Have anyone successful get power in charge to decide to leave SW ?

[SPerman]

Constant scrolling up and down and passing History, Sensors, Annotations, Solid Bodies, Material on every part.

No argument there. I much prefer the NX UI where you weren't constantly expanding, collapsing and scrolling.

viewtopic.php?t=2185

[Pernils]

I was taught to fully constrain my sketches using IDEAS 20 years ago. I don't think it is a SW thing as much as a "best practice" thing.

I have also been all in for fully constrain but was loosing it up a bit over the years. But what I have seen on youtube tut they are always constrainig even if they are like make a rectangular cutout. The function dimension is only the depth and width.

[Pernils]

When I took the Essentials class many years ago the instructor told us about a case he knew of where the CAD user didn't take the time to fully define his sketches. Something got moved slightly without anyone noticing it, and it didn't get caught until the part had gone into production. It cost the company hundreds of thousands of dollars, and cost the CAD his job.

Of course you have to adept to the situation, function dimension must be constrained. Design geometry sometimes not.

Hmm .. maybe I constraint everything in the end ... But I really start to like the ST concept. You have the both world to play around in ...

[jcapriotti]

I was taught to fully constrain my sketches using IDEAS 20 years ago. I don't think it is a SW thing as much as a "best practice" thing.

I always thought it was a Pro/E thing since it would let you out of the sketch until it was fully defined.

[jcapriotti]

I have also been all in for fully constrain but was loosing it up a bit over the years. But what I have seen on youtube tut they are always constrainig even if they are like make a rectangular cutout. The function dimension is only the depth and width.

image.png

Two problems this creates.

1. You get an underdefined indicator in the tree which leaves an open question as to what might not be constrained.
2. I copy this part, make the shaft diameter larger.......cut fails or give unexpected result due to far right vertical line floating.

-Just because you could, doesn't mean you should

[Pernils]

Two problems this creates.

1. You get an underdefined indicator in the tree which leaves an open question as to what might not be constrained.
2. I copy this part, make the shaft diameter larger.......cut fails or give unexpected result due to far right vertical line floating.

-Just because you could, doesn't mean you should

SW spits it out SE don't.

Yes increased shaft diameter could produce a failure .. but if I do this ... (removed the floating line)

... it can't ... This sort of open sketches could sometimes be a timesaver ...

Sort of ..

And you don't want to constrain your self as you don't know what will happen with the green surfaces as your modelling fiddling continue..

[Glenn Schroeder]

I always thought it was a Pro/E thing since it would let you out of the sketch until it was fully defined.

There's a setting in SW that will make you fully define a sketch also if you want it turned on.

[bnemec]

I have also been all in for fully constrain but was loosing it up a bit over the years. But what I have seen on youtube tut they are always constrainig even if they are like make a rectangular cutout. The function dimension is only the depth and width.

image.png

Since we're on the fully constrained debate I'll throw another one in; cut features from open profile sketches. I'm still annoyed in SW that I cannot do a cut with an open profile. I try to apply the "keep it a simple as possible but no simpler" motto to modeling, especially sketching. Allowing cuts from open profiles allowed simpler and more robust sketches in my opinion. Which brings a SE Pet-peeve to mind that it would usually flip the side to remove material after editing the sketch. I don't know that the problem was unique to open profile cuts, and I cannot say that SW is immune to the same problem either.

[Pernils]

Since we're on the fully constrained debate I'll throw another one in; cut features from open profile sketches. I'm still annoyed in SW that I cannot do a cut with an open profile. I try to apply the "keep it a simple as possible but no simpler" motto to modeling, especially sketching. Allowing cuts from open profiles allowed simpler and more robust sketches in my opinion. Which brings a SE Pet-peeve to mind that it would usually flip the side to remove material after editing the sketch. I don't know that the problem was unique to open profile cuts, and I cannot say that SW is immune to the same problem either.

I think with the new vertical layout (2023) they have given the direction a more focus..

(Direction is taken where your mouse pointer is related to the arrow).

In SW you have to check some checkbox labelled flip side or something, on the other hand Dassault seems to aiming for a complete non responsive UI. Thinking here that next time you open the file you see what you have been doing ..

[JSculley]

Since we're on the fully constrained debate I'll throw another one in; cut features from open profile sketches. I'm still annoyed in SW that I cannot do a cut with an open profile.

