SolidEdge vs. SolidWorks

[bnemec]

Recording of Dimple feature in Solid Edge, two closed profiles. Sorry I didn't fully constrain the sketches for this, I was trying to keep gif short. Also works nicely for open profile.

[jcapriotti]

@bnemec Creating on the fly has it's advantageous, like you said, one off designs.

The linked library features not showing up in references is a mystery. Not sure why they don't show it as it's clearly is in the tree and linked. Why would the users need to checkout the forming tool? Are they resizing them differently for each design? Do you really buy a new tool for every instance?

Another option is to not link it, and let the user edit the dimple dimensions after insertion. They could edit the diameter and depth dimensions.

[jcapriotti]

Insert then edit example:

How does Solidedge do these kinds of forming tools? These are tools we purchased for clipping and tying. One is a PCB slot hold.

[bnemec]

@bnemec Creating on the fly has it's advantageous, like you said, one off designs.

The linked library features not showing up in references is a mystery. Not sure why they don't show it as it's clearly is in the tree and linked.

Yes, they show in the feature manager tree but PDM is clueless there is an interaction between the files. The forming tool file is not in the Solidworks PDM Add-in, it is not in the contains tab of the part and the tools them selves have no where used in PDM. So even on the couple tools that are shared I cannot find their where used. If PDM would track refs then at least we would have that, now it just complains if I edit the feature that the forming tool file doesn't exist because PDM didn't know to cache it.

Why would the users need to checkout the forming tool? Are they resizing them differently for each design?

yep

@bnemec Creating on the fly has it's advantageous, like you said, one off designs.
Do you really buy a new tool for every instance?

The few standard dimples are break press tools made inhouse. The vast majority of these are in progressive dies, so yes each one has it's own design. There are very few parts that share the same tool (a punch is removed for one part number for example).

Another option is to not link it, and let the user edit the dimple dimensions after insertion. They could edit the diameter and depth dimensions.

Most of these dimples are not just a round or straight bead they have way more than just a diameter and depth.

example:

[mike miller]

While reading yet another thread about multiple versions of SW installed I was reminded how nice it is to not have to worry about that with Edge. There is no installing two versions. There is a tool for testing another version where you can have another version installed, but it's more just for temporary, testing use.

@bnemec, can you elaborate on this? Does it work for virtual machines?

[bnemec]

@bnemec, can you elaborate on this? Does it work for virtual machines?

Oh man, that's been like an eternity ago (feels like it anyway.) I recall there's a script or exe that's run to switch between the two. IIRC it's doing some semi-graceful reg edits so technically there's still only one version installed as far as the registry is concerned. They just provide an automated way to switch between them. That's my dumbed down lay understanding of it.

I did a little searching and it looks kind of like this. I don't recall needing to do the silent install for the temporary version but could be wrong. I want to say you'd need to uninstall the test version once you decided to do the update for real.

screen shot copied from https://www.prolim.com/wp-content/uploa ... -Setup.pdf

If you're on subscription I'd call GTAC they have guides for this stuff that they send. Come to think of it now; it's kinda like getting a Solution article from SW customer portal but instead you call and talk to a person and they email you the pdf that applies. Have I said GTAC might be the best part of Solid Edge subscription?

[HDS]

How does SE handle arrangements/configurations? It looks like they call it "alternate assemblies" but I would like to hear from SE users how well this works, and how it compares to NX arrangements/SW configurations.

https://docs.plm.automation.siemens.com ... masm1a.htm

It has been a few years since I was in SE. So my thermology maybe wrong or they could have fixed this. I had a really hard time because of assembly configurations. We had slow hardware and it could take 5 or 10 minutes to save a file. Each configuration was saved in the file in a way that if you had 5 configurations it took 5X longer to save.

All the other assembly tools for day to day operations were better. For example the capture fit tool saves the mates for a part. So something like a screw already knows that you want a plane and a hole. You only have to pick the features on the parts in the assembly.

I feel like there were fewer geometry bugs and I not remember it ever flipping the direction of a dimension.

