I'm sorry but for some reason I decided to combine two straight weldment segments and that's what I got.
I'm sorry but for some reason I decided to combine two straight weldment segments and that's what I got.
me too
Looks like it doubles the combined length
Yes, tomorrow I`m going to get SPR
Hey Igor, why not make them in one weldment and use the merge built inside it?
There is no such option in my case
Are both of your line segments on the same sketch? Are they put in the same ''group''? inside the Weldment? Those could be reasons why the option isn't there.
Yes, Alex, These two segments are on the same sketch inside the weldment.
Hrm, it appears this function is only available when there is a corner treatment. I'm out of solutions, sorry.
Thank you and don`t worry, I wanted to report about a bug only.
OK, I understand that it's impossible to combine profile names or profile standards and so on, but it`s possible to get sum of mass or sum of lengths. I think it hasn`t to be a problem.
There is definitely a problem, but the help file is saying they know about the problem, but aren't doing anything about it. It gets the right length, sometimes. For angles less than or equal to 90, the length is reported correctly. For angles greater than 90, the reported length is incorrect and gets worse as you approach 180, where it is double what it should be. After 180, the discrepancy shrinks again until you hit 270 where the length is correct.
I'd guess they aren't doing anything about it because if they're identical profiles there's no reason (that I can think of) to ever need to combine bodies. Why not just create it as a single body in the first place?
Hi Jim,
I think this is a good example of SW making user aware of a limitation. So I wouldn't use the term "bug".
The whole scenario can be easily dealt with in many other ways.
- Delete one of the bodies plus convert face contour extrude to point & merge
- Use trim tool with "extend option" and select end face of body that needs to be merged with then delete that body afterwards.
- Edit the original feature and include the path of the second body if possible
I would even say that's a much cleaner approach since you could change one profile to a different size when you use combine.
I can understand why you might want to combine bodies. Eg. the sketch/sketches might be created by some kind of automation and in some cases end up with two coincident lines.
I tried to create your feature tree exactly from scratch (2017 SP3.0), and I could not reproduce your error. I used a default profile though, so the problem might somehow lie in the profile, not the path. Who knows?
I used SWX18.2, one line sketch which consist of two collinear segments. There is no difference between one or two groups.
SPR #: | 1013891 | |||
Product: | SolidWorks | |||
Status: | Open | |||
Fixed in: | none none | |||
Area: | Drawings | |||
Sub-Area: | Tables - General | |||
Customer Impact: | Medium | |||
Enhancement: | Yes | |||
Summary: |
BOM and Weld Table - Weld bodies from the same section, but with different length - The 'LENGHT' parameter shows wrongly the same total length value for any cut-list items
| |||
Thank you very much
I realize that this is an old thread
But I have a question:
Without the input of a Solidworks employee or a VAR, how would anyone know that this SPR is linked to this issue (that is asked in this thread). Because the description of the SPR and the issue that the OP are having are not the same. They may have some background info that links the two, but if I were searching for an SPR related to the issue the OP posted, I would NOT have chosen that SPR because it says nothing about the combine function.
So, what is the best way for this?
I really wish that the background info that the VAR's and SW people can see could be seen by us plebes.
Dan Pihlaja wrote:
I realize that this is an old thread
But I have a question:
Without the input of a Solidworks employee or a VAR, how would anyone know that this SPR is linked to this issue (that is asked in this thread). Because the description of the SPR and the issue that the OP are having are not the same. They may have some background info that links the two, but if I were searching for an SPR related to the issue the OP posted, I would NOT have chosen that SPR because it says nothing about the combine function.
So, what is the best way for this?
I really wish that the background info that the VAR's and SW people can see could be seen by us plebes.
I agree. I've been told here (in the forum, not this particular thread obviously) that because of things like this, you should go through your VAR to be attached to SPRs. That's a bit too much trouble, IMO. They should fix the KB, instead.
And just to complete the infinite loop:
Combined Weldment bodies call out exactly twice its actual cut length (with workaround)
SPR #:
1013891
Product:
SolidWorks
Status:
Open
Fixed in:
none none
Area:
Drawings
Sub-Area:
Tables - General
Customer Impact:
Medium
Enhancement:
Yes
Summary: