bachi in solidworks

[Nevio]

Good morning to all,
I would kindly like to have an opinion from users regarding the amount of defects they encounter when using solidworks.
after working with several cads for almost thirty years (autocad, catia 4, pro-eng wf5, me 10, inventor), I am now in a company that works with solidworks.
workstation is not bad, it is one of the precision tower 3620 with cpu xeon e3-1240, 32 gb ram, graphics card nvidia m2000 and ssd disc, clean and well managed. on the software side we have drivers for strictly certified graphics card, and windows 10.
We initially installed solidworks 2018, which immediately showed terrifying. apart from the pure 3d modeling, which I think has always gone well in all versions, everything else was full of problems and malfunctions of various kinds, sometimes I was almost tempted to return to the tecnigraph. . .
Later we bought the 2019 version, on which I would lay a pitiful veil, and now we have 2020, which actually seems to me a little improved.
I make examples to clarify: I have seen the problems most in the drawing of the tables, it goes from the lines that are not "sentite" when you take them over the cursor, just as if they were not, to the views of spiral objects that are sometimes created graphically wrong, to the views mirrored (a true delirium, e.g. I draw a quota to the right and that it moves to the left, never seen a thing of the genre!)
problems are also in the parts and in the assemblies: e.g. saved files that inexplicably become of zero size and you lose the job done, cosmetic threads that are displayed only when they want it (historical problem, I see it since 2012), rectangular series that repeat by default also the serial head so that you have overlapped objects and bom with incorrect quantities (on 2020 I have not yet verified), problems with cosmetic threads because if I have e.g. an exact diameter hole of the crest of the fillets of e.g. a m8, paradoxically I can not add to it a cosmetic thread m8 because I force on another measure, some fine steps of the threads lacking, the conical threads lacking (e.g. iso 228 or iso 7), and there would really be much more.
talking to the dealer, he admitted that there are problems in the drafts of the boards, and he told me that probably these will not even be settled, because "now the tendency of the companies is not to use the tables anymore". I told him I'm out of my mind.
I am very perplexed, I do not understand why of all this disaster; in fact it could be a nice software, but it's not, and the time that makes me lose constantly is huge.
I was wondering if it's just me who notices all this, or if other users find problems.
Thank you in advance.

Negotiation

 

[MassiVonWeizen]

work with solidwrks since 2006
of what you wrote I found:
problems with the sensitivity of line selection (but with huge designs with various sections and details)
the spiral parts gave me problems only because the spires were tanngeti (shortened slightly, one or two tenths, the problem had resolved)
the thin lines of the threaded funds have always appeared to me. you must import them into the assemblies or manage them with the quality of the views in the parts.
the samplings I rarely change so I have no historical memory of how they behave; I ran a rectangle yesterday and I had no problem.
As for the uncomposed section I never had problems limiting myself to doing what the version allowed; over the years have greatly improved these types of view.
boms are not complicated at all, they must be used with criterion by correctly handling parts and assemblies.
the visualization of cosmetic threads I always had them.
in the rectangular repetition the serial head option cannot overlap anything because it indicates whether it should be considered in the repetition or not; having activated by default means that the repetition will be made to the instead of rectangle
If you have an 8 hole you can't make a m8 thread, it seems pretty trivial like what.
the fine steps you add them by changing the toolbox
for conical seal threads I do not see the problem; use bsp and on the design indicate the type of hole; if you need to create a 3d print template build the correct profiles

So for me you're just the one who notices these lambs

 

[LaboratorioDieci]

some problems seem to arise from the display.
I have read these days on the forum that the picture series m have revealed some problems.. .

 

[Nevio]

Thank you for the answer.
I want to point out that not just all the problems I have listed are still present in the 2020 version, but there were definitely until 2019 sp5.
the repetition I used was not rectangular, it was the one based on the sketch, and in that there is no option to eliminate the head of series, so either the subversion remains, if one does not notice, or you must go to eliminate it manually
I actually had problems with the selection of drawing lines even medium or small, while the spires I mentioned were not at all close, indeed very spaced.
What do you mean when you say that the thin lines of the threaded funds "need to import them into the assemblies or manage them with the quality of the views in the parts"?
I have seen that it is possible to select "high quality" for the views, but this option does not use it anymore on precise indication of solidworks assistance, because it also gave problems.
If you need to correctly display a coupling with screw/hole from m8 or other size, you must clearly draw the hole a little smaller (see tables), and that's what you have to apply the required cosmetic thread, not to a ø8 hole. and I add, that this is another thing that would be very nice to do automatically.
I don't have the toolbox, we have the standard version.
for conical threads, the problem is because I had to insert the hole in extremely limited spaces, to be evaluated in every detail, I could not insert a hole for another, I would have risked to "bucare" the metal.

Negotiation

 

[Nevio]

some problems seem to arise from the display.
I have read these days on the forum that the picture series m have revealed some problems.. .

Really? I didn't know that, even though I actually thought about it. but if this is it, we are far beyond the "some problem"....

