export bodies equal multibody part

[drake]

Hello everyone, I have long been writing and I often read your very interesting discussions and this is my first message!
solid use but I am not really a great expert!
time ago I remember reading about it a very interesting discussion that I can no longer find, so forgive me if I propose an old question.
how did you solve the problem of exporting the same bodies to a multibody part?
is the only solution to buy a steelworks application or is it possible to solve it in another way?
I remember that there was a user who was solving the problem with the pdm and it seemed to have understood that he was willing to sell his procedure, possibly I would be willing to... Maybe you can contact me.
Thank you.

 

[SolidUser]

no one answered you because no one understood.
If you want answers, try to explain yourself better.

 

[drake]

I said bad, I wanted to ask you this:
when working with a multibody part and you want to save the individual bodies on disk, solidworks even if rightly recognizes the same bodies in the model tree, at the time of their rescue gives you a list without recognizing the same ones!
i.e. if I create two equal objects when I do the body rescue procedure, a list appears to me with two items to be saved that I must by force name differently and not a list with only one body.
Basically how can you create a separate material of a steel structure without a specific steelworks application?
then I wanted to say this: time ago I read about this "problem" but now while doing several research I can't find that discussion where among other things a user said that he was developing an ad hoc procedure with the pdm that he could even sell. Sorry I wasn't clear in 1 msg I hope I was right now.
Thank you all.

 

[re_solidworks]

I think I intervened in the discussion and the pdm is ready2works. in the premium version has several functions aimed at managing carpentry structures. These are exclusively anagraphic functions, nothing modelling. the package is not yet completed, in the sense that there will still be a lot of news implemented in a pretty near future. I am aware of all this because I have been and am still a beta tester of these features.

 

[drake]

so it could be considered for those who draw carpentry once in a while and probably not worth buying an application.
One last thing: is it an expensive and easy to use package?
thanks for the answer

 

[re_solidworks]

steelworks should not cost much, but they are two completely different products. ready2works is a pdm with several functions to facilitate the work of the technical office. the "advantage" of drawing the carpentry "hand" is the total freedom of modeling and this can be a value and a defect at the same time. with a pdm there is the possibility to integrate the life cycle of a carpentry in the company organization more easily (as you do with all pdm), to pass the data to the management, etc...
an application like steelworks works in a completely different way, greatly facilitates modeling, drastically lowers time but tends to keep the user on "tracks" like all products designed for carpentry.
If for example I have a "strange" structure in which it is not possible to use standard knots, I can still model them with swx, but I don't know how far it is possible to integrate in the distinct as hand model.
I also do not like the fact that the features generated by steelworks are not editable with only solidworks but are hidden in special features.
This gives me a bad feeling and creates a total user dependence. of steelworks I saw a demo, I liked enough, but to date I should review it, it's been different time and I should reevaluate it.

to return on ready, it could be considered in the premium version also by those who make carpentry, as, in addition to opening the user to the production use of welds, also has a marking function, advanced management of orders and production batches, linear nesting of profiles, automatic creation of separate, production lists divided in various ways (e.g. for processing).

there would still be a lot to say, but a lot is in development and I can't talk about it, as beta tester I can't talk about what's not official yet, if you need more info I suggest you contact them.

 

[drake]

Thank you very much for the most exhausting answer!
I also see that you think like me, I don't like to take a software that binds you, that was also why I opted for solid with all its qualities and flaws.
I will then contact the ready to have information.
Thanks again

 

[Mike1967]

steelworks should not cost much, but they are two completely different products. ready2works is a pdm with several functions to facilitate the work of the technical office. the "advantage" of drawing the carpentry "hand" is the total freedom of modeling and this can be a value and a defect at the same time. with a pdm there is the possibility to integrate the life cycle of a carpentry in the company organization more easily (as you do with all pdm), to pass the data to the management, etc...
an application like steelworks works in a completely different way, greatly facilitates modeling, drastically lowers time but tends to keep the user on "tracks" like all products designed for carpentry.
If for example I have a "strange" structure in which it is not possible to use standard knots, I can still model them with swx, but I don't know how far it is possible to integrate in the distinct as hand model.
In addition, I do not like the fact that the features generated by steelworks are not editable with only solidworks but are hidden in special features.
This gives me a bad feeling and creates a total user dependence. of steelworks I saw a demo, I liked enough, but to date I should review it, it's been different time and I should reevaluate it.

