originally created .stp file

[arzigogolo]

Bye to all,

I happen an uncertainty with an imported .stp file with inventor that I explain below:
in the company we received a set in step format of which we have to obtain the constructive drawings of each particular detail and create the isometrics for the cutting and construction (treatment of a pipe system of various diameter, 900 mm, with curves, fittings, tubes and carpenters of support.
the workshop that sent it to us says that it was made with inventor and converted it into step format, but when I opened it to convert it into native format of inventor (.iam, .ipt), I found myself with the parts he assiemi as simple bodies, without the tree of parametric processing, practically unmodified if not with direct modeling.

Now it seems strange to me this fact because it seems to me to remember that, when we had inventor 2019, I had opened a .stp file sent by a client, the program had converted the file to me and also recognized the working tree, this always that you do not remember badly.

In short, I was convinced that the file, having been made with inventor and converted with the same in stp format, to my opening and consequent conversion, would also recognize me the tree of the processing and instead so it was not.

I've misrepresented myself or is there anything true?

the doubt I have is that the design was not made with inventor but with another program and for this I was wondering if there is a way to analyze the step file to understand the program that generated it.
at the time of the dos there was an ascii/hexadecimal viewer with which you could understand something by opening the file, now I don't know.

Can you tell me something?
Thank you.

p.s.
I attach an image of the axieme to see if from graphics you can deceive something of the program that generated it (honestly it also seems to me the graphics of inventor).

 

[Stan9411]

I think it is impossible to recover the original file feature tree from a step, unless I have lost some revolution in this area over the last couple of years.

 

[cacciatorino]

the step by its nature does not contain the information you are looking for. At the limit the "receiving" cad can try to do some sort of reverse engineering and rebuild a working tree that will never be the original one, though, as it's just a guess.

to see with what cad was created the step in general is enough to open the same file with wordpad and read the headers.

 

[MassiVonWeizen]

step files are interchange files between various programs and contain only bodies and surfaces without history.
However if they did it in inventor it is not better if they send you those files if compatible with your version?
confirm that opening it with notepad or similar in the first rows is written the program with which it was generated

 

[stefanobruno]

I've misrepresented myself or is there anything true?

You remember badly.
inventor has a process recognition module, but it is not automatic on the whole axieme.
If you open particular for particular, ask if you want to recognize the work and it is up to you to decide what answer to give.

 

[arzigogolo]

thanks to all for the celerity and clarity of the answers, you have made me clear the doubt!

the step by its nature does not contain the information you are looking for. At the limit the "receiving" cad can try to do some sort of reverse engineering and rebuild a working tree that will never be the original one, though, as it's just a guess.

to see with what cad was created the step in general is enough to open the same file with wordpad and read the headers.

in fact I opened the step with notepad and it brings me this writing:
file_name(
/* name */ 'c:/users/fracno/desktop/sup.01.00 .step',
/* time_stamp */ '2020-06-02t17:24:59+02:00',
/* author */ ('''),
/* organization */ (''),
/* preprocessor_version */ 'st-developer v18.1',
/* injured_system */ 'autodesk translation framework v9.3.0.1241',
/* authorization */ '');

I imagine that it refers to the application that generated it and in this case the autodesk writing appears, so this must be the string that interests.

step files are interchange files between various programs and contain only bodies and surfaces without history.
However if they did it in inventor it is not better if they send you those files if compatible with your version?
confirm that opening it with notepad or similar in the first rows is written the program with which it was generated

That's what I asked him, but they told me that he made it an external designer who didn't give it in native files.

You remember badly.
inventor has a process recognition module, but it is not automatic on the whole axieme.
If you open particular for particular, ask if you want to recognize the work and it is up to you to decide what answer to give.

It may be, it's been two years, but there's one thing that's not so clear to me, that is, if I generate a step file with a certain program and I reopen it with the same program, the latter will ask me to convert it into its native format, but it will no longer rebuild the working tree considering it as a foreign file.

instead I thought that reopening a step created with the given cad, this recognized me the work and instead I did the test also with creo and the result was the same, opened the design as if it was a file created with another cad.
I also tried to do as you say, I downloaded "feature recognition" of autodesk and in fact rebuilt the working tree for single part though not perfectly. Is that what you were referring to?