 

[MassiVonWeizen]

I want to point out that not just all the problems I have listed are still present in the 2020 version, but there were definitely until 2019 sp5.

as I wrote sleep several years that I work with solid, currently with 2019, and I do not have all these problems

the repetition I used was not rectangular, it was the one based on the sketch, and in that there is no option to eliminate the head of series, so either the subversion remains, if one does not notice, or you must go to eliminate it manually

You can't talk about something and talk about something else. This is a modeler error and not solid. this happens because you use a sketch point even on the first position, usually to have a reference point; therefore as the sketch repetition includes all the sketch points present you have that the body is also inserted on itself.
♪

or in reality I had problems with the selection of drawing lines even medium or small, while the spires I mentioned were not at all close, indeed very spaced.

this probably from the general settings that slow down and weight the processor. in the forum there has been so much talk, even recently, of the measures to improve the performance.

What do you mean when you say that the thin lines of the threaded funds "need to import them into the assemblies or manage them with the quality of the views in the parts"?

that cosmetic threads must be imported in axiemi by means of model inserts.
in the parts cosmetic threads cannot be imported and are always present; it is necessary to verify that the annotations are visible and that the views are in high quality and not in draft quality

If you need to correctly display a coupling with screw/hole from m8 or other size, you must clearly draw the hole a little smaller (see tables), and that's what you have to apply the required cosmetic thread, not to a ø8 hole. and I add, that this is another thing that would be very nice to do automatically.

hai scritto:

problems with cosmetic threads because if I have e.g. an exact diameter hole of the crest of the fillets of e.g. a m8

which means you try to apply a m8 thread on a hole 8.
if you make the threaded hole the cosmetic thread is automatically placed. If you cut ø6,8 who knows the program that must be threaded? and however on the hole from ø6,8 the cosmetic thread from m8 makes it without problems.

for conical threads, the problem is because I had to insert the hole in extremely limited spaces, to be evaluated in every detail, I could not insert a hole for another, I would have risked to "bucare" the metal.

how do you insert threads if you don't have toolbox?

I don't have the toolbox, we have the standard version.

This is a company problem, it is not a kiss of solidworks.
If you really need precise measurements you create an ad hoc library function.

 

[Nevio]

is it a modeler error and not solid? who uses the cad does not care if it is one part or another of the software that is not good, the fact is that this should not happen, I noticed the problem only when in the bom I read of the wrong quantities, and fortunately before buying the pieces! Please, we do not defend the indefensible!
for threaded holes I had the habit of performing a hole and then applying the cosmetic thread to it, but actually it seems better as you suggest, to immediately perform the feature of “ threaded hole”.
the general settings I checked and discussed them also with the assistance, we found nothing wrong, which weighs down the cpu or other.
so to display cosmetic threads together you have to import them with -> pattern elements? I didn’t know this and I want to try it, however if it is so is yet another absurdity, I think if a piece is threaded it should be displayed as such, without unnecessary complications.
In the meantime I found another problem: I have a board of a set and if I want some components in a section instead to be displayed in view, I click dx on the section -> section -> section I choose the components.
I happened right now that this does not work, the components are not selected. the only difference I can detect in this set (sldasm) compared to the others on which I work is that it contains a component inserted with “insert part”, which in others was not there.

Negotiation

 

[MassiVonWeizen]

by modeler I mean the person who models. if you are wrong to use the functions is user fault and not software. is not defending the indefensible.

for threaded holes I had the habit of performing a hole and then applying the cosmetic thread to it, but actually it seems better as you suggest, to immediately perform the feature of “ threaded hole”.

also this is a user limit and not software.

the general settings I checked and discussed them also with the assistance, we found nothing wrong, which weighs down the cpu or other.

make screenshots of the tabs:
drawing drawings
display view
selection
performance
Axioms

so to display cosmetic threads together you have to import them with -> pattern elements? I didn’t know this and I want to try it, however if it is so is yet another absurdity, I think if a piece is threaded it should be displayed as such, without unnecessary complications.

instead it is fundamental because in a set it is not necessary to represent the threads, which is indispensable for the parts; by automatically weighing down the design management that already, as you say, makes us cry

In the meantime I found another problem: I have a board of a set and if I want some components in a section instead to be displayed in view, I click dx on the section -> section -> section I choose the components.
I happened right now that this does not work, the components are not selected. the only difference I can detect in this set (sldasm) compared to the others on which I work is that it contains a component inserted with “insert part”, which in others was not there.

That sounds normal. you can view the side files while the part inserted in one part and in fact a body.

to me it seems that you do not know the software well, which has certainly its limits, and that it denucies like bachi ability problems in modeling

 

[Nevio]

Look, superior man, I'm 30 years drawing, I used several cads, all better than this, worked in different areas, and I was also head office.
Shouldn't threads be displayed in the axioms? But what do you draw, clacson for racing cars? Did you do a drawing school like I did, or as a cook?
Of course I don't know everything about solidworks, also because the default education resources of the program despite the apparent great amount, are in very lacking practice.
You're very good at defending the software, I find that the mother's house should pay you a salary if it doesn't.

