Assembly default fix/float first part

[Petertha]

Somehow one of my Assembly templates took on a setting to allow first component to float vs. default to normal origin (intersection of 3 primary planes). I toggled it back to fixed carry on with work. But I was looking for the place to specify this in presumably my Assembly template. Unless I missed, didn't see it document settings or general settings. Can someone point me in right direction.

[SPerman]

Since that screen shot is from the "insert component" command, I assume it would be saved in the assembly template. You can go and change it, but in my experience, if you have anything else saved in your assembly template, it will be gone. So unless you have a list of all the settings you need to change when creating a template, it's a losing battle.

IMO, there should be a 4th choice. "Never fix anything." I want the first part I insert mated to the origin, not "Fixed" not ever.

[AlexLachance]

Since that screen shot is from the "insert component" command, I assume it would be saved in the assembly template. You can go and change it, but in my experience, if you have anything else saved in your assembly template, it will be gone. So unless you have a list of all the settings you need to change when creating a template, it's a losing battle.

IMO, there should be a 4th choice. "Never fix anything." I want the first part I insert mated to the origin, not "Fixed" not ever.

Which is why so many people complain about their whole concept of "erase and start new at every versions" for templates.

I know since then Dassault has retracted their statement about this, but my VAR is still one to use it as an excuse, so I assume others are as well. I'll drop this file here, which Dassault sent me to look upon to see if anything might have been wrong or missing. Note how it says "resaving" and not "recreating", as so many have ill-advised others before.

This was sent to me about a year and a half ago and has yet to be publicly released as far as I'm aware, which speaks volume about their speed of operability and their follow-through.

[josh]

IMO, there should be a 4th choice. "Never fix anything." I want the first part I insert mated to the origin, not "Fixed" not ever.

Just curious... Why don't you like that first component to be fixed? That's my preference... Gives a visual in the tree of what is anchoring the whole assembly in space. Granted, there are times that I want to relocate that first component later, and so sometimes I'll float that component and re-position things with mates to the origin/planes.

[SPerman]

Just curious... Why don't you like that first component to be fixed? That's my preference... Gives a visual in the tree of what is anchoring the whole assembly in space. Granted, there are times that I want to relocate that first component later, and so sometimes I'll float that component and re-position things with mates to the origin/planes.

Why not give me the option? It is actually less work for the code; "do nothing."

Seeing an (f) in the assembly tree could mean everything is fine, or it could mean the designer was lazy, and changing mates could have unintended consequences because it was easier to fix the part than to build proper mates. In a one man shop, where you can ensure best practices are followed, then your workflow makes sense. As you get more designers involved, and have a harder time herding the cats, IMO it is easier to say "don't fix components" than to have exceptions to that rule.

[AlexLachance]

Why not give me the option? It is actually less work for the code; "do nothing."

Seeing an (f) in the assembly tree could mean everything is fine, or it could mean the designer was lazy, and changing mates could have unintended consequences because it was easier to fix the part than to build proper mates. In a one man shop, where you can ensure best practices are followed, then your workflow makes sense. As you get more designers involved, and have a harder time herding the cats, IMO it is easier to say "don't fix components" than to have exceptions to that rule.

It's a more intuitive principle for user collaboration. If I'm entering someone's assembly and I see no (F) for fixed, I'll have to check the mates that the planes have, and see which one has all 3.

I mate to all planes and then fix it, so the result is still there, and if the intention is to somehow move it around, I can unfix it and modify/supress the mates to change the position or whatevs.

To me, one F doesn't really mean anything. Many F means either laziness or lack of need for mating. Now if I come in an assembly with tons of (-) next to parts/assemblies, now that boils my blood.

[Petertha]

I'm glad I'm not hallucinating, thanks for replies. I do have a few other specific custom settings saved in my assembly template. I just tested it by making new assembly from part, specifying the same assembly template name & this time it hung onto my preference 'only fix first component'. So it appears it saves this preference (somewhere), but getting at it is not really in the System Options or Document Properties tab? Maybe at some point in the past I inadvertently selected a different option & it hung onto that? I should have also mentioned SW 2024 SP2.0

[josh]

I definitely wasn't saying that it shouldn't be an option, just wondering what the reasoning was behind your preference... Maybe we just have different preference, but maybe I learn something.

To me, one F doesn't really mean anything. Many F means either laziness or lack of need for mating. Now if I come in an assembly with tons of (-) next to parts/assemblies, now that boils my blood.

Exactly... The one "f" shows where to start in figuring out why this thing is where it is in the world, especially if I didn't make it.

If there's more than one "f", hopefully they're all "f", and it's because it was an imported neutral format that came as an assembly, but isn't needing to change.

I don't mind a few (-) on hardware and stuff... The more mates in the assembly, the longer it takes to solve. But I've definitely pulled up a few where nothing was fixed or mated to the origin, and everything was (-) just floating around in space...

[jcapriotti]

I'm glad I'm not hallucinating, thanks for replies. I do have a few other specific custom settings saved in my assembly template. I just tested it by making new assembly from part, specifying the same assembly template name & this time it hung onto my preference 'only fix first component'. So it appears it saves this preference (somewhere), but getting at it is not really in the System Options or Document Properties tab?

It's a user setting that is remembering the last time you used it. It' stored in the registry here, I didn't check all the values, probably 0, 1, 2 for each of the 3 options.

[SPerman]

It's a more intuitive principle for user collaboration. If I'm entering someone's assembly and I see no (F) for fixed, I'll have to check the mates that the planes have, and see which one has all 3.

My workflow is the top component in the assembly gets mated origin to origin. Similar in concept, but you don't have the (f) visible in the tree.

Admittedly, some of this is my OCD. It was beaten into me from day 1 that all sketches must be constrained. Seeing the (f) is like seeing (-). It is just wrong. (Even though there are many instances where it is fine.)

[jcapriotti]

My workflow is the top component in the assembly gets mated origin to origin. Similar in concept, but you don't have the (f) visible in the tree.

Admittedly, some of this is my OCD. It was beaten into me from day 1 that all sketches must be constrained. Seeing the (f) is like seeing (-). It is just wrong. (Even though there are many instances where it is fine.)

In my 25 years with SolidWorks, I've always left the first/base part fixed. The (F) in the tree was a nice indicator for which part was the base of the assembly. In a few cases its not always the first part.

I can see why you guys might feel like it should mated in place though. In the earlier years of SolidWorks, when you inserted the first part, it would just drop into place wherever you unclicked the mouse. It would only snap to the origin if you hovered the mouse over the origin which we often had hidden by default. So some users would drop the part off in space then fix it which was bad practice for obvious reasons. Then they added the auto origin alignment which helped.

[Glenn Schroeder]

. . . In the earlier years of SolidWorks, when you inserted the first part, it would just drop into place wherever you unclicked the mouse. It would only snap to the origin if you hovered the mouse over the origin which we often had hidden by default. So some users would drop the part off in space then fix it which was bad practice for obvious reasons. Then they added the auto origin alignment which helped.

I didn't like it placed in a random location depending on where I clicked either, but I learned that just clicking on the green check mark at the top of the "Insert Component" property manager would accomplish the same result, and without the need for showing the origin.

[SPerman]

I'm sure my workflow is influenced by previous software. SDRC Ideas did not have that feature, and if NX did, I didn't use it.