Eh? I do cuts with open sketches all the time , and I'm still using SW 2017. You are restricted to 'Blind', 'Through All' and 'Through All - Both' end conditions, but that's probably 95+% of all cuts anyway.

[jcapriotti]

Eh? I do cuts with open sketches all the time , and I'm still using SW 2017. You are restricted to 'Blind', 'Through All' and 'Through All - Both' end conditions, but that's probably 95+% of all cuts anyway.

Yeah, this has been possible going back to at least Solidworks 99 I believe. I remember when we evaluated both SWX and SE back then, the sales guys from both would point out how you could just leave the sketch open. I think it was to "one up" the Pro/E sales guys. I quickly learned that I didn't like doing that as it left the sketches under defined and felt half assed.

[Pernils]

We do need to keep records of the old revs for various reasons.



Production only makes the revision that is connected/setup in ERP. Once the BOMs and Routings are updated that's it, production should be making new rev. It gets drawn out sometimes though as they don't like to scrap inventory so we do a lot of "running changes" where Inventory Control and Planning will manage orders to balance inventory of piece parts that are changing so that we can use up existing inventory. The goal is the bins of parts are consumed FIFO. So the weldments may be switched over the same day as the parts or several months later, similar applies for revising purchased components and assembled part numbers. Every part affects other parts. Notice this has nothing to do with CAD files, closest thing to CAD is which revision the drawing.pdf is connected in the routings. For example it's not unheard of for production to still be running orders of rev 02 while the CAD >files< have been released at rev 03 and be back in WIP for the next ECR. We get change requests from all directions.

When a change to a part cannot be applied across all the where used then a new part number is created. In CAD we literally copy the model and drawing then make the changes to the new file and assign the new part number. This is one reason why the majority of our files do not start from templates. I'd guess over 50% of our part files are copies of existing part and well into the 70%s of our assemblies are copied from another assembly file. Downstream interchangeability of these components has proven to be very important over the years. That is why I get so excited about geometry IDs, modeling methods and editing methods. Also why copying of existing similar part files instead of remodeling from scratch helps us.

So you have a multiple split enviroment ?

One erp and one plm ?

You mention ECR .... are you using Arena ?

[bnemec]

Eh? I do cuts with open sketches all the time , and I'm still using SW 2017. You are restricted to 'Blind', 'Through All' and 'Through All - Both' end conditions, but that's probably 95+% of all cuts anyway.

I'm sorry. I don't know what I'm talking about. Memories are fuzzy. It's adding material that cannot do open profile in SW (I think) it only allows thin feature with open profile.

[Glenn Schroeder]

I'm sorry. I don't know what I'm talking about. Memories are fuzzy. It's adding material that cannot do open profile in SW (I think) it only allows thin feature with open profile.

How would the software know what profile to extrude if it isn't closed? I can just about guarantee that if the programmers set it up to make an assumption of what you want it would not be what you want a good portion of the time.

[bnemec]

How would the software know what profile to extrude if it isn't closed? I can just about guarantee that if the programmers set it up to make an assumption of what you want it would not be what you want a good portion of the time.

In solid edge the feature profile selection is different. It's more by sketch segment or profile, not entire sketch and definitely not region. In simple parts a link for example, can be done with one simple sketch; circles or inner profiles for cut features that drive the outer profile can all be one sketch. The be one tab/extrude feature from the outer profile and subsequent cut extrude features for the holes.

[Glenn Schroeder]

In solid edge the feature profile selection is different. It's more by sketch segment or profile, not entire sketch and definitely not region. In simple parts a link for example, can be done with one simple sketch; circles or inner profiles for cut features that drive the outer profile can all be one sketch. The be one tab/extrude feature from the outer profile and subsequent cut extrude features for the holes.

You can use a single sketch for multiple features in Solidworks also, but I still don't understand how you can have an extrude without a closed profile.

[Frederick_Law]

My guess.
Sketch a line. Pick cut direction through the part and pick which side of the line to cut.
So I can sketch a point and cut corner off a part.

[bnemec]

You can use a single sketch for multiple features in Solidworks also, but I still don't understand how you can have an extrude without a closed profile.

It's for adding material, not for first solid. The profile is connected to edges/pierce points of existing solid. It simplifies the sketch as the profile can be fully defined with fewer sketch elements.

