nx9

[The_Matrix]

I wanted to inform you that it is available for the beta test nx9 ph. 11.
if someone is interested in this possibility (you receive the version, complete with documentation and temporary license) can refer to your business or your dealer.
the pre-requisite is to subscribe a nda (not disclosure agreement).
I do not tell you to write to me or to my colleague amnericano because in this period I am a bit taken and I would struggle to be behind any requests.
the version is interesting.

 

[axa]

I just want to point out that you don't need to switch to commercial or retailer, you just need to register through a valid account (of course you need to be in maintenance) directly on the beta testing site.

 

[The_Matrix]

I just want to point out that you don't need to switch to commercial or retailer, you just need to register through a valid account (of course you need to be in maintenance) directly on the beta testing site.

He thinks I didn't know there was a beta testing site.

 

[The_Matrix]

about more technical information. . .
nx9 works only with tc9.1 or tc10.1.

 

[axa]

He thinks I didn't know there was a beta testing site.

I know all of them:

jokes aside, just go to google and ski "nx beta test" the first link is the right one!

I asked my partner if he let me go to the onsite, unfortunately he told me not the cursed:biggrin:

 

[axa]

returning to the main topic, unfortunately I managed to play only 10 minutes, the first feeling is not the best, but I need a little rod to take my hand before spitting judgments.
next week I have to make a couple of stupid little bits for a client and I try them with the 9th, then I let you know if the number of blasphemies is in line with the other release changes!

 

[Utente NX]

the graphic impression is very positive.
Sorry for this version because they are not yet competitive with solid edge in sheet metal, drafting and other tools.
nx is not yet competitive with mid-ranges in the industry producing automatic machines.

 

[The_Matrix]

the graphic impression is very positive.
Sorry for this version because they are not yet competitive with solid edge in sheet metal, drafting and other tools.nx is not yet competitive with mid-ranges in industry producing automatic machines.

I disagree with this phrase.
you can not think that nx is better on all fronts than a se/swx.
It is physiological that there are aspects where these are a little better.
but I invite you to think about some aspects, precisely of the design of automatic machines:
- particularly large assembly management
- piping management (including links to p&id part)
- wiring management (including schematic links)
- management of integration between sleeves, electronics and software
- simulation cae
- cinematic simulation
... without thinking about aspects that concern the tc suite (although it no longer concerns you...) such as the integration of ecads (schematics and pcb) or the integration of software development or the operation/scheduling or the management of requirements, or the integrated management of suppliers.

are aspects in which (I believe) nx is higher than if/swx/inv... and are aspects that make you think about design in another level.
a bit like saying, 23 years ago, that gbg/me were better in 2d autocad or cadam... sin were discussions about the caprine wool, since the design paradigm would gradually change from 2d to 3d.
Here... it is time to move from 3d to 4th generation design where mechanics, software, electronics, all together are managed within the scope of the contract.
we are investing in these aspects... Although on "traditional" mechanics (pass me the term) we are closing gaps with competition.
some appreciate this strategy, others do not... Obviously you, like so many others...

 

[bafio]

but I invite you to think about some aspects, precisely of the design of automatic machines:
- particularly large assembly management
- piping management (including links to p&id part)
- wiring management (including schematic links)
- management of integration between sleeves, electronics and software
- simulation cae
- cinematic simulation

Excuse me if I interfere with the discussion. . especially after a long time I do not attend the forum...

Are you sure the_matrix, which list you made games for nx? to me it seems a list of regiments of the past (also too recent) that today does not find any feedback. pingitore about 10 years ago said that it is clear that every software house has some version of the competitors' products. That doesn't happen anymore?

Have you seen the last videos of the competition you mention yourself?

the feeling is that it is at least 5 or 6 years that nx is chasing the mid range without even approaching the offer of the same.
Here the accounts in your pocket you make one day you and the other as well. the result of some accounts is that a full license (and by complete I mean your list more pdm (at least the base), viewers, fem, etc., costs as much as one of ours who has assembly, drafting, modeling and limiting the possibility of making fem at the base level without even the possibility of reopening the simulation. I mean, take a shot and go. If it's okay, good. Otherwise you start again. But we're not joking.

