep 16, 2015 12:38 PM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
Not sure what the main issue is. However duplicate files names is a good candidate, because that is generally a bad practice. And because the issue came up when you combined your file locations.
2014 SOLIDWORKS Help - Search Routine for Referenced Documents
Is each R1 model the same? just multiple copies of one original? That would make it a little less horrible.

If not then when you do the Pack and Go try adding something to the filename (e.g. add suffix "-1"). So that all the inherently different models have different file names.
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions
- Dean Long @ Brian McEwen on Sep 16, 2015 1:09 PM
  Mark Correct
  Correct Answer
  Brian,
  
  I am not sure how WindChill would handle the -1, -2, -3 for write protected library parts. Meaning I am 99.9% confident it would give me a conflict when trying to check in. Or it would store and track them and the Gate Keeper would come looking for me. Because on one assembly alone I have 2000+ electrical components and I am not the only Monkey in the cage. Suddenly if -1 thru -infinity for the same part started to hit the server from multiple people, across multiple projects....I think I will be in deep.
  
  Also...I do not have control over the part names coming from the ECAD side. I get what I get. Am I scaling a never ending mountain with regard to EE part names imported to SW?
  
  Thanks for the help.
  Like • Show 0 Likes0
  Actions
  - Brian McEwen @ Dean Long on Sep 16, 2015 2:31 PM
    Mark Correct
    Correct Answer
    Hmm, I think I understand a little better. And sadly it does sound like a struggle that will continue.
    
    So the ECAD parts are turned into Step files on multiple occasions, and then you save them as SolidWorks for a new project - so I can definitely imagine some variation - they are effectively different models even though you don't want that. The behind the scenes stuff used for mates and things like that probably have different identifiers (face1 vs face23 - for a simplistic example) for each model instance.
    
    If you are only supposed to check-in one of each - all your new sldasm are supposed to be referencing the existing Windchill sldprt... with EPDM there is an update references tool where you can find parts that already exist (based on file name) and replace them. But you would then need to fix the mates anyway. That is a task I don't see a way to eliminate if you must consolidate.
    
    It partly depends on what you are doing with the electronic assembly model... can it be saved as a single .sldprt file? - if you are just checking fit. Check-in a zip file? I'm grasping at straws.
    
    By the way, Altium does advertise an add-on for SolidWorks. It could possibly make the process easier and pay for itself. But I've never used it.
    
    Good luck.
    Like • Show 0 Likes0
    Actions
    - Daniel Smith @ Brian McEwen on Nov 10, 2015 7:10 AM
      Mark Correct
      Correct Answer
      Have you ever had problems saving as a single part? I can do that, but whenever I do I lose a lot of the material and appearance properties randomly around the parts. I can't figure out why it does this and how to fix it.
      Like • Show 0 Likes0
      Actions
      - Brian McEwen @ Daniel Smith on Nov 10, 2015 8:36 AM
        Mark Correct
        Correct Answer
        Saving from a healthy SolidWorks assembly to a sldprt? I don't think I've seen it lose material. I've seen that with various imported parts, especially with geometry errors (try Import Diagnostics for that). The appearance thing I have seen, I think sometimes it goes all one color.... But I just tried it on an assembly, and the save-as-part transferred colors applied at feature, body, part, and face.
        Like • Show 0 Likes0
        Actions
        Daniel Smith @ Brian McEwen on Nov 10, 2015 8:44 AM
        Mark Correct
        Correct Answer
        Yeah, the assembly is healthy and while it was imported components there were no geometry errors. It would just lose a few random faces on some subparts. Not seemingly connected in any way. For example, the top face of one pin on a 30-pin connector would lose the gold appearance it was given in the assembly, but the rest of it would be fine. Along with about a dozen other little errors like that it can look pretty bad coming out for me.
        Like • Show 0 Likes0
        Actions
        Daniel Smith @ Brian McEwen on Nov 11, 2015 9:39 AM
        Mark Correct
        Correct Answer
        Here is an example of what I am talking about.
        This is the original assembly where everything is correct.
        This is the result when saved as a part. I have tried all the options in the save dialogue with the same rough result. The faces that are wrong are not consistent though. Each time I save it ends up a little different.
        Like • Show 0 Likes0
        Actions
        Brian McEwen @ Daniel Smith on Nov 12, 2015 9:45 AM
        Mark Correct
        Correct Answer
        Not sure Daniel.
        I have not yet watched this presentation by Adrian Velazquez, but you may learn some stuff from it about dealing with the save as part.
        Re: Large Assembly Performance Discussion
        Like • Show 0 Likes0
        Actions
Chris Saller Nov 12, 2015 10:01 AM
Mark Correct
Correct Answer
Imported parts do not have the same surfaces/features as the SW part, although they 'look' the same. When you replace/write over the same file name, mates go wrong.
In the assy you have to repair each mate.
Like • Show 0 Likes0
Actions

Imported model with same part names implosion

Outcomes

Related Content

Recommended Content