SOLIDWORKS Top Ten List (maverick style)

[mike miller]

Someone here was asking what a TTL would look like if it's away from the DSS hammer. Not being one to wonder without knowing, I thought I'd start one.

EDIT: After thinking about Matt's post below, I realized I can keep editing this post and add up to 20 ideas at a time. If that's not enough we'll do something else. I had to add placeholders because adding options resets all votes.

EDIT2: Not sure if I was clear enough- please post your ideas below and I'll add them to the OP for voting.

EDIT3: Can't believe I missed ONE and TWO! Oh well, it's there now.

EDIT4:
12/2/21 This poll is continued here since there have been more than 20 ideas submitted.

[mike miller]

This is the only one I entered that I'm not half-ashamed to repost here.

Replace 3DEXPEREINCE with Desktop works. https://r1132100503382-eu1-3dswym.3dexp ... qzPql2Bi_w

End 3DEXPERIENCE and re-fund Desktop SWX. Why not go back to the point in time where users were as happy as the C-level executives of Dassault?

[matt]

Someone here was asking what a TTL would look like if it's away from the DSS hammer. Not being one to wonder without knowing, I thought I'd start one.

Maybe we can have "likes" count as votes for the following entries. Also, can we keep the banter and discussion in other threads..???

You can make a poll in a post. That would work.

[jcapriotti]

@matt , maybe we could do something like this:

https://www.phpbb.com/community/ideas

https://github.com/phpbb/ideas

[jcapriotti]

Maybe also add tags to categorize and search (PDM, Sheet metal, sketching, features, etc)

https://www.phpbb.com/customise/db/find ... 5D=36&sc=1

[mike miller]

Maybe also add tags to categorize and search (PDM, Sheet metal, sketching, features, etc)

https://www.phpbb.com/customise/db/find ... 5D=36&sc=1

Tags.....?!?!?? You've been contaminated by the Swamp! Are you feeling okay, Jason?

[jcapriotti]

Tags.....?!?!?? You've been contaminated by the Swamp! Are you feeling okay, Jason?

Yeah, well you made me go back over their against my better judgment and I come back with swamp fever.

I think I found that guy looking for a refund.

[Tom G]

* Colorize Comment Indicators

* Enable triple clicking in text selections
You most likely have long known and used double click to select a word, or double click and drag to select words. Many users do not know that you can triple click text to select the entire paragraph or header or such (in browsers, text editors, PDF's, etc). I use it often, and have never seen this function in Solidworks.

[Reennie]

Don't forget ONE and TWO.....

[Lucas]

Fix Structural System (and finish it too)
https://r1132100503382-eu1-3dswym.3dexp ... HfsY6tFRjg


Improve Move/Copy Bodies (Ref. Geo. as entities) - Got from @bnemec
https://r1132100503382-eu1-3dswym.3dexp ... Ko5pnqOZwA

[Lucas]

Join Feature without Boolean
https://r1132100503382-eu1-3dswym.3dexp ... wrj-yhzFpg

[zwei]

This is actually a nice one, especially if the file need to be exported as STEP:
Hole Wizard to have color https://r1132100503382-eu1-3dswym.3dexp ... aym0JlnLSQ


Ability to add multiple path for custom property tab template file location
https://r1132100503382-eu1-3dswym.3dexp ... KLjnyj2WvA

[bnemec]

Sheet metal dimple without forming tool, just like SE can do.

[bnemec]

Recognize non-flatenable features in mirrored sheet metal parts when saving to dxf for CNC cutting.

[Dwight]

When suppressing a feature in the FeatureManager, add an option to not suppress any child features.

[Dwight]

When deleting a feature in the FeatureManager, add an option to delete everything that is selected, with no regard to what happens to child features.

[Dwight]

When creating a new feature, add the option to create it even when there is an error.

[Dwight]

For sketch arrays, add a new sketch element that shows the array center. Allow relations to the array center. Update the array center when the array counts and the array dimensions change.

[mike miller]

Thanks for all your input. I just added all the submitted ones, so they are now open for voting. If we need more than 20 I'll create a second one and sticky both threads for a few weeks.

[bnemec]

Sketch relations in SW is better and worse than SE. It's nice that I can select a bunch of arcs then make them all equal radii, in Edge could only do one set at a time. Conversely, applying tangent in Edge was MUCH faster than SW; instead of needing to select the elements first one could select the tangent relation then just click the coincident (box) between the line and arc. I think this is all pros and cons of selecting object first vs. action first. Solid Edge is "Choose what you want to do then select the objects". SW is "Select something(s) and then choose what you want to do." Everyone where I work would very much like to be able to start the "make sketch elements tangent relation command" then select segments to apply the relation. This would save much time in sketching.

IMO good sketching practices are the foundation of a good model and safe sketches use relations first, then dims. On that I would say that sketch relation placement functionality might be one of the most important components of parametric modeling.

