Hello everybody
When I did an advance hole on a part s and then I do the drawing , and I try to dim the advance hole with hole callout command , but the solidworks shows a messages, that the advance hole can't use the hole callout command.
Anybody can help me?
Thanks.
Matthew,
We already have processes in place to create advance hole types using other methods. When we go to SW2017 early next year, I will not introduce the advance hole feature to our users. I do not want to replace one manual process with another. From your comments, I will wait until SW2018.
David Brukardt - can you share some of your "other Methods"?
I am stuck on 2015 so I can't use the advanced holes but often need to do things like have a tapped hole with a .01 spot face on post ends, a split part with a threaded hole in the bottom section and a C'bore hole above it to act as a clamp...
I was really excited to see some of the advanced hole capabilities but really saddened that we aren't going to update for at least a couple more years.
I always like to get pointers on things like this to make my life easier.
Rick,
Sorry for taking so long to reply; I do not get out to the forums as much as I would like.
What we do is really crude; but it is a known process to our users. For your example of a tap with a spotface. We might start by putting in the tap, followed by a drill the diameter of the spotface and set the drill angle to 180 degrees. In the drawing we would use hole callout for both the tap and drill then combine them by using an annotation (see below).
I have also experimented with putting the tap in with a countersink. I then edit the profile sketch making the countersunk angle driven, changing the countersunk diameter to the spotface diameter, add a horizontal and vertical line to make the spotface and finally add a depth dimension.
Unfortunately, I have not found a way to get the depth dimension to link to the hole call out so I manually added it (I had the idea of setting the countersunk angle to 0.01 but I could not get it to display to two decimal places).
David,
It sounds like I do the same as you do in the first example.
I have tried to also do a tap followed by a C'Bore with a small diameter less than the tap hole (so it won't show) and the C'Bore large diameter and depth what I need for the Spot face. Then edit the annotations as you do.
I have never tried the C'sink in your example. Sounds like it will save some instead of creating the separate C'Bore as I do.
I will have to try that.
Thanks for the input.
Why do I read that you put the tap in first then the c'bore? Seems weird and also would lead to a false tap depth.
Personally I put the c'bore in first, then the tap. That way, the call-out will read correct...
Would anyone want to tap a hole...say 5" deep, then add a 3" deep c'bore after? lol, I think not.
BTW, I just used the advanced hole on a couple of parts and the hole call-out didn't work, so that's why I read this. Now I have to go back and delete the advanced holes, very nice swx...very nice. Keep adding non-functioning features while taking away old shortcuts, we love that.
Mike,
If you look at the part image that David Brukardt showed, you will see that the C'Bore is very shallow (actually is a "Spot Face").
This image shows the detail very clearly.
This kind of feature is used commonly on the end of a rod or post where a tapped hole was added for attaching the rod to a plate or other surface where the two must join precisely to the rod end. This spot face is added after the drill and tap operation as a relief (or debur cut) to insure that there is not material left that would have swelled up from the drill and tap operation that would prevent the rod from seating exactly. It is easy to make this spot face on a lathe or CNC instead of manually trying to debur the threaded hole.
This shallow relief insures that only the edges outside of the relief are in contact with the mated part.
Perhaps I am missing something, but what exactly is "the important functionality" that is included, if you can not dimension the feature (other than the same what you currently dimenion a "non standard hole, which if you use mutilple holes in the same location, it allows you to actually use "hole callout").
When can we expect annotation capability?
Is it going to be a service pack? 5 years from now? or is this something that is going to die on the vine?
The concept is ideal, the execution is severely lacking
Regards
Hopes waiting to be dashed
Dear Hopes waiting to be dashed,
See my comments above about the hole callout capability. Many regions do not use hole callouts, but rather make section views or broken-out sections with linear dimensions when they need to define complex holes. This is a common practice in Europe. ISO standards actually don't have any provision for calling out holes more complex than just straight thru. This might seem a little unusual to North Americans who are used to the ASME methods. So, when we discovered issues with the hole callouts on Adv Holes during 2017 Beta Testing, we had to really evaluate the core functionality. Do we pull the entire tool, or do we make it available, and those who can use it will use it? We decided to include the tool, but not include hole callout support.
As far as functionality for hole callouts that supports Adv Holes, of course, we cannot make promises about when functionality will be included in the produce, but we aren't forgetting about this either. There are still a significant number of users who require hole callouts. We will use your comments and that of many other customers in our process to help guide us on what enhancements to consider for upcoming releases.
Sincerely,
Dasher of hopes no more
I guess I do not see a tool that makes it more complicated than doing a simple revolve to define a complex hole as a feature.
The reason I thought this might be a good tool is because trying to call out a hole with complex geometry with one dimension, with a single GD&T seems beneficial (hole callout).
Otherwise, this seems a convoluted method to make a revolve
It's a bit more than a revolve. It has all the sizing you may need, and you can do reordering and several other functions without having to get into a sketch and directly affect relations and such. It's a big time saver for complex holes. Instead of having to know what such and such sizes should be or looking them up, you can simply pick the type and size from a list and that element is created for you. Even with just a countersunk hole, this is going to save you time.
Matthew Lorono wrote:
It's a bit more than a revolve. It has all the sizing you may need, and you can do reordering and several other functions without having to get into a sketch and directly affect relations and such. It's a big time saver for complex holes. Instead of having to know what such and such sizes should be or looking them up, you can simply pick the type and size from a list and that element is created for you. Even with just a countersunk hole, this is going to save you time.