Edit: To me it feels like it has similar robustness as the Extrude up to next body type of thing, except direction of extrusion is more parallel to the face(s) of the body we're adding to than normal to them. I prefer to make the sketch normal to the faces the additional material is being added to then use extrude up to body/faces as it's usually much more tolerant of upstream edits. Example, mounting bosses, ribs, pin landing points, etc. With a little bit of art/skill in terminating/defining the open end of the profile we can get almost the same behavior when the added material is extruded/swept parallel to the faces with a lot less sketch fixing than a closed profile. I mean there's plenty of other ways to do this that are equally tolerant of upstream edits too; multi-body with union is usually a solid option but comes with extra overhead.

[Pernils]

Made a video on the topic "open sketches".



This is SW 2021 so perhaps something have changed in the latest releases. (but I highly doubt it ..)

[Arthur NY]

@Pernils: You remind me of users that swear by AutoCAD and it being way faster than 3D because they've been using it for 10, 15, 25 years. By your own admission you are standing in your own way. It has nothing to do with any of the softwares as much as it has to do with your inability to want to adapt to your new environment. And that throughout this entire thread you've still not done the base things with which to even help yourself actually become more familiar.

I watched the 25min video and man.... there's just SO much that you are missing. I'd say 95% of what you don't know is even in Solidworks is what's holding you back. Will there be some slight differences between these two, well yes...duh otherwise they'd just be the same. Here is just about as 1:1 response to your video as you'll get.

Show Hidden: Shift+Tab. Place your mouse where the model is and hit Shift+Tab and the model comes back

View------>Modify Perspective

Display States: Allows for any component to be changed on a per option basis. In other words you can have solid, wireframe, hidden lines show...etc all existing and can then be toggled when needed.

Can create a configuration that does a cut extrude and can exclude any Part file to create a custom section view.

Arc command was on tangent. There are three options to choose from in the Arc command. In Solidworks it wants to start at an endpoint. It's just different.

When you rotated the viewport there are two red arrows showing the major and minor axis. It's literally an on screen indication for which way the viewport is orientated. There is also the world coordinate arrows located in the lower left corner.
It would not make sense to be able to make two lines horizontal just because the viewport is rotated. It's working with the world coordinate system. That's like telling a line to be dimensions and infinite at the same time.

You have instant 3D turned off. And this is definitely a disingenuous representation because it's on by default. Instant 3D then gives blue blubs to a dimension and will change in real-time.

The definition of Mid-Plane is that it goes in two directions evenly. If you want option that was shown in SE then it has to be two directions then select the second direction and you'll get the same options.

Again because you have instant 3D turned off you're missing out on the option to make live edits on the screen while modeling. When using the Extrude and Cut Extrude commands.

Again because you have instant 3D turned off you are missing out on the ability to move the sketch around that is absorbed by a feature.

There is a literally a "Mates" double paperclip located at the bottom of the Feature Manager Tree that shows all of the mates. There is also the ability to click on a Part or SubAssembly and choose to "View Mates" which will then isolate only those that have a mate referencing that Part or SubAssembly.

So once again the majority of what and why you are having issues would have been solved months ago. You could have saved yourself this anguishing painful aspect of learning SW had you done the base training. For some reason you seem to just want to inflict this "woe is me.....can you feel sorry for me" attitude rather than trying to actually get your answers solved. Why.... I don't know.

[Pernils]

@Pernils: You remind me of users that swear by AutoCAD and it being way faster than 3D because they've been using it for 10, 15, 25 years. By your own admission you are standing in your own way. It has nothing to do with any of the softwares as much as it has to do with your inability to want to adapt to your new environment. And that throughout this entire thread you've still not done the base things with which to even help yourself actually become more familiar.

I watched the 25min video and man.... there's just SO much that you are missing. I'd say 95% of what you don't know is even in Solidworks is what's holding you back. Will there be some slight differences between these two, well yes...duh otherwise they'd just be the same. Here is just about as 1:1 response to your video as you'll get.

Show Hidden: Shift+Tab. Place your mouse where the model is and hit Shift+Tab and the model comes back

Should have figure that out by my self ..
On the other this is what the assistant UI in SE is doing for you ..

View------>Modify Perspective

Display States: Allows for any component to be changed on a per option basis. In other words you can have solid, wireframe, hidden lines show...etc all existing and can then be toggled when needed.