I have to say, honestly, that I see siemens' efforts to update nx. but when on youtube I see others (and on youtube clearly there is not everything) , my arms fall (and also more). the fact is that they update the commands but it seems that instead of simplifying, streamlining and reaching the destination, they change color, add functions to the command and make it more difficult to understand. The result for me that I'm not an engineer is that I have to become otherwise I don't understand how to make a fucking ray.

told outside the teeth, the only thing that does not make us change software according to the office head is the archive (the reusable historical). According to me at the present day, implementing a new software one station at a time (educating an operator at a time) in 3-4 years we would have replaced all our 8 stations with the updated archive and modern design methods suitable for our type of work. It is a long-term job but these accounts are also done.

In conclusion, excuse me if I bored you, it is that to me it is good that siemens think about the design of 4th generation (and less but that it does) but the needle of the balance for us that we make sheets is always less on the part of siemens.

ps: in any case the other software is full of bachi.

 

[The_Matrix]

Excuse me if I interfere with the discussion. . especially after a long time I do not attend the forum...

Are you sure the_matrix, which list you made games for nx? to me it seems a list of regiments of the past (also too recent) that today does not find any feedback. pingitore about 10 years ago said that it is clear that every software house has some version of the competitors' products. That doesn't happen anymore?

Have you seen the last videos of the competition you mention yourself?

the feeling is that it is at least 5 or 6 years that nx is chasing the mid range without even approaching the offer of the same.
Here the accounts in your pocket you make one day you and the other as well. the result of some accounts is that a full license (and by complete I mean your list more pdm (at least the base), viewers, fem, etc., costs as much as one of ours who has assembly, drafting, modeling and limiting the possibility of making fem at the base level without even the possibility of reopening the simulation. I mean, take a shot and go. If it's okay, good. Otherwise you start again. But we're not joking.

I have to say, honestly, that I see siemens' efforts to update nx. but when on youtube I see others (and on youtube clearly there is not everything) , my arms fall (and also more). the fact is that they update the commands but it seems that instead of simplifying, streamlining and reaching the destination, they change color, add functions to the command and make it more difficult to understand. The result for me that I'm not an engineer is that I have to become otherwise I don't understand how to make a fucking ray.

told outside the teeth, the only thing that does not make us change software according to the office head is the archive (the reusable historical). According to me at the present day, implementing a new software one station at a time (educating an operator at a time) in 3-4 years we would have replaced all our 8 stations with the updated archive and modern design methods suitable for our type of work. It is a long-term job but these accounts are also done.

In conclusion, excuse me if I bored you, it is that to me it is good that siemens think about the design of 4th generation (and less but that it does) but the needle of the balance for us that we make sheets is always less on the part of siemens.

ps: in any case the other software is full of bachi.

Luckily cad is full of the world...
You know, I think so, and I'm convinced. then on youtube everything is wonderfully beautiful: the other cads, the other women, the grass of the neighbor.
I say: ug has its defects, (who has no?) but continues to erode market shares to others... but then others are not so cool... Maybe it's just self-suggestion.
returning to your claim:
a full license (and by complete I mean your list plus pdm (at least the base), viewers, fem.
- all machs have integrated teamcenter client license
- the free viewer is available (jt2go)
- jt tile is free for all nx users
- The fem is the base. What do others give you in the modeler? an adv simulation level fem with nastran? Really?

Anyway, bafio, I think the historian is a really small problem if you think that aug is so petting... all cads can change st style 3d models and tables in the end are not then such a big problem... between remake it once and update it the gap is not high.
We would not replace thousands of jobs every year of our competition... and the same goes for others and for you: accepting such poor productivity as you say of noug only for historian is a loser policy and surely you are not losers... No? In fact... you're better than your competition, so you have to use a software that is the best... and on the market there is everything better than ug: catia, proe, solidworks, solidedge, inventor, topsolid, microstation, just to quote the first ones that come to mind.
your type of work must come first of all.

... vabbeh, goes... I uninstall the previous beta of nx9 and install the new that is available from today, so I relax a bit and wait for the catastrophe... so much with noug so badly put my job has the days counted. I'm dancing on the titanic telly and I don't think about it.

