I create the structural members by repeated and nested linear
patterns. I have discovered that Cosmos does not treat as beams the
members obtained by a pattern whose father does not contain any
member of first level.
It seams that this is a bug, and my dealer is dealing with
SOlidWOrks development team.
Thanks for your answer
That used to be the case with CW designer. CW professional
recognizes the patterns as structural members. Guess there has to
be some incentive to move up to professional.
I have professional already (SP3.1). Bur it does not work.
My dealer supposed that this is a defect reintroduced with the last
SP.
Another problem is that with mixed mesh it refuses to convert beams
in trusses (radiobutton not enabled).
A huge problem for me now (I am a new user) is that with no more
than 180 beams (obtained by the function 'add a beam' over a
replenishment function) and with perhaps two thousand solid
elements in the solid structure it gives me 'out of memory'. If on
the same model I get out all the beams but the first true element
of the replenishment function all goes fine. I fear that this is
another bug
1) We changed the algorithm for identifying beams in 2008 to remove
the patterned beam limitation. We're making progress at increasing
its robustness as we learn all the ways customers are creating
beam-like geometry. One of the downsides of a General beam creation
(from solids) algorithm is that we could only plan for combinations
of entities we could predict. That, it turns out, was incomplete
but we are working very hard at increasing the capabilities.
2) There is NO difference between Designer and Professional
functionality with respect to beams. I'm not sure where this
misunderstanding came from but I thought I'd clear that up.
Finally, with regards to (1) above, if you have a particularly
difficult, large, or complex beam or mixed mesh model that is
having trouble, please forward it to your reseller and make sure an
SR is filed with the database attached. The more samples of this we
get, the better we'll be able to perfect this.
OK Vince. Interesting to hear that difference doesn't exist
between designer and professional. I had the same problem some time
back and that was the reason I was given to believe.
Always glad to hear of bugs in algorithm's being fixed. I like the
beam analysis. I find it a quick and convenient design tool even
for relatively large trusses and structures.
It seams that this is a bug, and my dealer is dealing with SOlidWOrks development team.
Thanks for your answer
My dealer supposed that this is a defect reintroduced with the last SP.
Another problem is that with mixed mesh it refuses to convert beams in trusses (radiobutton not enabled).
A huge problem for me now (I am a new user) is that with no more than 180 beams (obtained by the function 'add a beam' over a replenishment function) and with perhaps two thousand solid elements in the solid structure it gives me 'out of memory'. If on the same model I get out all the beams but the first true element of the replenishment function all goes fine. I fear that this is another bug
1) We changed the algorithm for identifying beams in 2008 to remove the patterned beam limitation. We're making progress at increasing its robustness as we learn all the ways customers are creating beam-like geometry. One of the downsides of a General beam creation (from solids) algorithm is that we could only plan for combinations of entities we could predict. That, it turns out, was incomplete but we are working very hard at increasing the capabilities.
2) There is NO difference between Designer and Professional functionality with respect to beams. I'm not sure where this misunderstanding came from but I thought I'd clear that up.
Finally, with regards to (1) above, if you have a particularly difficult, large, or complex beam or mixed mesh model that is having trouble, please forward it to your reseller and make sure an SR is filed with the database attached. The more samples of this we get, the better we'll be able to perfect this.
Thanks!!!
Vince
Always glad to hear of bugs in algorithm's being fixed. I like the beam analysis. I find it a quick and convenient design tool even for relatively large trusses and structures.