axial problem sw2011

[Imec]

Hello everyone,

Following the new folder setting, as suggested by the assistance, to prepare me for a likely purchase of pdm by my company, I found an incredible increase in loading times and calculations of each function when working in the environment together.

I imagine that this is due to the shifting of components, in fact first together and parts were contained in a sigola folder, now it was all divided into an alphabetical library (example: a x-rings > b x bussole-bobine etc...)

How can I improve this situation? According to you it was better to work in the initial situation even if so every time I created copies on copies of existing parts in multiple different assemblies.

thank you in advance, I remain waiting for your answer.

perry (imec)

 

[meccanicamg]

Hello, Perry.
the fact of changing all the organization in folders, will surely slow down the loading until you save the assemblies you had already designed. according to my point of view there are many ways to divide and catalog products. mainly depends on many factors, whether you do series machines or not, whether it is components of trade or parts in production.

depends on what you mean by library. If he put everything in folders and then he added the library as the toolbox ... well it's nothing new and if it's slow it's just for the reason I explained earlier.

but don't you have all the coded pieces??? ? what is a piece of commission even if equal or similar must be double triple ennuplo. what is standard must be one! !

 

[Imec]

hello mechanics

Meanwhile I want to thank you for the prompt answer, but wanting to specify that the pdm still has not been purchased, the alphabetical library in folders was created by us of the office, under advice of the assistance sw, which suggested we work in folders of maximum 500 files (so as not to have visible differences to the opening of the folders caused by massive use of ram), according to this we divided into families all the codified details.

I conclude by pointing out that we draw machines, so we talk about medium-sized assemblies of great complexity and weight, given all this as you suggest to organize the Assyrian folders?

below you will find the link to the library image.
Thanks again, I'm waiting for your answer

perry (imec)

 

[meccanicamg]

I figured out how you did it, it can be a system. What I ask myself is, why organize in a thousand folders, do handwork when a pdm manages the internal properties of the file in a single folder? this system to divide the folders, according to me it is valid only for manual search of the parts and possibly for search of files indexed by windows.

to me they have always explained that the pdms manage the propitiancies of the files and for this reason the "parlanti" codes no longer serve anything. by speaking encoding I intend to use alb123 for trees for example rather than a complex encoding with var meanings. the progress coding is very convenient. even you could have a progressive encoding also for standards and trade components, from bearings to gearboxes to motors to screws.

when I can, I do progressive coding for the parts and the original coding of the manufacturers components from trade (that I do not like to recode it). However, it is necessary to have the fields of well defined properties, to complete them all and always.

However the pdm allows to make less mistakes and is a little rigid and thanks to this allows the management of all the projects without losing the historian.

 

[Imec]

so if I do not err the best way to work without pdm would have you a library for the immediate search of the individual component, but at the same time, on other site, have folders contained axioms and components belonging, but they are copies of the files I already have in the library.
This means that when I work in my assemblies they are incredibly fluid because they draw their components from 1000 different folders, but if one day there was a need to change a component contained in dozens of axioms? Should I change the article in the library and in all the assemblies in which it was inserted? Doesn't that sound a little uncomfortable? does not exist a faster way to do this?

in fact it was born for this precise necessity the division in folders, to draw from the library and not to waste more time in changes, and believe me it happens quite often, you also know how many mortal jumps you make to please customer and commercial. . .

I do not doubt that the pdm is a great tool but for issues of time that it would go to occupy only with its setting we risk blocking the work of the technical office already very busy, in fact for various reasons of management of the times we are making retromarcia to the pdm speech, so without it how do we recommend to work or set our folders?

Thank you for your patience.
good day and good work
perry (imec)

 

[meccanicamg]

if you have used the piece to in 50 projects and decide that in the machine x you have to give it an extra hole, you can not upgrade the hole on the other 50 machines, otherwise you get that it is no longer true that the 50 machines delivered to the customer are done so.

what is really standard must remain, and perhaps even in read alone. the rest, they are commit files and as such they will live each in the folder of the individual commit.

Standards and commercials are in a separate archive, and they must remain, to be used every time they need.

the speech of having folders, subfolders, other subfolders, long file names etc... create an index of the file to load formed by many characters. me and other colleagues, with the help of a technical soldworks we have verified that the projects where the length of the path of the file is long put us a lot but much more to load. Moreover, taking material from many different folders, having multiple references is normal that times stretch.

the ideal would be to have a disk divided into 2 folders, a commercial with all files without folders and with the appropriate properties and the other folder with inside the encoded customer folders, subfolders commit code and encoded files and stop.

 

[re_solidworks]

I disagree with what I said, even if I didn't do any tests. I have always divided my work into many folders and I am very well so, having hundreds of thousands of files in one folder seems to me a suicide, although for these cases it is the habit to give a better optimization of the times.
My assemblies open quickly, they are on the net and how small they are of 2000 components.
As for the pdm... the encoding system must meet corporate requirements and not least interface properly with the corporate management.
often a coding made in a certain way helps this phase. Moreover a talking coding helps to normalize the design, in my pdm there is just a function that is called normalizer that divides codes for families and with technical data. this thing is very convenient and allows to attach to ridiculous costs the configurator (integrated into the pdm). with this encoding system it is avoided to clone from the top one together every time since the system is able to perform comparisons on the historian and is generated only what differs from the historian.
I chose a speaking encoding and although in some cases I have to spend some time to integrate it I find myself very well so.