If you have plumbing and stuff their routing tools to create the paths are great.

[Jaylin Hochstetler]

It has been a few years since I was in SE. So my thermology maybe wrong or they could have fixed this. I had a really hard time because of assembly configurations. We had slow hardware and it could take 5 or 10 minutes to save a file. Each configuration was saved in the file in a way that if you had 5 configurations it took 5X longer to save.

All the other assembly tools for day to day operations were better. For example the capture fit tool saves the mates for a part. So something like a screw already knows that you want a plane and a hole. You only have to pick the features on the parts in the assembly.

I feel like there were fewer geometry bugs and I not remember it ever flipping the direction of a dimension.

If you have plumbing and stuff their routing tools to create the paths are great.

In 2022 they made it possible to only save one Family (configuration) at a time. Which would alleviate the save problem. Haven't had time to mess with 2022 yet so don't know how well it works.

[bnemec]

In 2022 they made it possible to only save one Family (configuration) at a time. Which would alleviate the save problem. Haven't had time to mess with 2022 yet so don't know how well it works.

I wonder if they took the opportunity to fix the problem that would corrupt the asm file if it was opened from drawing view (handy feature by the way) and then saved. IIRC that workflow would make the asm forget that it's a FOA then only that one member used by the drawing view from which the assembly was opened would be available.

[mike miller]

I wonder if they took the opportunity to fix the problem that would corrupt the asm file if it was opened from drawing view (handy feature by the way) and then saved. IIRC that workflow would make the asm forget that it's a FOA then only that one member used by the drawing view from which the assembly was opened would be available.

@bnemec, I already tested that. If you double click a view, it will open that family member. The other members are not available from that member, but it won't adulterate the family.

[bnemec]

@bnemec, I already tested that. If you double click a view, it will open that family member. The other members are not available from that member, but it won't adulterate the family.

even if you save the assembly after opening from double clicking the drawing view? It was the save after opening from drawing view that wrecked the asm file for us. There were other reasons in the past that caused us to avoid FOA; don't recall what they/it was. Maybe no longer relevant, but like food poisoning, it's hard to go back to the "bait station" after a bad experience. If we didn't use and copy our files for decades it wouldn't bother so bad.

[mike miller]

even if you save the assembly after opening from double clicking the drawing view?

Yes. I'm not sure how much functionality was available, but I know it worked. That seems to be a theme for SE: there may be missing functionality (5% maybe) but the 95% typically won't turn around and bite you.

[KennyG]

even if you save the assembly after opening from double clicking the drawing view? It was the save after opening from drawing view that wrecked the asm file for us.

We use FOA's and certainly enter from Draft and save the assembly, but never had any issues with it losing the FOA info. Just tested this specifically and no loss of FOA info.

A 2022 FOA change allows saving the base and active member only for intermediate saves to reduce save time vs. old method of saving everything. You still want to save everything when complete with editing, and you also have the ability to select individual members for save.

[mike miller]

Back on SWX today........ SE has its fair share of short-comings but they seem pretty insignificant right now.

I didn't realize how tyrannical history-based modelling actually is until I had a chance to escape it. Everything is peachy until you need to make a major edit, or your design intent is flipped on its head. Then you start chasing dimensions and redefining things to control your changes. Even if you use planes and sketches to drive your model, driving geometry may need to be changed to driven (reverse parent-child relationships)- all because a tab isn't centered anymore.

[jcapriotti]

Now we just a live stream of history based modeling vs ST. First blindly model some parts, assemble them, then make edits as suggested by the audience. I vote for @matt to host.

[mattpeneguy]

Back on SWX today........ SE has its fair share of short-comings but they seem pretty insignificant right now.

I didn't realize how tyrannical history-based modelling actually is until I had a chance to escape it. Everything is peachy until you need to make a major edit, or your design intent is flipped on its head. Then you start chasing dimensions and redefining things to control your changes. Even if you use planes and sketches to drive your model, driving geometry may need to be changed to driven (reverse parent-child relationships)- all because a tab isn't centered anymore.

Quit centering things!