Can create a configuration that does a cut extrude and can exclude any Part file to create a custom section view.

In SE section views are stored under its own selections.

SW is throwing everything under configuration.
Both approach have their pros and cons

Arc command was on tangent. There are three options to choose from in the Arc command. In Solidworks it wants to start at an endpoint. It's just different.

SE have also 3 different options but "Tangent arc" cover mostly of your daily needs.
Notice also that line and circle have bigger buttons, just to make them easier to select.

image.png (11.05 KiB) Viewed 25518 times

When you rotated the viewport there are two red arrows showing the major and minor axis. It's literally an on screen indication for which way the viewport is orientated. There is also the world coordinate arrows located in the lower left corner.
It would not make sense to be able to make two lines horizontal just because the viewport is rotated. It's working with the world coordinate system. That's like telling a line to be dimensions and infinite at the same time.

Can't help it that I find it more intuitive to pressing one button to get vertical or horizontal based on the element related to the screen. A line almost horizontal with the screen will be horizontal with the screen.

You have instant 3D turned off. And this is definitely a disingenuous representation because it's on by default. Instant 3D then gives blue blubs to a dimension and will change in real-time.

The definition of Mid-Plane is that it goes in two directions evenly. If you want option that was shown in SE then it has to be two directions then select the second direction and you'll get the same options.

Yes its doable but I find more user friendly to have commands/function to be consistent.

Symmetry/Mid plane should be equal if blind or up to vertex.

One reason why you choose to use up to face/vertex is that you don't know or care what's the distance. The manually have to specify it in direction 2 render the intention of "mid plane" useless.

Again because you have instant 3D turned off you're missing out on the option to make live edits on the screen while modeling. When using the Extrude and Cut Extrude commands.

Again because you have instant 3D turned off you are missing out on the ability to move the sketch around that is absorbed by a feature.

Instant 3D mimics SE dynamic edit.
Why keep the functionality to have it turned off (Instant 3D) ? Clutter the UI with more and more stuff don't make it more user friendly.
(Perhaps one thing could be that Instant 3D don't do midplane among others ..)

For example SE have in 2023 throw away the button "Cutout" and "Revolve cut" and have them combined under the same button "Extrude" and "Revolve".
Thought it was a shitty move at first but now find it useful.

We have sort of the same functionality with instant 3D in SW. Draw a sketch and select an edge and drag.(After more inspection is crippled compare to regular boss)

There is a literally a "Mates" double paperclip located at the bottom of the Feature Manager Tree that shows all of the mates. There is also the ability to click on a Part or SubAssembly and choose to "View Mates" which will then isolate only those that have a mate referencing that Part or SubAssembly.

Under the paperclip you are meet by horrible mess. Okay its nice to delete failed mates in one location but you must visit every part to recreate them anayway.

Thanks for "View mates" ..

So once again the majority of what and why you are having issues would have been solved months ago. You could have saved yourself this anguishing painful aspect of learning SW had you done the base training. For some reason you seem to just want to inflict this "woe is me.....can you feel sorry for me" attitude rather than trying to actually get your answers solved. Why.... I don't know.

I don't search for pity.

But I must admit that I'm a bit puzzled why some are so protective over SW.
Like SW is the best you can get on the market, today and forever. And if you don't find to not be so then you are to be blamed.

Whatever ...

[Arthur NY]

@Pernils Quite literally everyone is telling you to just use SE and stop your complaining about SW. No one is saying that SW is better. There are Pros/Cons to each software. What you are doing is never going to convince any company or SW user because of your own personal preferences. How do you not understand that? You spend more time complaining and showing what SE has that SW doesn't when you could invest that time into helping yourself get better in SW. If that is what your company is using then either get with it or look for a new company that uses SE.

You're fighting yourself here not us. We're simply showing you that what you think isn't possible or isn't a functionality is not the case. What you're showing in SE is great for you, it works for you. But I can show you my UI and it's WAY more streamlined in SW than yours is in SE. Why because I've taken the time to customize the UI so I'm VERY rarely in the menus or icons. It's all hotkey and "Default S-Key" driven. I'm staying on screen 99% of the time. I don't have these short comings that you are showing. But again that's me these are my personal settings.