[mike miller]

Sketch relations in SW is better and worse than SE. It's nice that I can select a bunch of arcs then make them all equal radii, in Edge could only do one set at a time. Conversely, applying tangent in Edge was MUCH faster than SW; instead of needing to select the elements first one could select the tangent relation then just click the coincident (box) between the line and arc. I think this is all pros and cons of selecting object first vs. action first. Solid Edge is "Choose what you want to do then select the objects". SW is "Select something(s) and then choose what you want to do." Everyone where I work would very much like to be able to start the "make sketch elements tangent relation command" then select segments to apply the relation. This would save much time in sketching.

IMO good sketching practices are the foundation of a good model and safe sketches use relations first, then dims. On that I would say that sketch relation placement functionality might be one of the most important components of parametric modeling.

You are mostly correct but there are a few caveats.

1) I guess you know SWX allows tangent relations to be applied when you click the point of tangency.......
2) SE 2022 has a sketching context menu (to win over the SWX users).

You are correct about sketching being foundational for good modelling practices. Unless you use Synch- then sketching is only a means to an end.

[Glenn Schroeder]

. . . Everyone where I work would very much like to be able to start the "make sketch elements tangent relation command" then select segments to apply the relation. This would save much time in sketching.

Do none of you use the practice of Ctrl+selecting sketch elements, then releasing the Ctrl button (or just a click and drag box) to get the relations pop-up right there by your cursor, where you can apply the relation or relations without the need to go to the property manager?

[bnemec]

Do none of you use the practice of Ctrl+selecting sketch elements, then releasing the Ctrl button (or just a click and drag box) to get the relations pop-up right there by your cursor, where you can apply the relation or relations without the need to go to the property manager?


image.png

Yeah, that's the way we were shown, but it's painful slow compared to the other way around for some things.

[HDS]

The sketch relation tool I miss in SW is from Pro/E. If you add a conflicting relation it shows the conflicts and askes which one you want to change.

[Jaylin Hochstetler]

Do none of you use the practice of Ctrl+selecting sketch elements, then releasing the Ctrl button (or just a click and drag box) to get the relations pop-up right there by your cursor, where you can apply the relation or relations without the need to go to the property manager?


image.png

That's all I use, period.

Edit to add: At first I thought SE was clunky compared to SW, but I'm pretty much used to it now. Although I am looking forward to the breadcrumbs in SE 2022.

[Jaylin Hochstetler]

It would be really nice to have a button in the "Modify Configurations" Dialogue to "Suppress All" and "Unsuppress All" (or "Check All" and "Uncheck All").

image.png (12.28 KiB) Viewed 6258 times

[SPerman]

A big +1 from me. Same for configuring constraints. Sometimes between the number of constraints selected, and the number of configurations, there can be a long list of checks to be applied/unapplied.

[Glenn Schroeder]

It would be really nice to have a button in the "Modify Configurations" Dialogue to "Suppress All" and "Unsuppress All" (or "Check All" and "Uncheck All").
image.png

1. Check the box to suppress in the top cell.
2. Move your cursor to the bottom right corner of the cell until a little cross appears.
3. Click on it and drag down.

[SPerman]

Thanks Glenn. That's a huge time saver.

It works laterally as well.

[mike miller]

1. Check the box to suppress in the top cell.
2. Move your cursor to the bottom right corner of the cell until a little cross appears.
3. Click on it and drag down.


image.png

image.png

Wheee!!! I wish I had known that about a year ago when I spent a LOT of time clicking in those tiny boxes as fast as possible. Another request I would have is to be able to open a table to configure both components and features. Having to configure components, close the table, select a bunch of mates, and reopen the table gets under my skin a bit.

[DennisD]

Wheee!!! I wish I had known that about a year ago when I spent a LOT of time clicking in those tiny boxes as fast as possible. Another request I would have is to be able to open a table to configure both components and features. Having to configure components, close the table, select a bunch of mates, and reopen the table gets under my skin a bit.

Maybe we go about configuring things differently. When I make configurations I will purposely name features, dimensions, and mates that I want configured. I'll make at least two manual configurations where these items are different. Then I make a Design Table and let it automatically include all the configured items. With them suitably named it is easy to then layout all the things I want in the spreadsheet. The DT might create with just the two or three configurations, but I can easily generate all the versions I want and use Excel functions to boot.

Here's a look at one of my DT's from my parametric gear file. It is a part file so it does not have any mates, but if it did they would have meaningful names. The configuration names are generated from the green input values and they are simple to modify for special naming. It works for me.

[Glenn Schroeder]

Wheee!!! I wish I had known that about a year ago when I spent a LOT of time clicking in those tiny boxes as fast as possible. Another request I would have is to be able to open a table to configure both components and features. Having to configure components, close the table, select a bunch of mates, and reopen the table gets under my skin a bit.

Like this?