Reordering? What use is reordering without the hole callout tool?
When you are putting a hole in, in one feature, what does it matter what the order is? The only time the order matters is when you are calling it out on the print, and if you can't use the hole callout function....then ordering doesn't matter at all.
Maybe they don't use hole callouts in Europe because your hole callouts aren't the proper formatting used in Europe. Did you ever consider that? Do you think people like to do manual work because they enjoy it? Do a little more research and actually talk to people (instead of your secret data gathering methods) to find out what people really think.
Marcus, can you provide the standards that reference complex hole callouts in ISO standards? The more information we have, the better.
A side note, SW2018 supports callouts for Adv Holes.
This is wholly disappointing. Why ever would we release something that is only half baked. I'm a firm supporter of SW, but this 2017 is really a bad example of the software.
We have typically been very cautious of such 'half-baked' enhancements in recent years, as customers have asked us to avoid such a thing. In this case, it's not half-baked, as there are a substantial number of users that can use the tool as it. This is more of a case of use not putting the frosting on the cake. I know many North Americans expect hole callout functionality, and we did take that into consideration when issues where discovered with the hole callout tool and Adv Holes in Beta Testing last year. We bake this cake and made it available in the frosting-free version first. Hopefully we can add the frosting soon for us guys in North America who expect it.
Prefacing this with the statement: With all due respect Matt.
Cute icing aside. As an admin user who has always stated SW is the best software, I admit I feel that SW is now waning on being comparable to other software programs with instability. I've used many others.
We upgrade every other year. I'm not convinced, with 2017, that ALL the testing was done for some of the new and old functionality as well as it should have been. This includes the installation software, which really sucks for a lot of users (we were not of this issue, but of an observation of the forums).
It's not just the advanced hole functionality that I feel is half baked.
I feel that just like when 3ds/SW/Dass. bought Enovia (which was a beta program that barely worked or was programmed for consistency in the PLM environment - for functional use) and just rolled it out, we are now seeing the myriad of sparkley options that would make the software great but only cause instability.
These things are not icing -but the fact that it costs a few thousand per seat, topped with subscription requirements.
Please just make SolidWorks great again?
Solidworks is in perpetual beta. The fact that they strongly encourage everyone to allow data sharing of their crashes so they can try to fix things proves this. A solid release already has been thoroughly tested on all configurations and is stable. Solidworks has never progressed passed beta. Yet they charge the cost of a car every year for the "privilege" of using their hackjob beta project.
Marcus, please let me direct your attention to this thread. You may wish to comment there.
https://forum.solidworks.com/message/826657?et=watches.email.thread#comment-826657
Nah. I wouldn't blanket that SW is bad or use the term hackjob.
Then maybe the 2017 help file/links should not have instructions on reversing the hole order in the callout for an advanced hole. I wasted a bunch of time trying this feature out and learning how to make it work only to not be able to add an advanced hole callout.
Froylan,
You will be happy to hear that SolidWorks ALMOST has advanced hole call out fixed in SW2018. There is still an issue using favorites with option 'use baseline dimension' (I have a SPR for it but SW seems to have forgotten about it now that 18 is out of beta) but otherwise it works (my crude workaround is to cut and paste my advanced hole so the callout will be correct in the drawing).
That defeats the "it's fixed" bit about it.
Yes it is sad that SolidWorks gave up on fixing the issue. However, it is 95% better than what was available in SW2017. Although I saw a post that found you cannot manually change the number of instances (unless there is a workaround) so maybe that makes it 85% better?
I don't understand why advanced holes wasn't just added to the hole wizard anyway.
Why have two different ways of making a hole?
And not having hole callouts available in the drawing is a serious issue.
Why isn't there a warning I the feature telling the user this.
I'd be mad if I modeled a bunch of parts using this feature, then started making drawings, only to discover I can't use hole callouts.
We won't be upgrading past 2017SP5 anytime soon, so I guess we will likely not be using this feature...
Adding to this post, the Advanced Hole tool is a very nice tool. It has been fixed in 2018. It requires a little work up front for getting hole call-outs to display as the hole wizard does (by default), but really I am now impressed with it.
I agree it should have been added to the regular hole wizard, however I gather that programming concerns were why it weren't.
As I stated in my 24 Feb 2018 post, the call out almost works; it does not work with 'use baseline dimension' option selected and you modify the default call out. I just checked on my SPR a couple weeks ago and it is still open. We will be upgrading to SW2018 in two months but I will not be rolling out Advance Hole to our users because of this.
OH man, I modified the text file to get it to work.
Try that, no?
David, what's happening with "Use baseline dimension" and modification of the callout?
SPR 1043320
Which means I will not be rolling out advanced hole when we upgrade to SW2018 in July.
Froylan,
Unfortunately, Hole Callout will not create hole callouts for Adv Hole in SW2017. We did intend to include this functionality, however issues were discovered during Alpha and Beta testing. Instead of completely pulling this important functionality until annotation functionality is complete, we decided to include feature in the SW2017 release. This allows users that do not use Hole Callout tool to use the new feature. For example, our research suggests that Hole Callout tool is typically not used in Europe. We feel that it is better to provide this new feature without the annotation support rather than not release it at all for one year.