to return on ready, it could be considered in the premium version also by those who make carpentry, as, in addition to opening the user to the production use of welds, also has a marking function, advanced management of orders and production batches, linear nesting of profiles, automatic creation of separate, production lists divided in various ways (e.g. for processing).

there would still be a lot to say, but a lot is in development and I can't talk about it, as beta tester I can't talk about what's not official yet, if you need more info I suggest you contact them.

What you said!
I tried steelworks but I wasn't impressed.

 

[re_solidworks]

What you said!
I tried steelworks but I wasn't impressed.

I want to point out that for me steelworks is a nice product, makes topdown modeling extremely simple for the user and most carpenters are modeled at the speed of light.
I do a little bit of everything, not only carpentry, and very often the carpentry to make machines must be made with nodes "out of standard" and require maximum flexibility.
to satisfy this request the amv should (in my opinion) be able to digest the analogue as it is modeled directly with swx and should not "nasfy" the native functions of swx as it is doing.
during the demo I told them that the fact of "tight" the work of steelworks made the model equal to an imported, but do this to "defend" their product from any copying.
for one reason or another to me is something from boredom and I prefer to work in manazza with the help of a good pdm.

 

[SolidUser]

I said bad, I wanted to ask you this:
when working with a multibody part and you want to save the individual bodies on disk, solidworks even if rightly recognizes the same bodies in the model tree, at the time of their rescue gives you a list without recognizing the same ones!
i.e. if I create two equal objects when I do the body rescue procedure, a list appears to me with two items to be saved that I must by force name differently and not a list with only one body.
Basically how can you create a separate material of a steel structure without a specific steelworks application?
then I wanted to say this: time ago I read about this "problem" but now while doing several research I can't find that discussion where among other things a user said that he was developing an ad hoc procedure with the pdm that he could even sell. Sorry I wasn't clear in 1 msg I hope I was right now.
Thank you all.

Why do you want to export a welding environment to single pieces?
Can't you put the part in the environment together?
The part is welded, right?
If it is a welded because you want it to be dissolved in individual parts... I don't follow you.

 

[SolidUser]

I want to point out that for me steelworks is a nice product, makes topdown modeling extremely simple for the user and most carpenters are modeled at the speed of light.
I do a little bit of everything, not only carpentry, and very often the carpentry to make machines must be made with nodes "out of standard" and require maximum flexibility.
to satisfy this request the amv should (in my opinion) be able to digest the analogue as it is modeled directly with swx and should not "nasfy" the native functions of swx as it is doing.
during the demo I told them that the fact of "tight" the work of steelworks made the model equal to an imported, but do this to "defend" their product from any copying.
for one reason or another to me is something from boredom and I prefer to work in manazza with the help of a good pdm.

I agree with you, amv is a good product and speed of much the design of metal structures.

However, like all the products integrated in solidworks, it is not the only one, he blinds its features, I understand.
he does it, moldworks for the molds, 3dquickpress, etc...

steelworks automates operations and integrates a series of components to be applied quickly, with this does not mean that sw is unable to perform such operations.
in comparison videos between solidworks and solidworks + steelworks, these are made specifically for steelworks.
through library parts, library features, smart (configurable) components and toolboxes, building operations are very fast.
in fact steelwork already starts with these libraries already created and ready for use, while for those who have only solidworks, if they have to create them.
It is also true that a somewhat intelligent designer, does not draw from scratch all the time, but by hand reuses projects performed previously through the tools made available by solidworks.

 

[re_solidworks]

I agree with you, amv is a good product and speed of much the design of metal structures.