[Jaylin Hochstetler]

1. Check the box to suppress in the top cell.
2. Move your cursor to the bottom right corner of the cell until a little cross appears.
3. Click on it and drag down.


image.png

image.png

COOL! I wish I had known that a long time ago!

[mike miller]

Like this?


image.png

Like this.

Also, that is a long context menu!

[mattpeneguy]

Like this?


image.png

No Glenn,
Use meaningful names. I can't tell what you are configuring in your picture. Try naming things in a way that makes sense, like this:

image.png (2.45 KiB) Viewed 6213 times

[Glenn Schroeder]

Like this.

2021-11-30 14_33_55.jpg

Also, that is a long context menu!

Choose "Configure Component" first to open the simplified design table. Then expand the tree and double-click on each Mate you want to configure. That will add a column for each Mate where you can choose whether or not to suppress it. If it's a Mate that has a numerical value, like a Distance mate, I believe you'll get a little drop-down where you can add a column for that value also.

[mike miller]

Choose "Configure Component" first to open the simplified design table. Then expand the tree and double-click on each Mate you want to configure. That will add a column for each Mate where you can choose whether or not to suppress it. If it's a Mate that has a numerical value, like a Distance mate, I believe you'll get a little drop-down where you can add a column for that value also.


image.png

Wizard.

[Glenn Schroeder]

Wizard.

I'm glad I could help.

[SPerman]

(Any of my discussions of NX should be prefaced with "if I am remembering correctly" because my memory isn't trustworthy and it is getting further and further away from when I last used it.)

NX had a setting where any visualization changes made while in the middle of a feature, were undone when you closed that feature dialog. For example, you open the Mate window. You then hide 3 things and change the shading on another so you can access the two faces you want to mate. When you close the Mate window, everything goes back to how it was before the command was started. i.e. the things you hid while performing the mate command are now visible again.

This worked pretty much across the board. If you were in an extrude command, and needed to show a sketch to use as the direction for the extrude, the sketch is hidden again once you finish with the extrude.

[zwei]

Improve Parting Line Drafting Face Visibility
https://r1132100503382-eu1-3dswym.3dexp ... Tat3tgAG-w

[zwei]

Allow body to be set as "Not Selectable"

https://r1132100503382-eu1-3dswym.3dexp ... xHEJSaAnyw

[Frank_Oostendorp]

Just to see if this idea gets banned over here:
https://r1132100503382-eu1-3dswym.3dexp ... JJD_rxZxRQ

Reaction of mysterious Top Ten List Admin:

Thank you for submitting this idea. We greatly value your feedback.

The Top Ten List is meant for enhancement ideas within the SOLIDWORKS product itself. As this idea is not a functional enhancement the SOLIDWORKS product, we will remove this idea in one week on December 7th.

[Uncle_Hairball]

Allow body to be set as "Not Selectable"

https://r1132100503382-eu1-3dswym.3dexp ... xHEJSaAnyw

For what purpose?

[SPerman]

Allow body to be set as "Not Selectable"

"Change Transparency" does something similar.

image.png (18.95 KiB) Viewed 6064 times

[zwei]

"Change Transparency" does something similar.

Not really in multibody part i think, you can still select a transparent face, see image below, i had tried to select the face on the blue body but end up selecting the transparent body

For what purpose?

Sometimes i need to model a part inside a bounding volume (which a lot of time is a separate part that i bring in using insert part), making the bounding volume visible but not selectable will make life easier as u can have a visual feedback but will not select it by accident instead of hiding and unhiding

[zwei]

Allow individual plane to be assign with different colour
https://r1132100503382-eu1-3dswym.3dexp ... H-DeloNa_A

Separate visibility control of construction and geometry sketch
https://r1132100503382-eu1-3dswym.3dexp ... Om02_vi72w

[bnemec]

Not really in multibody part i think, you can still select a transparent face, see image below, i had tried to select the face on the blue body but end up selecting the transparent body
image.png



Sometimes i need to model a part inside a bounding volume (which a lot of time is a separate part that i bring in using insert part), making the bounding volume visible but not selectable will make life easier as u can have a visual feedback but will not select it by accident instead of hiding and unhiding

I'd like same thing, I need to see the body, but don't allow selecting. IIRC in Solid Edge the other bodies were not active or something like that, so the selection manager wasn't grabbing geometry from those bodies, was much smoother IMO.

[Tom G]

Allow either multiple BOM sorting filters, or to select a Sort from favorites.

[jcapriotti]

Not really in multibody part i think, you can still select a transparent face, see image below, i had tried to select the face on the blue body but end up selecting the transparent body
image.png



Sometimes i need to model a part inside a bounding volume (which a lot of time is a separate part that i bring in using insert part), making the bounding volume visible but not selectable will make life easier as u can have a visual feedback but will not select it by accident instead of hiding and unhiding

Yeah, didn't realize select thru transparency didn't work with multibody, bummer. You have "select other" but that can be pain to do a lot. You could do a 3dsketch, and "convert entities" on the reference solid's edges, then hide it the body.