storage projects

[bear69]

good morning, as already written in the presentation message work recently in office design with solidworks 2012 that is new both for me and for my colleagues, before you worked only in 2d with autocad.
My problem is the following, I should make two separate archives, one for the 3d and one for the tables. I started creating parts and assembling in a folder and then created all the relevant tables in the same folder. Having to make a separate archive I moved the tables to another folder, at the time of the opening of the drawings I came out a message that did not find the components and on the table instead of the various views I appeared rectangles with its diagonals. I know that by doing this I have removed every relationship between boards and 3d is that the separate search has been defined by the project leaders in the advanced phase. how should I structure the project and then realize the type of storage required?
Thank you in advance.. .

 

[maxopus]

How come this "genial" choice?

 

[Er Presidente]

I think it is enough to put in a separate archive only the 2d tables in dxf.

 

[bear69]

In fact it is a choice that I don't even understand because then some tables you will have to make a copy in pdf so that the designs are visionable from all the pcs of the company connected on the net. but is there a way to store them separately so that if I make a change to the part or the axieme you will also update the table?
Meanwhile thank you for the answers.

 

[meccanicamg]

the files must all stay together especially if you do not have a pdm installed. However it is a wrong choice to keep the tables silky for native sw models if they do not understand it is better that they go to do another kind of work.

the pdf folder makes sense that it is separated and is good to be seen from all within the company.

without a pdm happens as follows:
the general condition of ideal use is to have a folder with inside all projects, assemblies, tables etc. etc.
the first issue highlights when we have a folder with commercial components where we can have 2 files for mistakes with the same name and similar or different geometry. here are the first errors within the 3d models if we place in a general set two axioms containing "the same name of similar files".
the relationship between table and board is the basic link between these entities. shifting together from table can be useful if we want to pedestal a copy of putting to the table to point to a different set (because sw asks automatically to bind the board). It is harmful to keep in two different levels puts on the table and parts/assies.

this genial to divide into folders I think it is due to the absence of the pdm, so we invent "short" ways to understand the company historian. but it doesn't really need anything to have the files divided. better invest in the pdm some money... and the pdm itself provides to understand and know what and where. you ask the pdm to see the plan tables and he shows you. not so by hand dividing into folders... poor technology... and how many things you don't know... and how many cabbages you set up in the company... .

 

[Fulvio Romano]

a bot that every five minutes makes a copy of the tables in preset folders? obviously setting the parameters of the file in read-only, marking the hash and breaking the fingers to whom it changes?

 

[meccanicamg]

a bot that every five minutes makes a copy of the tables in preset folders? obviously setting the parameters of the file in read-only, marking the hash and breaking the fingers to whom it changes?

If for this, the solidworks planning program does it already. is used to convert pdf automatically and make various copies. However, the table set made with sw copied out of the working directory can only be seen with the viewer because otherwise by path error of geometric content (solid model part/assembly)

 

[bear69]

making a summary of all answers the best solution but above all the most logical and rational is to leave everything in the same folder. I will try to understand why the leaders have thought otherwise. . .
Thank you all!

 

[maxopus]

making a summary of all answers the best solution but above all the most logical and rational is to leave everything in the same folder. I will try to understand why the leaders have thought otherwise. . .
Thank you all!

it was just what I was going to tell you ... since logic (regardless of the cad) would want all the files of a project (other than library elements) inside a directory, ask why they would like to take this path seemingly meaningless.

 

[sampom]

bhè.. is not quite obligatory.. :smile:
if in swx you indicated the path where to recover folders; this you can do it directly during table/lifting, when you save go to do it in the designated folder and the program will "memorise" the location.
vice versa, as you are doing now with a next move, instead of simply doing it with clik and moving windows uses the special tool of swx. right clik on the file (from any resource explorer) ==> solidworks ==> moves. In this way the links remain, exactly as happens when you use rename (but always swx).

Also sometimes it is enough to first open only one file that is in another folder than the first original rescue, then open the axieme and this finding the first already opened go to search there also all the other "mancanti". In short, at least give him a "small tip" for where to go looking.

greetings
Marco:smile:

p.s. of course would be good thing that any "subfolders" of assemblies parts and tables reside within the "general folder" of the project.

 

[bear69]

Good morning to all, as soon as possible I will update you on how the company intends to accurately structure the storage of projects.. .

 

[bear69]

Good morning, I've been informed about archiving, it will be structured as follows:
- "archive boards", here will be inserted the slddrw boards of all the projects to have a single archive, each table will have a copy in pdf that will serve both as a design viewable from the whole company, and as the approval of the drawing;

- "common articles", here will be all common parts to different projects;

- "machine type", there will be a subfolder "common parts" that will contain the common parts to the various configurations, on the same level of "common parts" there will be the various folders related to each configuration where there will be together, sub-axis and specific parts of the single configuration.

"archive tables", "common articles" and "machine type" will be on the same level.
at the end of all from the set of each configuration with the pack and go will collect all the components and tables related to the configuration itself.