However, like all the products integrated in solidworks, it is not the only one, he blinds its features, I understand.
he does it, moldworks for the molds, 3dquickpress, etc...

steelworks automates operations and integrates a series of components to be applied quickly, with this does not mean that sw is unable to perform such operations.
in comparison videos between solidworks and solidworks + steelworks, these are made specifically for steelworks.
through library parts, library features, smart (configurable) components and toolboxes, building operations are very fast.
in fact steelwork already starts with these libraries already created and ready for use, while for those who have only solidworks, if they have to create them.
It is also true that a somewhat intelligent designer, does not draw from scratch all the time, but by hand reuses projects performed previously through the tools made available by solidworks.

are roads that I tried with swx "smooth" and I got good results. However, for example, I couldn't create a "steelworks" style joint and be able to insert it. I tried it with library functions but it doesn't seem to work on welded.

to extract the bodies... depends on who produces what is designed. if to produce it is a super organized carpentry serves a brand for every single piece produced and its design.
at this point it is better to export the bodies and work with external parts.
to make you a comparison this method is about 5 times faster than traditional modeling in conjunction with equal print result.

 

[SolidUser]

are roads that I tried with swx "smooth" and I got good results. However, for example, I couldn't create a "steelworks" style joint and be able to insert it. I tried it with library functions but it doesn't seem to work on welded.

to extract the bodies... depends on who produces what is designed. if to produce it is a super organized carpentry serves a brand for every single piece produced and its design.

and where is the problem to put it in the cut list?
without pdm, can't you use the property tab builder ?

 

[re_solidworks]

and where is the problem to put it in the cut list?
without pdm, can't you use the property tab builder ?

I can use tab builder and in some ways I do not consider it a valid tool. Can tab builder keep you synchronized folders of welded with external parts? in your opinion would you be able to manage the record of a 50,000 body carpentry with a board builder?

 

[drake]

Why do you want to export a welding environment to single pieces?
Can't you put the part in the environment together?
The part is welded, right?
If it is a welded because you want it to be dissolved in individual parts... I don't follow you.

the part is a welded because it is much simpler to model with the welds rather than with a standard environment, so I would like, once modeled the multibody part, to export the individual pieces to recreate me later a automatic set and to have the final axieme with all the various parts appointed in a unique way.

 

[re_solidworks]

the part is a welded because it is much simpler to model with the welds rather than with a standard environment, so I would like, once modeled the multibody part, to export the individual pieces to recreate me later a automatic set and to have the final axieme with all the various parts appointed in a unique way.

It's not exactly what I do. Recreating the axieme does not make any sense from my point of view, what matters is to be able to export the bodies in order to manage the tables of each individual profile and to be able to connect the folders of the welded with the external parts.
recreating the automatic axieme is not possible and swx does not properly recognize the equal bodies as the volume captured in the space will be different.

 

[drake]

It's not exactly what I do. Recreating the axieme does not make any sense from my point of view, what matters is to be able to export the bodies in order to manage the tables of each individual profile and to be able to connect the folders of the welded with the external parts.
recreating the automatic axieme is not possible and swx does not properly recognize the equal bodies as the volume captured in the space will be different.

I also agreed, it is important to have all the parts to make their table.
in fact he commits precisely the error and cannot recreate it correctly.

 

[re_solidworks]

using the relative view it is possible to put into the table every single body without exporting it. the problem arises when I want to put a brand to a tube included in the frame a and I want to put the same brand to all the same tubes within the structure. this is very difficult to do by hand without a tool that performs the anagraphic and dimensional control of the piece.
steelworks does this natively in a transparent way, ready by excellent aid to achieve this goal.

 

[drake]

using the relative view it is possible to put into the table every single body without exporting it. the problem arises when I want to put a brand to a tube included in the frame a and I want to put the same brand to all the same tubes within the structure. this is very difficult to do by hand without a tool that performs the anagraphic and dimensional control of the piece.
steelworks does this natively in a transparent way, ready by excellent aid to achieve this goal.

That's the problem.
I asked for information at readysolutions and told me they'll also make me an online demo. As soon as I have them, I will show you my impressions