But then again I also use Rhino, F360, zBrush, Modo, Geomagic, Design X, Substance and many more. It's become part of my muscle memory to adapt to these different UI's because it's become necessary to get my job done. That you can't overcome 20 years is saying more about you than it is about SW or any other 3D app.

[jcapriotti]

@Pernils

You can create and save section views without using configurations. There are limits on the shape though since it's defined using one or more planes. SE gives some additional flexibility to use a sketch, which you can do in SWX but requires a configuration and cut. SWX gives the option to show cut component areas as transparent and different colors for the cutting surfaces. So I think, like most things in these programs, you'll find things that one does better than the other and vice versa.

[AlexLachance]

I don't search for pity.

But I must admit that I'm a bit puzzled why some are so protective over SW.
Like SW is the best you can get on the market, today and forever. And if you don't find to not be so then you are to be blamed.

Whatever ...

And I must admit that I'm a bit puzzled why you're so protective of SolidEdge when so many people have provided you with solutions.

Nobody here said SolidWorks is best, most people actually agreed with you that SolidWorks had a bunch of issues. What people did is provide you with solutions for the issues you listed about SolidWorks, which you then proceeded to reject out of hand without even giving them a chance.

The only person that claimed a program to be better then another in here is you. Stop being delusional.

[Arthur NY]

@jcapriotti It's 100% possible to create a configuration and use a Sketch to do a cut extrude and then select the Part files that this will affect. It's not limited to planes only.....

[jcapriotti]

@jcapriotti It's 100% possible to create a configuration and use a Sketch to do a cut extrude and then select the Part files that this will affect. It's not limited to planes only.....

I meant in the section view command, you are limited to select up to 3 planes to define a section cut. Doing a configuration with a cut is more a of a workaround IMO, especially going back to before SolidWorks could save section views.

[Arthur NY]

I meant in the section view command, you are limited to select up to 3 planes to define a section cut. Doing a configuration with a cut is more a of a workaround IMO, especially going back to before SolidWorks could save section views.

Definitely is a workaround....but like the Mandalorian's always say...."This is the way" especially in SW, it's always about finding the workarounds!!!! ......

There should be, within the Section View command, the option to choose a sketch not just planes to use as the cutting tool.

[Frederick_Law]

But I must admit that I'm a bit puzzled why some are so protective over SW.
Like SW is the best you can get on the market, today and forever. And if you don't find to not be so then you are to be blamed.

Whatever ...

You should have seen them a few years ago in the old forum.
They are much better now

[Pernils]

You should have seen them a few years ago in the old forum.
They are much better now

(Thanks for a god laugh . . .)

[Pernils]

When we now are into views. Is there a way to get "view orientation" (using space) to default to isometric?
Current it default to some "dirotatometric".
When I press the isometric it will stick for a while but later default to the old behavior.
Did some search but... will try again.

[KennyG]

When we now are into views. Is there a way to get "view orientation" (using space) to default to isometric?
Current it default to some "dirotatometric".
When I press the isometric it will stick for a while but later default to the old behavior.
Did some search but... will try again.

I've heard of "dimetric" and "trimetric", but "dirotatometric"?

[Pernils]

I've heard of "dimetric" and "trimetric", but "dirotatometric"?

(I invented that word by my self.)

Hmm I think I got it now ...

Pressing the corner of the "view orientation cube" will factor in the object orientation related to the viewport.

If one rotate it a bit and hover the same corner you will be present with another view.

In SE this is fixed. You will always have isometric no matter how it initial is rotated.
For my self I just can't see the use case for this behaviour but surly it must be, either Dassult wouldn't bother to implement it.

[SPerman]

One possible reason for this: Most of the world thinks Z = up. SW doesn't. So your perfect isometric view may be pointing at the back and bottom of my orientation.

[Frederick_Law]

I think SW don't rotate correctly on a few of those locations.
Consistently inconsistent.

[gerard]

When we now are into views. Is there a way to get "view orientation" (using space) to default to isometric?
Current it default to some "dirotatometric".
When I press the isometric it will stick for a while but later default to the old behavior.
Did some search but... will try again.

Perhaps some training would be useful at this juncture.....

[Arthur NY]

@gerard It's been suggested to him several times over. It just goes in one ear and out the other. He wants us users to figure out what he doesn't know and then show him how it's done in SW to which he then decides that SW still sucks because it's not SE. It's way past beyond boring or productive at this point.

