Welcome to the Onshape forum! Ask questions and join in the discussions about everything Onshape.

First time visiting? Here are some places to start:
  1. Looking for a certain topic? Check out the categories filter or use Search (upper right).
  2. Need support? Ask a question to our Community Support category.
  3. Please submit support tickets for bugs but you can request improvements in the Product Feedback category.
  4. Be respectful, on topic and if you see a problem, Flag it.

If you would like to contact our Community Manager personally, feel free to send a private message or an email.

Can features on imported SolidWorks files be edited?

michael3424michael3424 Member Posts: 584 ✭✭✭
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

Comments

  • jakeramsleyjakeramsley Member, Moderator, Onshape Employees, Developers Posts: 628
    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.
    Jake Ramsley

    Director of Quality Engineering & Release Manager              onshape.com
  • andrew_troupandrew_troup Member, Mentor Posts: 1,584 ✭✭✭✭
    edited March 2015
    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.
  • jakeramsleyjakeramsley Member, Moderator, Onshape Employees, Developers Posts: 628
    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.
    Jake Ramsley

    Director of Quality Engineering & Release Manager              onshape.com
  • ilya_baranilya_baran Onshape Employees, Developers, HDM Posts: 1,049
    @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.
    Ilya Baran \ Director, Architecture and FeatureScript \ Onshape Inc
  • michael3424michael3424 Member Posts: 584 ✭✭✭
    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
  • jakeramsleyjakeramsley Member, Moderator, Onshape Employees, Developers Posts: 628
    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.  
    Jake Ramsley

    Director of Quality Engineering & Release Manager              onshape.com
  • michael3424michael3424 Member Posts: 584 ✭✭✭
    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

  • mevalemevale Member Posts: 22
    "...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.

  • michael3424michael3424 Member Posts: 584 ✭✭✭
    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
  • 3dcad3dcad Member, OS Professional, Mentor Posts: 2,457 PRO
    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.
    //rami
  • david_sohlstromdavid_sohlstrom Member, Mentor Posts: 159 ✭✭✭
    I agree with 3dcad I have hundreds of parts and assemblies in GD that I would like to import to OnS.

    Dave
    David Sohlstrom

    Ariel, WA
  • michael3424michael3424 Member Posts: 584 ✭✭✭
    Is there a way to formally request new features in OnShape?  If so, has anyone requested GM file import capability?
  • jakeramsleyjakeramsley Member, Moderator, Onshape Employees, Developers Posts: 628
    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.
    Jake Ramsley

    Director of Quality Engineering & Release Manager              onshape.com
  • 3dcad3dcad Member, OS Professional, Mentor Posts: 2,457 PRO
    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.
    //rami
  • michael3424michael3424 Member Posts: 584 ✭✭✭
    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
  • jakeramsleyjakeramsley Member, Moderator, Onshape Employees, Developers Posts: 628
    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.
    Jake Ramsley

    Director of Quality Engineering & Release Manager              onshape.com
  • michael3424michael3424 Member Posts: 584 ✭✭✭
    OK, I'll try to avoid extraneous screen cap info when sending feedback in future.

    Mike
  • jakeramsleyjakeramsley Member, Moderator, Onshape Employees, Developers Posts: 628
    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.
    Jake Ramsley

    Director of Quality Engineering & Release Manager              onshape.com
  • 3dcad3dcad Member, OS Professional, Mentor Posts: 2,457 PRO
Sign In or Register to comment.