Override interference detection errors???

Hello All I use the pem nuts/standoffs for sheetmetal design Pems jam into the sheetmetal by design. Is there a way to override or ignore these specific interference detection errors? I use pems a lot and these errors add up quick when sorting through the error list. Thanks in advance Regards Frank

"FrankW" <fworm@mxznorpak.ca> wrote in message news:eM-dndplALxDIOfdRVn-sw@magma.ca... > Hello All > I use the pem nuts/standoffs for sheetmetal design > Pems jam into the sheetmetal by design. > Is there a way to override or ignore these specific > interference detection errors? SolidWorks has no way of knowing what parts you want checked and those you don't. I generally just select the parts I'm concerned about and then check for interference. Selecting an entire assembly depending on size could take considerable time to complete interference check. Maybe someone can elaborate on how folders could be used to compile potential interference parts, suppress them and then do interference check on the assembly. SW Enhancement: Provide user ability to tag parts to be ignored by the SW interference check. Anyone else think this would be a useful edition? Kman > I use pems a lot and these errors add up quick > when sorting through the error list. > Thanks in advance > Regards > Frank >

Kman, This would be a WONDERFULL addition. I have this problem all of the time with bolts with cosmetic threads in holes with cosmetic threads. Think I'll make a enhancement request right now. -- Seth Renigar Emerald Tool and Mold Inc. (Remove "SpamFree-" from my address) "Kman" <kengineering@peoplepc.com> wrote in message news:uEzec.5221$zj3.1690@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net... > > "FrankW" <fworm@mxznorpak.ca> wrote in message > news:eM-dndplALxDIOfdRVn-sw@magma.ca... > > Hello All > > I use the pem nuts/standoffs for sheetmetal design > > Pems jam into the sheetmetal by design. > > Is there a way to override or ignore these specific > > interference detection errors? > > SolidWorks has no way of knowing what parts you want checked and those you > don't. I generally just select the parts I'm concerned about and then check > for interference. Selecting an entire assembly depending on size could take > considerable time to complete interference check. Maybe someone can > elaborate on how folders could be used to compile potential interference > parts, suppress them and then do interference check on the assembly. > > SW Enhancement: Provide user ability to tag parts to be ignored by the SW > interference check. Anyone else think this would be a useful edition? > > Kman > > > > I use pems a lot and these errors add up quick > > when sorting through the error list. > > Thanks in advance > > Regards > > Frank > > > >

Can you use the Physical Dynamics sensitivity slider to eliminate some of these. "Seth Renigar" <SpamFree-srenigar@emeraldtoolandmold.com> wrote in message news:4FAec.15363$So3.765385@twister.southeast.rr.com... > Kman, > This would be a WONDERFULL addition. I have this problem all of the time > with bolts with cosmetic threads in holes with cosmetic threads. > Think I'll make a enhancement request right now. > -- > Seth Renigar > Emerald Tool and Mold Inc. > (Remove "SpamFree-" from my address) > > > "Kman" <kengineering@peoplepc.com> wrote in message > news:uEzec.5221$zj3.1690@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net... > > > > "FrankW" <fworm@mxznorpak.ca> wrote in message > > news:eM-dndplALxDIOfdRVn-sw@magma.ca... > > > Hello All > > > I use the pem nuts/standoffs for sheetmetal design > > > Pems jam into the sheetmetal by design. > > > Is there a way to override or ignore these specific > > > interference detection errors? > > > > SolidWorks has no way of knowing what parts you want checked and those you > > don't. I generally just select the parts I'm concerned about and then > check > > for interference. Selecting an entire assembly depending on size could > take > > considerable time to complete interference check. Maybe someone can > > elaborate on how folders could be used to compile potential interference > > parts, suppress them and then do interference check on the assembly. > > > > SW Enhancement: Provide user ability to tag parts to be ignored by the SW > > interference check. Anyone else think this would be a useful edition? > > > > Kman > > > > > > > I use pems a lot and these errors add up quick > > > when sorting through the error list. > > > Thanks in advance > > > Regards > > > Frank > > > > > > > > >

Truthfully I think it'd be better to override or shutoff the "error" rather than ignoring the entire part. There could be other objects interfering unintentionally. Cheers Frank Kman wrote: > "FrankW" <fworm@mxznorpak.ca> wrote in message > news:eM-dndplALxDIOfdRVn-sw@magma.ca... > >>Hello All >>I use the pem nuts/standoffs for sheetmetal design >>Pems jam into the sheetmetal by design. >>Is there a way to override or ignore these specific >>interference detection errors? > > > SolidWorks has no way of knowing what parts you want checked and those you > don't. I generally just select the parts I'm concerned about and then check > for interference. Selecting an entire assembly depending on size could take > considerable time to complete interference check. Maybe someone can > elaborate on how folders could be used to compile potential interference > parts, suppress them and then do interference check on the assembly. > > SW Enhancement: Provide user ability to tag parts to be ignored by the SW > interference check. Anyone else think this would be a useful edition? > > Kman > > > >>I use pems a lot and these errors add up quick >>when sorting through the error list. >>Thanks in advance >>Regards >>Frank >> > > >

I've written a macro that does this. It creates an Excel file with a list of interferences to ignore (it identifies interferences by interference volume and the interfering component names/instances). You can also change the scope to check only interferences in subassemblies or only interferences in the main assembly (so any interferences within subassemblies are ignored)--this can save time in large assemblies. Also finds similar interferences so say you have 50 pem nuts in part A, it finds all 50 interferences and adds them to the "ignore" list if you choose to. Also "imports" interference lists from subassemblies. Yes, I wish SWX would add this to the ability of the software. Email me if you want a copy. Eric FrankW <fworm@mxznorpak.ca> wrote in message news:<eM-dndplALxDIOfdRVn-sw@magma.ca>... > Hello All > I use the pem nuts/standoffs for sheetmetal design > Pems jam into the sheetmetal by design. > Is there a way to override or ignore these specific > interference detection errors? > I use pems a lot and these errors add up quick > when sorting through the error list. > Thanks in advance > Regards > Frank