 

[bafio]

I didn't mean to insult you and I'm sorry I offended you.
in any case trying to be constructive (although not always succeeds me)
- all machs have the integrated teamcenter client license. All right, we customers for 15 years, we have 8, only the last 2 in "format" mach1. the others rather than updating them, it is better to regain them. (would you? or would you feel teased?) however have the teamcenter client... means to have the teamcenter server if not you can also make soup.
- the free viewer is available (jt2go)I've been installing it for a couple of years (I don't see any new releases in the meantime) and with my I just can't let them open the native file of nx (.prt) you don't want me to convert everything I do in .jt? so I have to maintain the .prt archive and that .jt. I know teamcenter does it in automatism but I don't have the teamcenter. .
it will be free but it is not the viewer that serves for my job.
- The fem is the base. What do others give you in the modeler? an adv simulation level fem with nastran? Really? I didn't think I had to break it but as I said for the pdm, it's clearly a basic version that at least makes you start from where you left. for my work does not need nastran (even if it would be nice for charity) just a functional solutor and give an idea of what you are doing without having to restart, if you are forced to suspend the analysis.
Anyway, bafio, I think the historian is a really small problem if you think that aug is so petting... all cads can change st style 3d models and tables in the end are not then such a big problem... between remake it once and update it the gap is not high.I'm trying to convince the boss.
We would not replace thousands of jobs every year of our competition. . .is this also valid for medium-sized companies like this? or just big company? thinking about us, I would say it takes 8 at a time to make thousands every year, of these times then, with this desire to invest... what do you replace in percentage? autocad, inv, if,sw, proe, catia altri?
accepting such poor productivity as you say of noug only for historian is a losing policy and surely you are not losersapart from the spocchioous phrase, derived from a completely personal consideration since you do not know the company directly, you know well that evaluating the productivity of a cad is possible only after 1-2 years of use. In any case we have nx today and try to exploit it to the maximum. I would like to have for the price that the company pays, something more advanced than today's nx and certainly also respect your competition. to today the 4th generation of design from me is not implementable.
... vabbeh, goes... I uninstall the previous beta of nx9 and install the new that is available from today, so I relax a bit and wait for the catastrophe... so much with nug so badly put my job has the days countedtoday also other software release a new beta... about the catastrophe, you're pessimistic. siemens as ugs, eds and others before, point on the big numbers, are not unprovided and employ capable people. all big companies can cum and/or need to have a high end cad are much less in danger than mine. anyway I just said that nx is not the ideal tool for my lamyeristic work. I'm sure many other users worldwide will find it ideal for other applications. in my little one I can understand that the potential of nx is unlimited with respect to the use we make and/or that we can afford.

so much to be synthetic and not polemical, we do not use the functions of high engineering that has a high end cad and we do not pay those licenses by choice. In any case, it seems to me that we pay the scalability that this system offers for constriction. We pay in monetary terms and product development. from here it seems that siemens is rightly oriented to blessed 4th generation and high-level features but leaves a bit back (as other users claim) the part, we say, basic.

 

[The_Matrix]