[Frederick_Law]

Perhaps some training would be useful at this juncture.....

Try click on all the edge and corners on the cube.
Not all work correctly.

[gerard]

@gerard It's been suggested to him several times over. It just goes in one ear and out the other. He wants us users to figure out what he doesn't know and then show him how it's done in SW to which he then decides that SW still sucks because it's not SE. It's way past beyond boring or productive at this point.

Roger that.

[Jaylin Hochstetler]

I went from SW to SE and wouldn't go back. I sympathize with you @Pernils. Sorry SW fanatics...
We do machinery design with lots of sheet metal so we use sync very heavily. If it would not be for sync the switch would not have been worth it. If I would be doing all ordered modeling I would probably use SW, I honestly think SW has a better "Ordered" interface, but the power of sync makes up for any lack in the interface.
I must also say that SE drawings put SW in the dirt. For instance you can change the geometry of a part and as long as the line doesn't move that the annotation, balloon, note, etc. is attached to it will not break. And to reattach is SUPER simple compared to SW. SW seems to go by the line "ID" so it breaks very easily, and to reattach is a PAIN.

There's many more things I like in SE and there's things I miss in SW. They both have their pros and cons after all they are 2 DIFFERENT companies.

We are also using Teamcenter now which ties nicely with SE for the most part. But I'm finding out from talking with support that in the Siemens world SE is considered in competition with NX. The developers do NOT live in the same building. Which means NX ties much nicer with TC.

I am planning to switch jobs by the end of the year where I will be using SW. I'm not looking particularly forward to it. But I'm willing to do whatever it takes. I'll be working for my brother so hopefully I can eventually convert him to SE.

[Dwight]

We are also using Teamcenter now which ties nicely with SE for the most part. But I'm finding out from talking with support that in the Siemens world SE is considered in competition with NX. The developers do NOT live in the same building. Which means NX ties much nicer with TC.

Jaylin

We are now using SW and Teamcenter. I am curious what improvements we'd see in Teamcenter if we switched to SE (without getting into SW vs SE).

Thanks

Dwight

[Jaylin Hochstetler]

Jaylin

We are now using SW and Teamcenter. I am curious what improvements we'd see in Teamcenter if we switched to SE (without getting into SW vs SE).

Thanks

Dwight

I don't know I've never used the Embedded Client for SW.
Do you have a Structure Editor for SW?

I'd imagine with SE and TC both being Siemens products they would tie more closely together. What are biggest grievances with SW/TC?

[Dwight]

Jaylin

I do have the structure editor, which is nice for reviewing the structure and exporting to a spreadsheet. I haven't used it to push a structure down into Solidworks, and I don't know if it even can.

I would imagine there'd be more things you could do directly from SE, maybe do a quick save. We have a tab that opens a manager for check in, etc.

The biggest issue I have with Teamcenter is with updating my local work folder with components that other people have saved, to get their latest. There's no option that updates my local files either to the latest files or to the latest released revision. Those are the two options I need, but instead I have to check the entire list and fiddle with it manually. Yes, there's a long list of options (see image) but none of them do what I want. It also very slow.

The other thing is all the useless warning windows that come up during a save or open and cause it to hang if I go get coffee. I have to stay and watch nothing happen in case there's a pop up.

I can say it is a lot better than what we had before.

Dwight

[Jaylin Hochstetler]

Dwight,

It looks like SE/TC is more tightly integrated.

SE has a very nice Cache assistant for checking the status of the items in your cache.

Can you just do a normal save in SW or do you have to use a "TC" save? In SE we can do a normal save which saves it in your cache then you can do an "Upload" which updates TC and leaves the item checked out to you. We have ours set up so when you close the item it automatically checks it in, or you can manually check it in.

This what the TC tab looks like in SE:

This is what the TC open dialog looks like in SE:

This is what the SE New Document Save dialog looks like:

You can drag parts directly into an assembly from the TC Parts Library:

Overall the TC/SE integration is very nice.

This should give you a good idea of what the SE/TC integration looks like. Feel free to ask me if you have other questions...

[SPerman]

I really appreciate you providing this info. If/when I leave Solidworks/PDM it will be for a siemens product, most likely SE for budgetary reasons.