 

[arzigogolo]

I correct something that I looked better in the string I posted:
under the heading " /* sensi_system */ 'autodesk translation framework v9.3.0.1241 "

should be the program that generated the file and this autodesk translation framework, it seems to be a maya application if I understood well, so it means according to you that it was generated with maya?

 

[Matteo Cappelli dis.CAD]

as stefanobruno says, the only solution is to make the processing recognize via app

https://apps.autodesk.com/invntor/it/detail/index?id=9172877436288348979&applang=en&os=win64

 

[stefanobruno]

means according to you that was generated with maya?

use maya to make pipes is a choice of the... tube.
But there are so many bellini.

 

[arzigogolo]

use maya to make pipes is a choice of the... tube.
But there are so many bellini.

? I would say too, but from the string that I extrapolated from the step I would say that it was made with maya, what do you say?

 

[stefanobruno]

I would say that for your problem it is influential to know what they did.
they gave you a step and the characteristics of the step are those that have been indicated to you, correct volumes and no working tree, even if you open it with the native application.
thinks that autodesk says that from the 2020 version (I think ), you can open the files of the upper version.
I tried it and it doesn't do anything but see the file as a step, it does it in a hidden way, so, if you don't be careful, you also lose the original file with the processing.
This last observation may not be totally correct, I have not worked there assiduously, only as evidence to satisfy curiosity.

 

[arzigogolo]

I would say that for your problem it is influential to know what they did.
they gave you a step and the characteristics of the step are those that have been indicated to you, correct volumes and no working tree, even if you open it with the native application.
thinks that autodesk says that from the 2020 version (I think ), you can open the files of the upper version.
I tried it and it doesn't do anything but see the file as a step, it does it in a hidden way, so, if you don't be careful, you also lose the original file with the processing.
This last observation may not be totally correct, I have not worked there assiduously, only as evidence to satisfy curiosity.

true, I also tried to open with version 2019.4 I think, a file made with version 2020, and in fact as you say I found myself with a file without the mast of processing, but with a file step any, nice stuff..

I did the test creating a step with inventor 2021 and reopening it with the same program does not recognize it and the same thing happens with I create, so I have to believe again.
However, it seems to me that a program does not recognize itself when it generates a file and transforms it into an interchange format, I think it should note that it was generated by the same and consequently rebuild it, mah.

However the 2019 version seemed well made, perhaps even better than 2020 and 2021, I don't know it's my personal opinion, what do you think?

 

[stefanobruno]

I did the test creating a step with inventor 2021 and reopening it with the same program does not recognize it and the same thing happens with I create, so I have to believe again.
However, it seems to me that a program does not recognize itself when it generates a file and transforms it into an interchange format, I think it should note that it was generated by the same and consequently rebuild it, mah.

It's normal, an interchange file, by definition, it's a neutral file, write it and read it all, but it doesn't contain any other information except volumes.

However the 2019 version seemed well made, perhaps even better than 2020 and 2021, I don't know it's my personal opinion, what do you think?

I have not yet made serious tests with the 2021, certainly with 2019 I am very well.
of 2021 I would mainly be interested in the increase of the speed that promises.
I have a robust but obsolete hardware, I have come to the point of having to wait for the program reactions and it is time to change, only there is never time to do it.

 

[arzigogolo]

It's normal, an interchange file, by definition, it's a neutral file, write it and read it all, but it doesn't contain any other information except volumes.

I have not yet made serious tests with the 2021, certainly with 2019 I am very well.
of 2021 I would mainly be interested in the increase of the speed that promises.
I have a robust but obsolete hardware, I have come to the point of having to wait for the program reactions and it is time to change, only there is never time to do it.

mah, regarding the opening speed of a set of about 1500 parts, (the one in question of this discussion) I must say that it is very fast, opens it in fast loading in a few seconds (but there was fast loading mode in the previous versions?), then if you want to change it you can click on "full loading" at the top right on the tape bar and actually loads all the parts.
probably fast loading consists of a "light" version of the axieme with all its parts, but only graphically, while if you want to make changes you must load the parts in a complete way.
with my hardware is pretty good, an i5 9400f, 16 gb ram ddr4 3000 mhz, a ssd samsung from 250 gb and a geforce gtx 970 from 4 gb (it is not a picture but it goes that a splinter).
What hardware do you have?