I didn't mean to insult you and I'm sorry I offended you.
in any case trying to be constructive (although not always succeeds me)
- all machs have the integrated teamcenter client license. All right, we customers for 15 years, we have 8, only the last 2 in "format" mach1. the others rather than updating them, it is better to regain them. (would you? or would you feel teased?) however have the teamcenter client... means to have the teamcenter server if not you can also make soup.
- the free viewer is available (jt2go)I've been installing it for a couple of years (I don't see any new releases in the meantime) and with my I just can't let them open the native file of nx (.prt) you don't want me to convert everything I do in .jt? so I have to maintain the .prt archive and that .jt. I know teamcenter does it in automatism but I don't have the teamcenter. .
it will be free but it is not the viewer that serves for my job.
- The fem is the base. What do others give you in the modeler? an adv simulation level fem with nastran? Really? I didn't think I had to break it but as I said for the pdm, it's clearly a basic version that at least makes you start from where you left. for my work does not need nastran (even if it would be nice for charity) just a functional solutor and give an idea of what you are doing without having to restart, if you are forced to suspend the analysis.
Anyway, bafio, I think the historian is a really small problem if you think that aug is so petting... all cads can change st style 3d models and tables in the end are not then such a big problem... between remake it once and update it the gap is not high.I'm trying to convince the boss.
We would not replace thousands of jobs every year of our competition. . .is this also valid for medium-sized companies like this? or just big company? thinking about us, I would say it takes 8 at a time to make thousands every year, of these times then, with this desire to invest... what do you replace in percentage? autocad, inv, if,sw, proe, catia altri?
accepting such poor productivity as you say of noug only for historian is a losing policy and surely you are not losersapart from the spocchioous phrase, derived from a completely personal consideration since you do not know the company directly, you know well that evaluating the productivity of a cad is possible only after 1-2 years of use. In any case we have nx today and try to exploit it to the maximum. I would like to have for the price that the company pays, something more advanced than today's nx and certainly also respect your competition. to today the 4th generation of design from me is not implementable.
... vabbeh, goes... I uninstall the previous beta of nx9 and install the new that is available from today, so I relax a bit and wait for the catastrophe... so much with nug so badly put my job has the days countedtoday also other software release a new beta... about the catastrophe, you're pessimistic. siemens as ugs, eds and others before, point on the big numbers, are not unprovided and employ capable people. all big companies can cum and/or need to have a high end cad are much less in danger than mine. anyway I just said that nx is not the ideal tool for my lamyeristic work. I'm sure many other users worldwide will find it ideal for other applications. in my little one I can understand that the potential of nx is unlimited with respect to the use we make and/or that we can afford.

so much to be synthetic and not polemical, we do not use the functions of high engineering that has a high end cad and we do not pay those licenses by choice. In any case, it seems to me that we pay the scalability that this system offers for constriction. We pay in monetary terms and product development. from here it seems that siemens is rightly oriented to blessed 4th generation and high-level features but leaves a bit back (as other users claim) the part, we say, basic.

offended?? but go there...
:biggrin:
If that's enough to offend me... to me sincerely sorry for you who use the wrong tool. already working is complicated... do it with a tool you don't like, that works badly and that doesn't fit your job I really think it's frustrating.
for this, in all sincerity, I hope you take the right path and adopt the ideal cad for you.

briefly on your arguments. . .pdm: I don't think there are other products that give you pdm... maybe I'm wrong.
vrs precedenti upgrade: machs cost less maintenance and give you functions in +... you need to see costs/benefits in 3 years between upgrades and lower costs + functionality... We don't force anyone to migrate. I think it's a logical policy.
viewer: if you want to open the prts directly you must use other products, such as tcvis or as nx/viewer that are paid. I think it's a "loser" policy to open native files... are heavier than the dedicated files and then feed them to all is to expose their know-how even to those who should not. we make jt our battle horse everywhere. then you can generate in many ways... automatically to save, batch, on demand, just set the correct tiling policies, even without tc.
ps. There are also other not our viewers, eh... have you seen them?
We do: Having a free fem base (and based on nastran) seems to me an interesting thing. I don't know what the problem is. that you would like the complete product (pre/solute/post) included in the price of cad? ... possibly there is also an intermediate package that is called design simulation that allows many things at an average price.
History: I have enough experience... if you need advice on migration both 3d and assembly and nx boards to other cad let me know. . .
catastrophe: but you know bafio... I think you don't have to accept the situations supinely only for the quiet living or for the "historical"... as I told you, take the bull for horns. I think in a period like this there is the line out in making you golden bridges to replace ivc (aka ug) and take the product "ideal".
ps... making the choice of the new cad is also fun you know? once you convince your boss that ug is not good, a fun phase will open where everyone will see you and you will enjoy a world to see how they will try to convince them that their green is really green... :finger:
evolution of nx. Unfortunately I don't know a great deal that the various solidx or inventor or topsolid... I do not know what they have so much better than ug. It seems to me that in the various "proves" proposed also here on cad3d ug if it has always been quite well, unlike other systems cad. I've been following other types of industry lately, so the mid-ranges of a certain kind I'm kind of losing sight of them... but if you want information about had, on tribon, on paramarine, on bentley or on napa... I'm becoming "disapute."

