Can features on imported SolidWorks files be edited?

michael3424

The subject pretty much says it all.  Can features on imported SW part files be edited?  I'm currently using GeoMagic Design (nee Alibre) and have hundreds of designs created with that program, so it would be nice if there was a way to import them into OS for revision of the features as they were originally created.  GM has a SW export function, so I used that to create a SldPrt file and imported that into OS but it came in as a dumb solid.

Mike

jakeramsley

No, we only get the geometry when we import in a SolidWorks file.

SolidWorks, like other CAD systems, has its own features with settings/options/etc that there isn't a 1 to 1 map of SolidWorks feature to Onshape feature.  In most cases the parametric history wouldn't make sense transplanted from one system to another.

andrew_troup

Thank, jramsley, that makes perfect sense to me.

I'd be interested to know what your thinking is about how a greatly enhanced Onshape in future years will handle models created in 2015. Obviously there won't be any legacy issues for such models still needing to remain usable by Onshape 2015, because (unlike conventional practice) there will be no apps of earlier versions "in the wild".

Do you envisage it may sometimes be necessary for file data of such models to be 'reversioned' in order to reflect and permit new functionality? I suppose another way of asking that is: presuming the 'version number' which created the file is recorded in the file, is there also a field for more recent reversioning?

I recall a time about the middle of last decade when Solidworks changed the algorithms for (I think) spline computation in lofts, which meant curvy models from previous versions failed wholesale, in spite of their best efforts to negotiate this discontinuity. I'm thinking this might be one very good reason for OnS to make sure their surfacing tools are based on really solid precepts before they go live on line, and I furthermore think that those of us who want to see the paradigm shift succeed should be patient and pragmatic on matters like this.

jakeramsley

Andrew_Troup said:

Do you envisage it may sometimes be necessary for file data of such models to be 'reversioned' in order to reflect and permit new functionality? I suppose another way of asking that is: presuming the 'version number' which created the file is recorded in the file, is there also a field for more recent reversioning?

I recall a time about the middle of last decade when Solidworks changed the algorithms for (I think) spline computation in lofts, which meant curvy models from previous versions failed wholesale, in spite of their best efforts to negotiate this discontinuity. I'm thinking this might be one very good reason for OnS to make sure their surfacing tools are based on really solid precepts before they go live on line, and I furthermore think that those of us who want to see the paradigm shift succeed should be patient and pragmatic on matters like this.

Anything that you've created that is currently successful will continue to succeed when new functionality is released.  You've probably noticed or will notice that when new functionality is released that the announcement will say to wait a bit for existing documents to get the new functionality.  This is because your document is being upgraded to the latest version.  The benefit of us doing this as opposed to sending a new disk with a whole new program on it to you is we are able to compare the result of all the features before the upgrade to after the upgrade.  If these don't align, then we don't upgrade.

ilya_baran

@Andrew_Troup
This is a really insightful question.  First off, yes, your documents created in Onshape today will work correctly in Onshape in the future years.   Since we're introducing enhancements very quickly, we already have to deal with this issue -- you may have seen "Automatic Upgrade" appear in your workspace' change history.  We have given this a lot of thought and have powerful versioning mechanisms to ensure models continue to regenerate without change, while maintaining access to the latest enhancements.  Having access to all of the documents in one database gives us an opportunity to do a very good job with this: we can tell if an update is going to break something before we deploy it and fix the problem before any customers ever see it.

In some cases, when we change features' regeneration algorithms (e.g. a parasolid upgrade or us making improvements) we have to fall back to old algorithms if we cannot map the feature parameters without introducing a geometry change.  So sometimes a new feature with the exact same set of parameters will produce slightly different results than an older feature.  We may also have to provide a legacy UI for a feature held back this way, though so far we have not had to do this.

Overall, our goal is for users to never have to think about this upgrade process anymore.

michael3424

jramsley said:

No, we only get the geometry when we import in a SolidWorks file.

SolidWorks, like other CAD systems, has its own features with settings/options/etc that there isn't a 1 to 1 map of SolidWorks feature to Onshape feature.  In most cases the parametric history wouldn't make sense transplanted from one system to another.

Thanks for the quick reply.  Two follow up questions if I might:

1) What is the recommended way to migrate a design from a different CAD system to OnS, especially if one wants to be able to revise the part design?
2) Out of curiousity - since OnS can't read the history of the imported part how does it know what the part looks like?  Do CAD files (like SW) typically contain a dumb solid representation of the part in some sort of generic format like IGES or STEP?