What do you think?

 

[re_solidworks]

Good morning, I've been informed about archiving, it will be structured as follows:
- "archive boards", here will be inserted the slddrw boards of all the projects to have a single archive, each table will have a copy in pdf that will serve both as a design viewable from the whole company, and as the approval of the drawing;

- "common articles", here will be all common parts to different projects;

- "machine type", there will be a subfolder "common parts" that will contain the common parts to the various configurations, on the same level of "common parts" there will be the various folders related to each configuration where there will be together, sub-axis and specific parts of the single configuration.

"archive tables", "common articles" and "machine type" will be on the same level.
at the end of all from the set of each configuration with the pack and go will collect all the components and tables related to the configuration itself.

What do you think?

years ago I also separated the paths, we did not have the pdm yet and it seemed easier to manage folders with a smaller number of files.
If when you create the new table you save it correctly already in the correct path it works and nothing happens, the trouble will be a tomorrow if you have to move something.
I believe that the most functional choice is to have a folder on a networked disk (not c: but a letter normally not used by the system type r: or z so if a tomorrow you will have to move the entire archive will be simple to re-open the new folder on the network and the change will be painless.
under this disk I would make a folder "data_technici" or "signs" and within this I would put a "commercial" folder, a "standard" folder for company standards (if there are) and for any type of product/project make a dedicated folder containing models and tables. I would basically not separate the models from the tables, but the machines, the groups, etc....

It is obvious that with the pdm it is all another story...thinks all of him and it is very easy to find everything by crossing the filters and exploiting codes or merceologic groups.

hi and good work

 

[MassiVonWeizen]

I smell like blood bath.
I think a project must be born and die alone. unless behind there is a careful and precise planning, which you get only with the experience.
just use mirrored parts or parts with derived sketches (classical example are the holes made in change part in the environment together exploiting the concentricity of other existing holes).
not to mention the modified details; and I do not say substantive changes, but just a geometrically identical but conceptually different function (always the example of the hole, instead of with cut extrusion erased and done with guided hole) and they break out all the assemblies that contain that part.
I have seen and corrected often pack&go containing folders that did not hit anything or even other projects.
if you decide to follow this path someone will have to do a handbook with the rules to be followed scrupulously to avoid cracking of folders and files.

configuration in solidworks is to indicate a variant within a set or particular; What do you mean by this term?

 

[bear69]

years ago I also separated the paths, we did not have the pdm yet and it seemed easier to manage folders with a smaller number of files.
If when you create the new table you save it correctly already in the correct path it works and nothing happens, the trouble will be a tomorrow if you have to move something.
I believe that the most functional choice is to have a folder on a networked disk (not c: but a letter normally not used by the system type r: or z so if a tomorrow you will have to move the entire archive will be simple to re-open the new folder on the network and the change will be painless.
under this disk I would make a folder "data_technici" or "signs" and within this I would put a "commercial" folder, a "standard" folder for company standards (if there are) and for any type of product/project make a dedicated folder containing models and tables. I would basically not separate the models from the tables, but the machines, the groups, etc....

It is obvious that with the pdm it is all another story...thinks all of him and it is very easy to find everything by crossing the filters and exploiting codes or merceologic groups.

hi and good work

we have no pdm, at least for now.
projects will be archived in a nas intended exclusively for this.
However for now we are working only on three projects and are the first so we will see later if there will be management problems.

 

[bear69]

I smell like blood bath.
I think a project must be born and die alone. unless behind there is a careful and precise planning, which you get only with the experience.
just use mirrored parts or parts with derived sketches (classical example are the holes made in change part in the environment together exploiting the concentricity of other existing holes).
not to mention the modified details; and I do not say substantive changes, but just a geometrically identical but conceptually different function (always the example of the hole, instead of with cut extrusion erased and done with guided hole) and they break out all the assemblies that contain that part.
I have seen and corrected often pack&go containing folders that did not hit anything or even other projects.
if you decide to follow this path someone will have to do a handbook with the rules to be followed scrupulously to avoid cracking of folders and files.

configuration in solidworks is to indicate a variant within a set or particular; What do you mean by this term?

the underlying problem is that we are at the first experience with a solid modeling program so I think it is difficult to manage immediately the design and management of the same.

we produce agricultural machines that are connected to tractors, for each type of machine there are different widths that vary depending on the size of tractors to which they must be combined. for example for the same machine you start from 1.3 meters, then 1,4 1.5 1,6 etc., I start to build the parts or the larger or narrower machine and then with the data table I create so many configurations as are the widths of the machine.

 

[MassiVonWeizen]

from my experience with external studies I have seen that each person has its own method of modeling. it goes from the point of pointing out that the part also renames the functions according to the use, to the savage that imports dwg sketches and blocks them with the relationship "fix".
until one works alone everything is fine, when one begins to share the tribal wars. So in my opinion as well as a logistics organization, which remains fundamental, you should also think of some basic rules, maybe doing each one same part of test and then analyze the different development methods, on how to model and assemble.