 

[ceschi1959]

hello to everyone after a long piece.
I'm 'obesato' work so I don't have time to intervene in the forum.
I had a chance to see and try 9.
there are some commands that are interesting and others that have been improved-powered. are of use a little niche but very useful. I refer especially to all those functions that are daily bread for me (unsew, delete face with the heal option and away. some already present in 8). the interface instead gave me the impression that I try when I go back to the supermarket and I find the products moved of lane. at the moment I am more irritated than attentive to the improvements.
in these months I have been in several companies to do also training activities to users already nx and to others who come from other cad. some from catia were amazed by the power of nx considering it an au pair product. others, coming from themselves, at first thought that if it was easier to use and with more 'mirate' functions to the product. Then I heard myself say: If he doesn't, for this other one, if you're going to have to take a spin of evil... Now I don't know what level of knowledge these people had, but they partly believed in the rumors about nx.
I hope soon bye to all.

 

[Utente NX]

hello to everyone after a long piece.
I'm 'obesato' work so I don't have time to intervene in the forum.
I had a chance to see and try 9.
there are some commands that are interesting and others that have been improved-powered. are of use a little niche but very useful. I refer especially to all those functions that are daily bread for me (unsew, delete face with the heal option and away. some already present in 8). the interface instead gave me the impression that I try when I go back to the supermarket and I find the products moved of lane. at the moment I am more irritated than attentive to the improvements.
in these months I have been in several companies to do also training activities to users already nx and to others who come from other cad. some from catia were amazed by the power of nx considering it an au pair product. others, coming from themselves, at first thought that if it was easier to use and with more 'mirate' functions to the product. Then I heard myself say: If he doesn't, for this other one, if you're going to have to take a spin of evil... Now I don't know what level of knowledge these people had, but they partly believed in the rumors about nx.
I hope soon bye to all.

I don't know what you plan and even what companies you went to do training, but I talk to you as a nx user who designs automatic machines.
the graphic interface of nx9 is the true manna from the sky of this version, as well as its customization.
nx9 sheet metal is not yet comparable to that of se or sw.
st is not supported in sheet metal as in itself for years.
the st of itself is more intuitive.
the drafting environment, weight management and property, less than that of itself.
nx templates only serve as a base, but if you have to change format, then they are ....azzi.
layout management does not exist in nx (other than its expensive package and niche), while in itself it is a nice tool.
creating nx explosive views is nothing compared to that of if, in addition to the fact that it compels you to manage it in drafting environment.
the rendering of nx (true shape or true shading) is old as the wedge and does not support the lightweight .
the management of physical and rendering materials, separated. No good.
The weld assistant is heavy, better than if.
the management of large assemblies in nx, needs a separate license and to say it all to two functions that are to be set to manazza and therefore a long job to implement and manage to every change of together.
opening in structure only does not display the axieme in a visible mode as in sw, so if the codes are not speakers or other, you must open the subgroups for description.
the management of the family member is not like that of itself.
You can't change the arrangements in drafting.
top-down design is linked to extra license for its possible maintenance that I don't tell you how much it costs.
the same top-down design of nx is not as fluid as that of itself, which is easy and simple to implement, as well as its maintenance.
nx interference analysis is an offense to designers, without taking into account what makes solid edge.
etc...

abandoned teamcenter.
###### #### ##### ######## ### ### ## ### ## #### ### ### ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ### ################################################################################################################################################## ########################## #################

 

[ceschi1959]

