#1
|
|||
|
|||
method for exporting to solidworks
Is there a way to export part-by-part (from a .pkg) to a format that solidworks can load without purchasing an expensive addon? I'm unfamiliar with Lisp, but could probably muddle through it if necessary.
Thanks |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
Re: method for exporting to solidworks
I guess that depends on your definition of expensive, but I was searching for a similar tool awhile ago: http://cocreateusers.org/forum/showthread.php?t=5046
I have found AI Export by Aspiration Innovation to be a very valuable tool, as I often export models for use by various machine shops. AI Export lets me send IGES, STEP, SAT, etc. all bundled in a zip file. If you do this kind of exporting a lot, I'm sure this utility will pay for itself. It looks like they've added a demo version - probably at least worth a download . . . I've even heard from one shop that they were able to load the eDrawing file directly into SolidWorks, if this is true, this may be your best path for transfer to SolidWorks. |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
Re: method for exporting to solidworks
To dig up an old thread to provide helpful info on this topic.
Recently, I have found that exporting ACIS (sat) file(s) from a PKG file works really well. To export just one or a few in the PKG file, just select the ones needed via the Structure Browser. Upon evaluating the ACIS and STEP to SolidWorks, ACIS files import cleaner with less model faces going corrupt on troubling parts. Therefore, my 1st choice going to SolidWorks is ACIS (SAT) files.
__________________
Support Your Local Sheriff - At high noon Jason: "How much does it pay?" Citizen: "Well, none of our other sheriffs ever lived long enough to find out." Co-Create 2007 (15.50G) ANSYS Workbench 14 SolidWorks 2011 UGNX-7.5 / TeamCenter UA 8 PADS 2000 Applicon Bravo Autotrol CADAM Pro/E |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
Re: method for exporting to solidworks
The biggest problem with ACIS as a translation tool, is lack of support for assembly structure. If you are exporting parts only, it works pretty good, but if you are moving an entire assembly, expect to lose all of your assemblies and sub assemblies. You will also lose shared parts, and part names.
I've done a lot of translations between CoCreate and SolidWorks. I have had best results when using the CoCreate SolidWorks Parisolids translator. Of course, this is not an inexpensive option. It does maintain part and assembly structure. Because SolidWorks sets on top of a Parasolids kernel, there is no translation required on the SolidWorks side. The fewer translations your data has to pass through, the better. Next best for me has been IGES, then SAT for single parts. |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
Re: method for exporting to solidworks
Mike thanks for the input.
If the CoCreate assembly is only a one layer, it will still work with SolidWorks. All of the imported parts are connected to the one assembly. If a hierarchy of more than one level structure of assemblies is transfered, then the structure is lost. STEP would then be my next option since it can maintain the hierarchy levels of a multi assembly structure. IGES gets me very worried right away. It's not a strong enough translation for solid models nor surfaces. Since release 5.1 of IGES, the wireframe part is excellent. I'd like to think of IGES as IGUESS. IGUESS it could translate or maybe not. So, if a really detailed component part needs to move from CoCreate to SolidWorks, ACIS SAT file is good to use. Here's another thought and method I do use. When moving the hierarchy structured assembly over, use STEP first. If any parts blow up in the transfer, mark them and then export from CoCreate those single selected parts via ACIS SAT. Using SolidWroks, replace those that came in bad via STEP. Now, the entire assembly is repaired without issues. Going from SolidWorks into CoCreate, the ACIS SAT works really well too. Our sister company uses SolidWorks and UGNX. Getting data from CoCreate to UGNX requires single parts going from CoCreate via ACIS SAT to SolidWorks that then makes a ParaSoild for UGNX. The data have been compared time and again for integrity. It's right on. UGNX has explicit modeling capability like CoCreate. That's where the orgins of it started before it went to the Parametric History part based side. It still has those tools listed as Direct Modeling. I'm from the older UGII days of that explicit modeling and have kept my skills ever so sharpened with it today. Maybe that's the real reason why I can use CoCreate so well compared to the other designers thinking about number driven and not geometry driven. If CoCreate can menuize better and add a few of the UGNX Direct Modeling techniques, it will rival the UGNX DM capabilities to become the best explicit modeler. Of course now, I'm straying a great deal from this thread topic. Maybe another thread would be ideal to talk about the UGNX DM and CoCreate explicit functions.
__________________
Support Your Local Sheriff - At high noon Jason: "How much does it pay?" Citizen: "Well, none of our other sheriffs ever lived long enough to find out." Co-Create 2007 (15.50G) ANSYS Workbench 14 SolidWorks 2011 UGNX-7.5 / TeamCenter UA 8 PADS 2000 Applicon Bravo Autotrol CADAM Pro/E |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|