save lighten asses for lay-out

[clingonboy]

Hello everyone,
I have been using solidworks for 6 years and have always tried to solve this problem but I have not yet found a way that works well.
I would like to be able to export or save the assemblies of the machines so that a single body is simplified and very lightened. If possible without an improposable infinity of open cups as I happen if I try to save as a step. I need this to be able to make lay-outs of entire production lines composed of many machines. Moreover this would allow me to give third parties my files for various reasons in simple and convenient light format to use. The superphs literally make me mad and I hope they disappear from the universe and from the memory of human beings: mad:.
I would love to generate a file equal to the result that I would get with a 3d print of a full block formed by the external form of my machine.
Any idea of you? Am I the only one who has this problem?
I searched on the internet but I couldn't find useful information.

 

[LorenzoB]

The same situation.

Here are some methods we are testing.

1) in sw2011 they introduced the "defeature" function that applied to the assemblies promises to "simplify" geometrically the group so that you can save as part the assembling and use it to compose the layout of the plant, or send it to third parties without fears of copyright.
2) if you do not have 2011 you can create the "already" configuration of the groups (expend everything you do not need at the plant layout level) and then use them in the plant layout.
3) then there is the speedpak conf, which allows to keep only the bodies that serve in the layout active.

personally, I believe that the 2 is the best solution, as a result, but not as a running time.

export can do so in parasolid or step, avoiding surfaces.

I hope I've been helpful.
Say hi.

 

[clingonboy]

Thanks for the kind advice. I have to spend some time doing tests, it seems impossible that there is no really simple and effective way. Too much when needed you have to do these things you are always running and you do not have time to delve into it.
If I find a good method I'll take you.

 

[Oldwarper]

Did you try to save the axieme as a part?
in save by name choose as part format (.sldprt) and choose whether to insert all the details (it is created a set with all the bodies of the axieme, also the internal ones, defeaturizzati) or the only external surfaces (and in this case you may have problems with the "open" surfaces you say), but often fails some surfaces.
a good solution can be external components, but also here occasionally clinks some body, especially those of repetition (vites, etc.), but for a layout it knows me more than acceptable.

 

[clingonboy]

Thank you now

 

[SolidUser]

The same situation.

Here are some methods we are testing.

1) in sw2011 they introduced the "defeature" function that applied to the assemblies promises to "simplify" geometrically the group so that you can save as part the assembling and use it to compose the layout of the plant, or send it to third parties without fears of copyright.
2) if you do not have 2011 you can create the "already" configuration of the groups (expend everything you do not need at the plant layout level) and then use them in the plant layout.
3) then there is the speedpak conf, which allows to keep only the bodies that serve in the layout active.

personally, I believe that the 2 is the best solution, as a result, but not as a running time.

export can do so in parasolid or step, avoiding surfaces.

I hope I've been helpful.
Say hi.

I would use the first solution you proposed.
allego of the video that can clarify the potential of the command.

 

[eboss]

attention that the "defeature" command is more indicated for simplifying a part or a set to simplify calculation/analysis times.

in some cases it simplifies but slightly varies the geometric dimensions, in particular with part/axis of marked with old versions.
for plants/layout the speed pack is very powerful and allows to work without weighting the development of the entire project.

 

[SolidUser]

attention that the "defeature" command is more indicated for simplifying a part or a set to simplify calculation/analysis times.

in some cases it simplifies but slightly varies the geometric dimensions, in particular with part/axis of marked with old versions.
for plants/layout the speed pack is very powerful and allows to work without weighting the development of the entire project.

Tell me where you're writing what you bring back?
1) defeature was born especially for the purpose required by clingonboy
shows that the only options are to save it as an external file or to insert it into a 3dcc catalog.

2) since the fem is absolutely integrated in sw, this pushes you to perform the analyses on the same file and then simplify it on a configuration and not on a different file.

3) the speedpak is a non-magnetic 'visual' simplification and therefore your save as an external file, as well as the fact that you will have to load in memory all the geometry, you will get nothing but the original geometry.

 

[re_solidworks]

attention that the "defeature" command is more indicated for simplifying a part or a set to simplify calculation/analysis times.

in some cases it simplifies but slightly varies the geometric dimensions, in particular with part/axis of marked with old versions.
for plants/layout the speed pack is very powerful and allows to work without weighting the development of the entire project.

speed pack I do not even use it because just a dwg is required to drop everything and the layouts turn to 99% in dwg.

 

[eboss]

problems detected in the "defeatures" of different axioms, senders in assistance that in turn opened a call to solidwors to understand how to solve the problem.

if you create a speed pack absolutely does not load all geometry but only what you need for couplings or references.

 

[eboss]

do well not use the speed pack if you can to create a layout but depends on what size it takes on your system...and what it consists of.
with the speed pack you can't export the real dwg but if the layout and made from under assemblies you can upload them and export them to groups in dwg.
or from a single large group you carry out all the dwg views with sections etc. and then you don't even turn to the dwg file?

 

[SolidUser]

problems detected in the "defeatures" of different axioms, senders in assistance that in turn opened a call to solidwors to understand how to solve the problem.

if you create a speed pack absolutely does not load all geometry but only what you need for couplings or references.

We don't just participate in this topic.
When you answer, you'd like me to bring back to whom you answer.

when the dealer sends something to the sw corp. doesn't mean it's a real problem.
It could be that they don't understand us and ask for lumens directly to the mother house.

the 'defeature' does not have the obligation to maintain geometry identical to the original.
If for example there are two flange diameters and you want to simplify the piece, it could be that one of the two disappears.
the purpose is what I described earlier.
the fact that particular cases or strange geometries arise, depends on the options set by the user and the complexity of the object.
Let us remember that no cad does miracles.
ask that with a function and a click the cad brings you the carcass of a motor to become only an external enclosure closed by all holes, then you are off the road.


the speed pack only loads the geometry you decided to load in its options, the rest you see is a super-already representation, a 'vision' 3d of the axieme.