I don't know what you plan and even what companies you went to do training, but I talk to you as a nx user who designs automatic machines.
the graphic interface of nx9 is the true manna from the sky of this version, as well as its customization.
nx9 sheet metal is not yet comparable to that of se or sw.
st is not supported in sheet metal as in itself for years.
the st of itself is more intuitive.
the drafting environment, weight management and property, less than that of itself.
nx templates only serve as a base, but if you have to change format, then they are ....azzi.
layout management does not exist in nx (other than its expensive package and niche), while in itself it is a nice tool.
creating nx explosive views is nothing compared to that of if, in addition to the fact that it compels you to manage it in drafting environment.
the rendering of nx (true shape or true shading) is old as the wedge and does not support the lightweight .
the management of physical and rendering materials, separated. No good.
The weld assistant is heavy, better than if.
the management of large assemblies in nx, needs a separate license and to say it all to two functions that are to be set to manazza and therefore a long job to implement and manage to every change of together.
opening in structure only does not display the axieme in a visible mode as in sw, so if the codes are not speakers or other, you must open the subgroups for description.
the management of the family member is not like that of itself.
You can't change the arrangements in drafting.
top-down design is linked to extra license for its possible maintenance that I don't tell you how much it costs.
the same top-down design of nx is not as fluid as that of itself, which is easy and simple to implement, as well as its maintenance.
nx interference analysis is an offense to designers, without taking into account what makes solid edge.
etc...

abandoned teamcenter.

hi, I had prepared a nice and articulated answer but, at the end of 15 minutes I lost everything!! ! ! ! !

I leave from the end: I believe that the best cad is what meets your needs independently that it is a so-called mid-high range cad (often they are seen as mid or high for a price issue).

But I wanted to discuss some points:

management of large assembly is more a technique than a set of commands. What do you mean in particular? if how does it handle them?
without the wave associativity manager we did extraordinary things working on a project in six on the same together.

sm of if what has more or better than that of nx?

for the management of weights and nx properties is bad, you have to make strange accumulations and not always you can get a good result.

for templates and format change, do you want to change an a3 with an a2? If so I can't find anything strange.

According to me there is a lot of confusion around the st world, the techniques and commands in the various cad are not comparable.

I ask you these questions because, having a very limited knowledge of other cads, I am not able to answer certain questions that make me some customers.

Hello, everyone.

 

[The_Matrix]

the interface instead gave me the impression that I try when I go back to the supermarket and I find the products moved of lane. at the moment I am more irritated than attentive to the improvements.

I also have the same impression. . Unfortunately, I'm getting older.
but I had the same problem quitting office 2003 for 2007, so I am confident that in the future I will change my mind.
In the meantime, I'm installing ph. 15.

 

[The_Matrix]

I don't know what you plan and even what companies you went to do training, but I talk to you as a nx user who designs automatic machines.
the graphic interface of nx9 is the true manna from the sky of this version, as well as its customization.
nx9 sheet metal is not yet comparable to that of se or sw.
st is not supported in sheet metal as in itself for years.
the st of itself is more intuitive.
the drafting environment, weight management and property, less than that of itself.
nx templates only serve as a base, but if you have to change format, then they are ....azzi.
layout management does not exist in nx (other than its expensive package and niche), while in itself it is a nice tool.
creating nx explosive views is nothing compared to that of if, in addition to the fact that it compels you to manage it in drafting environment.
the rendering of nx (true shape or true shading) is old as the wedge and does not support the lightweight .
the management of physical and rendering materials, separated. No good.
The weld assistant is heavy, better than if.
the management of large assemblies in nx, needs a separate license and to say it all to two functions that are to be set to manazza and therefore a long job to implement and manage to every change of together.
opening in structure only does not display the axieme in a visible mode as in sw, so if the codes are not speakers or other, you must open the subgroups for description.
the management of the family member is not like that of itself.
You can't change the arrangements in drafting.
top-down design is linked to extra license for its possible maintenance that I don't tell you how much it costs.
the same top-down design of nx is not as fluid as that of itself, which is easy and simple to implement, as well as its maintenance.
nx interference analysis is an offense to designers, without taking into account what makes solid edge.
etc...

abandoned teamcenter.

On your points, I am allowed to tell you, for the things I know:
- renderingI don't agree. It has been rewritten in nx8.5 and is very powerful, reaching to support also the hdri. I think only pro/e has this feature.
- Grandsiemi. at the level of functionality I think it is still very good... you need to know how to use and have well configured the environment... If you want to use structure only function maybe you should use the product outline, don't you think?
- interference analysis. Why do you say it's an offense to designers? I don't understand. I'm sorry. It's definitely me.
- esplosi. I agree. We hope they will soon put their hands on this part.
- layout. What do you mean there is no nx?

ps. in swx can I create an assembly starting from a multisolid file with the ease of ug? I don't know.

