table setting: how many files?

[AndreaL]

Hi, everybody, I'd like a little advice.
having to make the table of a set composed of about thirty parts like organized?
do a single file with all the drawings of details and the set, a file for each design or divided into groups?
Thank you in advance.

 

[michele81]

I'm not sure I understand the question. .
I was not advised by sw assistance to make a file with multiple designs inside, so according to them a file ==> a table. this because sometimes we encounter problems with the pack and go of assemblies that included tables...in fact some references were lost.
I hope that's what the question is.. .

 

[sampom]

Hi, everybody, I'd like a little advice.
having to make the table of a set composed of about thirty parts like organized?
do a single file with all the drawings of details and the set, a file for each design or divided into groups?
Thank you in advance.

decidedly a drawing board for the assemblies and a table for each single construction part that composes the machine. every part must be tied to a table of his own. and how would you then rule with any codes and/or file names?
then aside from the casino to find itself in the archive (and not least the size that would hire a .slddrw file consisting of dozens of drawings.. and on what sheet do you put it?), how do you deliver the boards to the various builders?

greetings
Mar

 

[re_solidworks]

I am countercurrent and that is maximum freedom. with swx you can do what you did before. I normally do as sampom and michele 81, but somehow I did differently. For example, for a particular carpentry very simple in the drawing together I also create the views of the cutting details.
other times I have done only two tables: in the first I have inserted everything regarding the axieme and in the second a pallinated isometric view of the axieme, the distinct materials and all the views of the cutting details.
to manage the information related to the cutting details I created a parametric note and simply by pasting this note in the drawing view fill out the information. the note included: code, quantity, material, rough state, various notes, etc...
we say it is a more complex aptitude to manage (not much later) but sometimes it is more practical for production.

 

[ilgioma]

as far as I'm concerned, I exploded with bubbles and distinct materials, and then a table for each file.
I think so doing even 10 years after you open the project and it will always be clear and tidy.

♪

 

[Oldwarper]

I begin by saying that I hate to have an infinite number of files per project and in this the current sw are masters in complication (for example, for a cam processing I have arrived to have 20 files from absurd names, used only by the program, before they "packed them" in a single one).
for what concerns me, I always make a table for the overall and all its sections (impossible to make the sections in separate files, besides being conceptually wrong) and a table for all (or almost) the details, at the most subdividing them into details of turning, milling, edm.

suppliers will be very difficult to get the slddrw, at most pdf, dwg/dxf. The export may therefore be selective of the interested parties.

It would be unmanageable for me to have 200 tables among which to look for every single detail. Better to have them all under their eyes. I don't know how reasons a pdm (magari per single file-single table, but without him I know that such a plethora of file would only make casinos, especially for parts with multiple configurations (you do, 1 table per config. or 1 table with multiple sheets? ).

problems you do not have with a table contain many sheets, but with a board with very complex axioms and sections. I can assure you. arrive at 50-100mb in a moment. I got spuxxanati and sent to the assistance. I've done everything before.

I then add the fact that (always without pdm) in order to insert the number of pieces for that particular it is necessary that a view of the assemblies with the distinct is in the same file of the details, otherwise it is necessary to implement escamotages as those discussed in the forum.

 

[michele81]

I felt like I didn't fully get the answer....:smile:
I am of the idea that every project should be presented as understandable as possible. therefore first a complete set, with possibly distinct and some particular if for example it is detached (additional or additional parts). then, if necessary, the sub-assistances and finally the tables with the details, in my opinion with an order as sensible as possible and always all reported in a first page of presentation and index. more everything is ordered more is traceable and understandable at a time distance and for any revisions.
the subdivision of the tables of the details depends in my opinion from those who will have to realize them, subdivisions by kind of processing are useful, but also keep on the same particular table that then be mounted insime is a valid road. then with the experience everyone finds his method...:smile:
greetings
Michael

 

[re_solidworks]

I felt like I didn't fully get the answer....:smile:
I am of the idea that every project should be presented as understandable as possible. therefore first a complete set, with possibly distinct and some particular if for example it is detached (additional or additional parts). then, if necessary, the sub-assistances and finally the tables with the details, in my opinion with an order as sensible as possible and always all reported in a first page of presentation and index. more everything is ordered more is traceable and understandable at a time distance and for any revisions.
the subdivision of the tables of the details depends in my opinion from those who will have to realize them, subdivisions by kind of processing are useful, but also keep on the same particular table that then be mounted insime is a valid road. then with the experience everyone finds his method...:smile:
greetings
Michael

I would say that it counts a lot what is asked by production. at the end the fall adapts.

 

[AndreaL]

thank you all for the answers. in the only project I did and that I just finished I divided into groups. I created a file for each group and a sheet for each particular by renameing all sheets. the groups I composed them referring to their position in the assembly : e.g. group pistons, carcass etc. I found myself quite well, I met a little bit of difficulty in export because details of different groups were executed in a company, others in another, so I did a little random with .pdf and .dxf
I probably would have tribulated less with a file for each detail regarding the export. . .

 

[scalva]

I am countercurrent and that is maximum freedom. with swx you can do what you did before. I normally do as sampom and michele 81, but somehow I did differently. For example, for a particular carpentry very simple in the drawing together I also create the views of the cutting details.
other times I have done only two tables: in the first I have inserted everything regarding the axieme and in the second a pallinated isometric view of the axieme, the distinct materials and all the views of the cutting details.
to manage the information related to the cutting details I created a parametric note and simply by pasting this note in the drawing view fill out the information. the note included: code, quantity, material, rough state, various notes, etc...
we say it is a more complex aptitude to manage (not much later) but sometimes it is more practical for production.

Hi.
a curiosity
how do you insert + details in a drawing?
I can only with welded assemblies

 

[re_solidworks]

with the classic view creation commands or with copy-paste of the views from the individual elements boards.

 

[scalva]

already
Thank you.
I never thought about it.
I use this system with autocad for carpenters and for projects related to themselves but never used with swx