Mike

jakeramsley

Michael3424 said:

Thanks for the quick reply.  Two follow up questions if I might:

1) What is the recommended way to migrate a design from a different CAD system to OnS, especially if one wants to be able to revise the part design?
2) Out of curiousity - since OnS can't read the history of the imported part how does it know what the part looks like?  Do CAD files (like SW) typically contain a dumb solid representation of the part in some sort of generic format like IGES or STEP?

Mike

It really depends on how big the design is, what revisions you want to do/parameterization you need, and what the cost is to migrate the data over.  If you can work with the dumb solid and build/edit new features on top of it, then I would suggest that.  You won't have all of the parameterization that created the part to begin with, but if it mostly doesn't need to change it doesn't matter.  The next step up, in my opinion, is to import the dumb solid and then create some direct edit/features that will control the part of the design you think you'll need to twiddle with.  This still doesn't have the history of the part but gives you some parameters you can control to change the downstream design at that point.  Finally, you have the option to re-create your design in Onshape so that it is fully parametric and native.

I would suggest try getting familiar with our direct edit tools and see if you can make the modifications you desire from the dumb solid first.  It'll probably take the least investment to get something somewhat flexible.  If that isn't suitable, then you'll need to make the decision on what to path to take from there.


As for how we get the geometry without the history, the proprietary file types generally have a representation of the resulting geometry embedded in the file on top of other things that are important to their system.  

michael3424

It really depends on how big the design is, what revisions you want to do/parameterization you need, and what the cost is to migrate the data over.  If you can work with the dumb solid and build/edit new features on top of it, then I would suggest that.  You won't have all of the parameterization that created the part to begin with, but if it mostly doesn't need to change it doesn't matter.  The next step up, in my opinion, is to import the dumb solid and then create some direct edit/features that will control the part of the design you think you'll need to twiddle with.  This still doesn't have the history of the part but gives you some parameters you can control to change the downstream design at that point.  Finally, you have the option to re-create your design in Onshape so that it is fully parametric and native.

Thanks - that was the conclusion I was coming to, so it was nice to get it confirmed.

Mike

mevale

Michael3424 said:

"...to import them into OS for revision of the features as they were originally created..."

¿The way they were created or the secuence (history) they were created?
Importing file shows the feature as it is. Why do you need the secuence?.


"...I used that to create a SldPrt file and imported that into OS but it came in as a dumb solid..."

The OS mission is to convert the dumb solids into intelligents solids.
Under the right hands, the dumbs are smarter than the parametric parts.
OS need it to play God.

michael3424

Mostly I was thinking that it would be nice to be able to revise the features that make up a part.  Say, change a tapped hole from 4-40 to 8-32 or change a bore diameter.   I don't really care about the sequence, to the extent that sequence doesn't affect the final form of the part.   It would, I think, in many non-trivial parts.  In my past work on R&D prototypes, I've often needed to make small revisions to parts.  It would be nice to have the feature details (history?) imported with the part for those sorts of changes

Probably a larger advantage would be in assemblies - the thought re-constraining an imported assembly because a few parts have changed is not appealing.  FWIW, I'm using Geomagic Design now and in the early part of the OnS learning curve.

Mike

3dcad

My main concern with imports are configurations, they should all come in when importing a model.

But currently I'm just waiting for OS to support Geomagic native files for import - it seems like there is quite a few GD users here.

david_sohlstrom

I agree with 3dcad I have hundreds of parts and assemblies in GD that I would like to import to OnS.

Dave

michael3424

Is there a way to formally request new features in OnShape?  If so, has anyone requested GM file import capability?

jakeramsley

Michael3424 said:

Is there a way to formally request new features in OnShape?

To formally request new features, use the "Feedback" option in the help drop down in the product.  This will submit a ticket that we will triage and enter into our system.

The other option is to make a post in this forum and we can make a ticket to track it.

3dcad

There is one request from me already, feel free to put another one in to climb up on priority list.

I've been thinking to run OnS into our pre-modeling team if we get GD file support and Keyshot link.

michael3424

Thanks Jake - it looks like that also sends along a screen cap of whatever you were doing when the Feedback was submitted.  Is that correct?

Mike

jakeramsley

Michael3424 said:

Thanks Jake - it looks like that also sends along a screen cap of whatever you were doing when the Feedback was submitted.  Is that correct?

Mike

Yes, this is correct.  It is used for when you run into issues and questions and It allows for some on screen markup to help better identify what you were doing.

michael3424

OK, I'll try to avoid extraneous screen cap info when sending feedback in future.

Mike

jakeramsley

Michael3424 said:

OK, I'll try to avoid extraneous screen cap info when sending feedback in future.

Mike

We are working on an improvement to our feedback system that would allow users to opt out of sending images.

3dcad

@JakeRamsley  What about https://onshape.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/requests ?