 

[bafio]

management of large assembly is more a technique than a set of commands. What do you mean in particular? if how does it handle them?
without the wave associativity manager we did extraordinary things working on a project in six on the same together.

I would be very grateful to you and I would certainly learn something if I wanted to illustrate in detail (your time allowing) how you organized the thing.
here have all the simblies licenses and also an advanced assemblies that by ignorance (at least I think) is not used

sm of if what has more or better than that of nx?

here maybe you can answer matrix.
if not erro in nx5, siemens decided to implement in nx, the sheetmetal module of if because more advanced and called nx sheetmetal. I never saw him. perhaps it is more powerful or perhaps it is only targeted at that type of industry (boeing?). If they follow this road again, I think every tot years will realline the sheet modules of se and nx.

for the management of weights and nx properties is bad, you have to make strange accumulations and not always you can get a good result.

with advanced assemblies weight management is a skemata (at least as we do) but the management of attributes and properties seem just undeveloped. perhaps it is wanted to incite to the use of teamcenter.

 

[The_Matrix]

here maybe you can answer matrix.
if not erro in nx5, siemens decided to implement in nx, the sheetmetal module of if because more advanced and called nx sheetmetal. I never saw him. perhaps it is more powerful or perhaps it is only targeted at that type of industry (boeing?). If they follow this road again, I think every tot years will realline the sheet modules of se and nx.Matrix doesn't know how to answer and he doesn't want to. probably nx user can give you the details where if it is better than nx.with advanced assemblies weight management is a skemata (at least as we do) but the management of attributes and properties seem just undeveloped. perhaps it is wanted to incite to the use of teamcenter.

asset management has not been developed?
Any details?

 

[bafio]

asset management has not been developed?
Any details?

I'll put my hands on. . .
first I said it seems undeveloped. the fact is that if we had not purchased the falcone juseppe tool with which we manage the properties (perhaps it would be better to say the attributes) of the individual part files, the job of drafting the bom would be panic.
I always hope to learn something, but if I don't remember bad, the documentation is written (always that something has not changed) that with the rmb on the axieme component you can manage its properties and in the specific case the attributes. I who use the license adv. assmblies for example manage the weight as well.
returning to the speech; I am managing a bom from just over 53 unique components mostly non-commercial (the axieme is 69 parts between unique and repeated) and according to siemens I should click on 53 different components and write more or less similar things about each.

paying an external supplier, wedges, press of a button an excel sheet appears and lists all the items of the axieme.
the first column is a key with which to decide whether to see the component in the bom or not. in manual I should have changed the attribute by looking for the file in the tree and by clicking on the component to change then click on the attribute tab, then click on the attribute to change, then click on the attribute value box to finally change this attribute. I close with further click on ok. this for each component to change.

Let's keep going. Since 95% of the time, we use as a drawing code the file name, this means that they select the second column, copy on the third and already all codes are written. without all the panic described above.

for the description is even easier because thanks to peppe we set seed parts that contain attributes. for sheets for example the attribute description is populated so lam. l=; w=; t=;. when active excel, it goes to read if there are expressions called length, width and thickness (which we generally use on the base block and as said seed parts have already implemented) and reports them automatically in the description box. everything is populated in a moment and without errors since I do not have to transcribe and/or remember values read or reported.

(with all this advertising next time peppe makes us discount... )

the only problem that we occasionally encounter (with parts made at the beginning of the use of ug) are discrepancies with the various attributes. I'll explain. for those who did not know nx has for each part file, part attributes, part attributes in the axieme and attributes of the axieme in the part (or something similar). here we in bimal manage these 3 different types of attributes but in honesty I have to say that I can explain it to someone else, I would say a lie and then when Captain Dicrepancies (rarely now) you have to miss a few minutes for the solution.

in pennies my note was about the fact that the mid ranges have the management "type peppe" in the base license. If you can put together in the table, you can also manage the bom.
bhe to do it with nx we had to ask peppe.
View attachment voci BOM Bimal.pdf