 

[erik.bo]

Bye to all,
I think the speed pack only serves not to load all geometry when inserting the axieme into another and should only load the selected geometry, wasn't it born for that? if you do not or calculate something more as it occurs?

for the problem of discussion according to me the best thing is to save as part. if the rescue goes to good end for the lay outs is perfect and beyond all after you can use e-drawings.

for small asses works.

 

[re_solidworks]

do well not use the speed pack if you can to create a layout but depends on what size it takes on your system...and what it consists of.
with the speed pack you can't export the real dwg but if the layout and made from under assemblies you can upload them and export them to groups in dwg.
or from a single large group you carry out all the dwg views with sections etc. and then you don't even turn to the dwg file?

I've been using the defeaur for several years. How? I do it by hand and even if it costs me a few more hours of modeling at the end of the fair it costs me less.
I do not dilute myself so much (see also the hour) but with this system we have raised so much the threshold of the number of components manageable in an assembly.

 

[clingonboy]

My problem remains, I have not yet found a solution that satisfies me fully.
The defeauter seems to me a complicated and laborious system for what I have to do.
I tried to save the assemblies as parts with various settings: only external surfaces, only external bodies, all bodies and in all cases the files that are generated are very large in my opinion.
what I imagine in my imagination is the possibility of getting a file of a part like a cluster of unique matter that has an external form like my machine, even less details and with an 'admissible weight'.
I will continue when I can get some time to do tests, but I think a simple and effective way does not exist.

 

[SolidUser]

My problem remains, I have not yet found a solution that satisfies me fully.
The defeauter seems to me a complicated and laborious system for what I have to do.
I tried to save the assemblies as parts with various settings: only external surfaces, only external bodies, all bodies and in all cases the files that are generated are very large in my opinion.
what I imagine in my imagination is the possibility of getting a file of a part like a cluster of unique matter that has an external form like my machine, even less details and with an 'admissible weight'.
I will continue when I can get some time to do tests, but I think a simple and effective way does not exist.

I repeat that the solution is 'defeature'.
If you want the easy things that with a click you get what you want, then the problem is not the complicated and laborious command, but it is you.

 

[Oldwarper]

My problem remains, I have not yet found a solution that satisfies me fully.
The defeauter seems to me a complicated and laborious system for what I have to do.
I tried to save the assemblies as parts with various settings: only external surfaces, only external bodies, all bodies and in all cases the files that are generated are very large in my opinion.
what I imagine in my imagination is the possibility of getting a file of a part like a cluster of unique matter that has an external form like my machine, even less details and with an 'admissible weight'.
I will continue when I can get some time to do tests, but I think a simple and effective way does not exist.

Well, I think "egg" and "gallina" is hard to find.
in any case if the geometries are complex the results are heavy if you want as much details as possible.
vice versa if you want few details you will have a lighter model, but as usual "that detail" for us very important maybe for defeaturing or approximation is not.
in this case proceeding by hand becomes indispensable.

However, I can guarantee that a model saved as a part is much lighter than it looks.
and anyway be, also saved with all the details you can proceed with a sort of manual cleaning so as to remove unnecessary bodies. so we will have the lightness and "the detail" we need.

 

[clingonboy]

It is true, avolte I would like everything with a click because pultrop to subjugate it is necessary to be competitive, my energies must serve to produce ideas that have an added will the computer and the software must do the job that can make a machine.
If I take my 3d of my machine, the mold with a 3d plotter and then I scan it with a 3d scanner, the resulting solid is what I want to get.
Maybe the way to get this was and I didn't know it, so I asked the question in this forum.
innovations (new commands) arise from people's desires and expectations.
cordial greetings.

 

[Oldwarper]

It is true, avolte I would like everything with a click because pultrop to subjugate it is necessary to be competitive, my energies must serve to produce ideas that have an added will the computer and the software must do the job that can make a machine.
If I take my 3d of my machine, the mold with a 3d plotter and then I scan it with a 3d scanner, the resulting solid is what I want to get.
Maybe the way to get this was and I didn't know it, so I asked the question in this forum.
innovations (new commands) arise from people's desires and expectations.
cordial greetings.

I think we figured out what you want.
I would also like to put the drawing of the piece in the crack of the cdrom and have to video the working mold. . .
but the automatisms come where they come.
where they don't arrive you have to arm yourself with good patience and do them by hand.

what you say you would get much more easily exporting to stl and reimporting in a body, sin that then everything becomes, besides too approximate, of a heaviness of different orders of magnitude greater than a defeature or a save as part.

You can try exporting and reimporting in different formats and see which one does most in your case.

evaluates very well what you need and if it is worth everyone with their pros and cons

 

[Paco]

I've been using the defeaur for several years. How? I do it by hand and even if it costs me a few more hours of modeling at the end of the fair it costs me less.
I do not dilute myself so much (see also the hour) but with this system we have raised so much the threshold of the number of components manageable in an assembly.

I also confirm that the defeature on complex pieces causes deformations of the solid to this point that can not be used then in assemblies. I tried with a pruning structure of carpentry, the result I compared it with the utility of comparison of the two parts, result: "deformations" also of centimeters.
I also have big problems of heaviness of certain assemblies, systems of paper industry with machine, various plants, accessories machines and so much to complicate the thing also the structures of the civil one that must be modeled to interface then 100% with the work previewed from the civil engineering. the solution for me too is to transform the assemblies into parts, to reunite them to simplify further or to hide things of "intellectual property" because maybe it is a set that must be exchanged also with sub suppliers of plant parts. In short, a further necessary complication of work. .