 

[stefanobruno]

mah, regarding the opening speed of a set of about 1500 parts, (the one in question of this discussion) I must say that it is very fast, opens it in fast loading in a few seconds (but there was fast loading mode in the previous versions?), then if you want to change it you can click on "full loading" at the top right on the tape bar and actually loads all the parts.
probably fast loading consists of a "light" version of the axieme with all its parts, but only graphically, while if you want to make changes you must load the parts in a complete way.
with my hardware is pretty good, an i5 9400f, 16 gb ram ddr4 3000 mhz, a ssd samsung from 250 gb and a geforce gtx 970 from 4 gb (it is not a picture but it goes that a splinter).
What hardware do you have?

fast loading is from some rel., I turned it off, just to make changes without double loading.
I have a xeon e5-2620 v2, 2.1 ghz, 32 g ram, 2ssd samsung evo 860 1t and evo 850 512g, 4hd various, video nvidia gtx 1070 sea hawk.
the file I'm running now is 66500 anniversary with 820 open doc.

 

[arzigogolo]

fast loading is from some rel., I turned it off, just to make changes without double loading.
I have a xeon e5-2620 v2, 2.1 ghz, 32 g ram, 2ssd samsung evo 860 1t and evo 850 512g, 4hd various, video nvidia gtx 1070 sea hawk.
the file I'm running now is 66500 anniversary with 820 open doc.

an excellent hardware there is nothing but say and with 66500 parts the 32 gb of ram serve hereme, perhaps the only thing is the basic frequency and with the turbo of the processor that is a little low, maybe with a little more than mhz you would be fine, but all in all I would keep your hardware for a while.
gtx 1070 is more than good.
One last thing I wanted to ask you, do you have the c226 chipset on the mainboard? to intell us what equips the hp series z workstations, because in this case it seems to me that you can update only with xeon class processors if not mistaken.

 

[stefanobruno]

chipset c602
in the specifications it says that I could put a cpu intel® 2nd and 3rd gen. core i7 series processors with non-eccudimm only.
In light of what you wrote, I went to see what I compared to what I might have.
On the card I could get to mount an i7 3770 3.4ghz, but I see that, aside (which I have spent now), I would not have major improvements.
also update the memory, passing from 800mhz to 1600, does not seem to bring big improvements.
I put the 1070 (in 2017 ) updating from painting 2000, memory in more and very low temperatures (liquid cooling, less than 37°, covid free ), some artifact +/- tied to the various driver updates, apart from the rabbocchi, I would say it is still okay.
I've made comparisons, equal files, with pcs of my clients.
clear that with pc younger, with value around 2keuro, there is no competition.
My pc is lit even 16 hours a day (sometimes it's 24 hours a day) and never had problems, compliments to those who assembled it 6/7 years ago.

 

[arzigogolo]

chipset c602
in the specifications it says that I could put a cpu intel® 2nd and 3rd gen. core i7 series processors with non-eccudimm only.
In light of what you wrote, I went to see what I compared to what I might have.
On the card I could get to mount an i7 3770 3.4ghz, but I see that, aside (which I have spent now), I would not have major improvements.
also update the memory, passing from 800mhz to 1600, does not seem to bring big improvements.
I put the 1070 (in 2017 ) updating from painting 2000, memory in more and very low temperatures (liquid cooling, less than 37°, covid free ), some artifact +/- tied to the various driver updates, apart from the rabbocchi, I would say it is still okay.
I've made comparisons, equal files, with pcs of my clients.
clear that with pc younger, with value around 2keuro, there is no competition.
My pc is lit even 16 hours a day (sometimes it's 24 hours a day) and never had problems, compliments to those who assembled it 6/7 years ago.

for how I see it you could do in two ways:
try to find at low price an i7 3770k and try to see what kind of performance increment you could get, after all it was an excellent cpu 7-8 years ago and still today makes its figure if accompanied by a good video card like yours.
certainly the increase, as you say, would not be very obvious, perhaps a few seconds less because of the greater operational frequency, but all there.
Moreover it could be worth if the price on the used was really convenient, I don't know about 50 euros, more or less.

or otherwise, which I think is the best solution, keep your hardware still for a while and then change processor, ram and motherboard keeping hdds and video card, with an i5/i7 of tenth generation with ddr4 memory and you should see a very marked improvement.

what happened to me when I went from a core 2 duo to 3.00 ghz to an i5 3570k with memory ddr3 1600, there was an exceptional performance jump!

the video card you still have is great, I had never seen that liquid-cooled solution, incredible.