One of the things that was really nice with NX/TC was that it wasn't a file structure, per say. It was a database with pointers. So if I have a part that is used in 5 machines, the file reference can exist in the folder for all 5 machines. It isn't 5 copies of the same part, but 5 pointers indicating the same part. Does it behave the same way with SE?

With NX/TC, you could build or modify entire assembly boms without ever opening NX. I didn't have anything to do with admin, so I have no idea how many addons we bought and how much customization was done. I know they were working on it for over a year, and had a couple of programmers involved, but I can't say how many hours they put in. It helps that we were sponsored by Siemens. I can't imagine what it would have cost for 40+ NX licenses, and 200+ for TC. We had lots of addons for NX; advanced sheet metal, advanced surfacing, advanced assemblies, etc, as well as Nastran simulation.

[Dwight]

Can you just do a normal save in SW or do you have to use a "TC" save? In SE we can do a normal save which saves it in your cache then you can do an "Upload" which updates TC and leaves the item checked out to you. We have ours set up so when you close the item it automatically checks it in, or you can manually check it in.

We can do a Solidworks save only for items we have checked out. Other items are in the cache "Read Only". This is a bit of a bother, as sometimes I want to save things locally but not check them out (I will occasionally edit the file properies to uncheck the "Read Only" so I can save it).

Thanks for the screen shots. Maybe someday I can use them to sell a switch to SE.

Dwight

[bnemec]

We can do a Solidworks save only for items we have checked out. Other items are in the cache "Read Only". This is a bit of a bother, as sometimes I want to save things locally but not check them out (I will occasionally edit the file properies to uncheck the "Read Only" so I can save it).

Thanks for the screen shots. Maybe someday I can use them to sell a switch to SE.

Dwight

image.png (93.72 KiB) Viewed 24819 times

I assume the CAD/PDM admin does not frequent this forum?

[Arthur NY]

@Jaylin Hochstetler For the most part this thread hasn't been about which one is better as much as it about taking the time to understand the tool being used at the moment. I get it when users have "X" plus years in a 3D software, it makes sense that it is what they're most familiar with and want to use and I've seen times when companies will allow for more than one system to be used to drive design/engineering. But at the end of the day if one wants a job at a company that uses that software as their standards it's either get onboard or hit the road.

A lot of the things that this user choose not to understand could have, and still can be, resolved with some training. I do agree that having ST inside of SE offers something that would be a nice addition to have in SW. It in interesting that in the CAD world it's like Highlander.....There can be only one!!! hahaha, yet in the VFX/DCC world they accept workflows from any number of different various inputs. Granted they're meant for different things yet there is a way that they integrate from multiple platforms and sources to create a cohesive solution.

[Dwight]

I assume the CAD/PDM admin does not frequent this forum?

What's the issue there, bnemec?

[Jaylin Hochstetler]

I really appreciate you providing this info. If/when I leave Solidworks/PDM it will be for a siemens product, most likely SE for budgetary reasons.

One of the things that was really nice with NX/TC was that it wasn't a file structure, per say. It was a database with pointers. So if I have a part that is used in 5 machines, the file reference can exist in the folder for all 5 machines. It isn't 5 copies of the same part, but 5 pointers indicating the same part. Does it behave the same way with SE?

With NX/TC, you could build or modify entire assembly boms without ever opening NX. I didn't have anything to do with admin, so I have no idea how many addons we bought and how much customization was done. I know they were working on it for over a year, and had a couple of programmers involved, but I can't say how many hours they put in. It helps that we were sponsored by Siemens. I can't imagine what it would have cost for 40+ NX licenses, and 200+ for TC. We had lots of addons for NX; advanced sheet metal, advanced surfacing, advanced assemblies, etc, as well as Nastran simulation.

Yes the "file" structure is same with TC/SE. If you add an item to a folder it just adds a reference or "link" to the item. Which allows you to have a particular item in multiple folders. It's NOT like a Windows file structure.

You can edit SE assembly structures directly in TC but it's recommended to use the SE Structure Editor which I posted a screenshot in an earlier post.

[JSculley]

What's the issue there, bnemec?

Manually altering the 'Read-only' flag on a file controlled by a PDM system is generally a big no-no. Most likely, the system has no idea that you manually tweaked it, and still thinks the file is read-only. Setting/unsetting that flag may be only a small portion of what the system does as part of a normal check-in/out process.