Negotiation

 

[MassiVonWeizen]

Shouldn't threads be displayed in the axioms?

tell me what sense it has to display threads on, for example, a chariot, a walking structure with dozens if not hundreds of joints, a drawing plant in scale 1:50, 1:100? you will go to see only in the necessary views.

But what do you draw, clacson for racing cars?

work in a company that makes constructions account third parties, then step from the folded sheet to the complete drawing machine of processing and assembly.

Did you do a drawing school like I did, or as a cook?

I did a professional school as an operator on machine tools I worked in the workshop for about ten years and 20 work in technical office doing development and drawings.

I have always used only solidworks and autocads for 20 years, so I do not defend regardless, but I point out that your software critical specifications are not founded.

 

[MassiVonWeizen]

You're very good at defending the software, I find that the mother's house should pay you a salary if it doesn't.

I forgot about this passage.
insinuating that I'm salaried by someone to defend a softwarehouse is a serious accusation.
are about ten years I write on the forum and have solved hundreds of roams of solidworks users and made my contribution on topics of other nature (development, autocad, design.... ).
all this I do for passion to improve myself professionally; if I was paid by someone I would do assistance and not free advice on the forum.

We all have ignorance, self-critical is one of the steps to overcome

 

[cacciatorino]

Look, superior man, I'm 30 years drawing, I used several cads, all better than this, worked in different areas, and I was also head office.
Shouldn't threads be displayed in the axioms? But what do you draw, clacson for racing cars? Did you do a drawing school like I did, or as a cook?
Of course I don't know everything about solidworks, also because the default education resources of the program despite the apparent great amount, are in very lacking practice.
You're very good at defending the software, I find that the mother's house should pay you a salary if it doesn't.

Negotiation

call to use more appropriate tones to a normal professional comparison. descend into sarcasm or insinuation does not make a good figure to those who use these argumentative techniques.

 

[drake]

I press that sw you have some bigger problems like all the software and I'm not here saying things and laughing. visulization errors often depend on operating system updates, which change cards at the table. This was also said and laughed. for the end user who has to work with us daily is certainly something unacceptable. I am certainly not one who has ever spared criticism, all these absurdities do not find them in use, so most likely the approach by the user is wrong. ah x conclude, in case you need to... does not model the trumpets of the cars.

 

[LaboratorioDieci]

I press that sw you have some bigger problems like all the software and I'm not here saying things and laughing. visulization errors often depend on operating system updates, which change cards at the table. This was also said and laughed. for the end user who has to work with us daily is certainly something unacceptable. I am certainly not one who has ever spared criticism, all these absurdities do not find them in use, so most likely the approach by the user is wrong. ah x conclude, in case you need to... does not model the trumpets of the cars.

If they paid me, I'd gladly do that. And, by the way, I don't think it's even too easy.

 

[Gabriele SWX]

actually solidworks is not a "lightening" in the table harvests.
However you must start from a good modeling if you want to get tables with fewer possible problems. the more the modeling is messed up and the easier it is for the boards to fall apart.
For example, for the more or less standard threaded holes there is the special function, making holes and then applying cosmetic threads is not the best method, instead of a function you use 2.
the fact that the display of threads in the axiemi boards is on request for each view seems correct. how did you imagine a total of a machine with thousands of screws how much resources would it use to display thousands of threads not necessary for that view?
also think of managing multibody parts as assemblies in the table masses is not correct.
I believe that to use a cad well you should also try to "fold" to its logic of operation, without thinking that if one thing does not make it using the system that you vui is by force a defect.

 

[Nevio]

It is your bold and arrogant attitude that is the most serious thing, to give the encapable to those who have deepened for years with dedication and commitment their work, among other things with excellent results, it does not seem respectful or just a correct way to do.
I have brought you some untouchable examples of bachelors and malfunctions that I experience every day, and you instead of identifying what and why it happens, throw you into the sword defense dealing with every magagna. What do you think? Of course you're sided, otherwise you wouldn't understand why of these extreme positions.
At this point, I think we have nothing to say anymore.
greetings
Negotiation

 

[MassiVonWeizen]

in fact I do not allow myself to say that you do not know your work, but that you do not know the software; I gave you some ignorant solidworks because, if you don't know the guided holes, you don't know how to use a sketch repetition, if you try to apply a m8 fillet on a ø8 hole, it is obvious that you lack knowledge, which is not a fault or something to be ashamed of.. .
you brought examples and I gave you answers on how to solve (repetition from sketch and threads together) or why it happens (derived part inserted in one part, tangent lines)
Then I asked you to attach the screenshots of the settings so I could get an idea of why you might have slowdowns.
brings an example of problem with boms and we see to solve even those if possible

if you think you're good at a design with a relative part that gives you problems and we verify, me and the others, that you shaped well and your trunks are clear to us too.

wrong to believe that he has taken extreme positions, I read how much you write and evaluate it according to my experience, that I repeat is ten years and I did not start a month ago to use solid.

 

[Nevio]

Give me a great pleasure.

No.

 

[cacciatorino]

I close the discussion and ban the user for a week, for obvious inability to relate.