2 Replies Latest reply on Sep 13, 2013 2:50 PM by Michael Dekoning

    Cluttered Copy Tree Fix?

    Thomas Horst

      Hi

       

      I am new to the forums, though I have been using Solidworks for several years now.

       

      I am trying to find a way to "hide" certain parts and drawings so that they do not appear in the Copy Tree dialogue.

       

      At our company, we do a lot of repetative design work, involving a lot of similar parts and standard parts. We upgraded to using EPDM this year, and now we have the Copy Tree functionality that should allow us to reuse our old designs more easily (pack-and-go was a nightmare...), but we are having some issues with it.Our assemblies are made primarily of configuration based standard parts, so each time we copy, there are only maybe a dozen parts new files, two or three parts and assemblies, and their drawings, and the rest are standard parts.

       

      The big problem is that the standard parts have maybe 20 or so configs each, and each one has a drawing. The result is that there are ~200 lines in the copy tree we have to pick through, because it pulls the references for every drawing of every config of every standard part, and we are only copying 5-10 lines. It looks like you should be able to close the pieces of the tree that you don't need, but you can't. The little arrows in the tree cannot be clicked to hide the depenancies. Its quite messy, and a lot or our users have found it to be easier to simply use "save as" function to copy assemblies. This has hidden, undesirable consequences, like breaking in context references, not storing the files into PDM properly, etc. Copy tree seems like it should be the right tool for the job, if it was easier to use.

       

      I am looking for a way to make it so that our standard parts (and associated drawings) do not appear in the copy tree dialogue. Is there a way to do this? Can I have a workflow state for "standard parts" where Copy Tree will ignore references to parts in that state?

       

      Thanks.

       

      Thomas