This was one of my key annoyances with SWX when I first started using it 2.5 years ago. It was also one of my key annoyances with Pro/E. My very first 3d parametric modeler was Mechanical Desktop. I REEEEEALLY wish SWX did it like MDT. MDT makes boolean solid models of the interferences, so you're not stuck with some dialog box listing names and volumes. I could do an interference check with MDT, turn off all the parts, and then see where the interference volumes were. I'd toggle the parts on/off to get in and really see the interference. Screw threads and PEM nuts always produced expected volumes, so they were easy to ignore/delete. The odd-ball crescent shaped solids or rectangular volumes were glaring errors and easy to fix. Perhaps there is a way to fake this type of interference detection within SWX? Is there a way to combine all parts in an assembly to create volumes where parts overlap? Equally important is the ability to retain the original parts/assembly. "FrankW" <fworm@mxznorpak.ca> wrote in message news:eM-dndplALxDIOfdRVn-sw@magma.ca... > Hello All > I use the pem nuts/standoffs for sheetmetal design > Pems jam into the sheetmetal by design. > Is there a way to override or ignore these specific > interference detection errors? > I use pems a lot and these errors add up quick > when sorting through the error list. > Thanks in advance > Regards > Frank >

I guess I should mention the fact that you can always make a configuration with your fasteners suppressed, then run the detection. Of course there are problems with that method as well. Mike Wilson

"Mickey Reilley" <mreilley@hotmale.fix.this.com> wrote in message news:L3Zec.51119$ES2.40075@newssvr25.news.prodigy.com... > This was one of my key annoyances with SWX when I first started using it 2.5 > years ago. It was also one of my key annoyances with Pro/E. My very first > 3d parametric modeler was Mechanical Desktop. I REEEEEALLY wish SWX did it > like MDT. MDT makes boolean solid models of the interferences, so you're > not stuck with some dialog box listing names and volumes. I could do an > interference check with MDT, turn off all the parts, and then see where the > interference volumes were. I'd toggle the parts on/off to get in and really > see the interference. Screw threads and PEM nuts always produced expected > volumes, so they were easy to ignore/delete. The odd-ball crescent shaped > solids or rectangular volumes were glaring errors and easy to fix. SolidDesigner did the same type of interference check. It was really nice. > Perhaps there is a way to fake this type of interference detection within > SWX? Is there a way to combine all parts in an assembly to create volumes > where parts overlap? Equally important is the ability to retain the > original parts/assembly. It could be done, by making a part from the assembly, then using the Common part of Combine to get the overlapping parts. Sure would be nice if SW would do it for us, though. Jerry Steiger Tripod Data Systems "take the garbage out, dear"

Yes, I have used that method on small assemblies where I can do it fairly quickly. The way I work and create my assemblies though, I don't ever like to suppress anything. I basically only use the configurations for hiding parts. For example, as a mold designer, I create my mold assemblies and have a configuration for: Complete Assembly, A-Side, B-Side, and B-Side Ejected. In most of these configs I am simply hiding what I don't want to see. I am really leery to suppress parts in am assembly. I used to do that when I first started using SW back in '97. But, I ran into some problems at the time (can't remember what they were) and have simply never revisited the idea since. -- Seth Renigar Emerald Tool and Mold Inc. (Remove "SpamFree-" from my address) "Mike J. Wilson" <m@w.com> wrote in message news:9ffe1dbbb8bf22d8d428e8c5263324ba@news.1usenet.com... > I guess I should mention the fact that you can always make > a configuration with your fasteners suppressed, then run > the detection. Of course there are problems with that method > as well. > > Mike Wilson > >

> It could be done, by making a part from the assembly, then using the Common > part of Combine to get the overlapping parts. Sure would be nice if SW would > do it for us, though. Maybe one of the SWX programming gurus on this board could come up with a macro or other custom applet that could do this. I'd pay. I bet others would pay. (Did I mention I'd pay?)

Was Eric Zuercher's solution not adequate? "Mickey Reilley" <mreilley@hotmale.fix.this.com> wrote in message news:FPefc.51271$Ge3.29839@newssvr25.news.prodigy.com... > > It could be done, by making a part from the assembly, then using the > Common > > part of Combine to get the overlapping parts. Sure would be nice if SW > would > > do it for us, though. > > Maybe one of the SWX programming gurus on this board could come up with a > macro or other custom applet that could do this. I'd pay. I bet others > would pay. (Did I mention I'd pay?) > > >

It sounds like an improvement over the way SWX does it, but it's not what I'm after. I want actual solid bodies where parts interfere. "Corey Scheich" <cscheich@garlockequip.com> wrote in message news:c5jue5$2j5sc$1@ID-200385.news.uni-berlin.de... > Was Eric Zuercher's solution not adequate? > > "Mickey Reilley" <mreilley@hotmale.fix.this.com> wrote in message > news:FPefc.51271$Ge3.29839@newssvr25.news.prodigy.com... > > > It could be done, by making a part from the assembly, then using the > > Common > > > part of Combine to get the overlapping parts. Sure would be nice if SW > > would > > > do it for us, though. > > > > Maybe one of the SWX programming gurus on this board could come up with a > > macro or other custom applet that could do this. I'd pay. I bet others > > would pay. (Did I mention I'd pay?) > > > > > > > >

Seth, I agree, I prefer hiding bodies as well but... let me ask you about visibility or hiding issues? Don't you see a problem with bodies unhiding in SW2004 sp3? I've actually had to go back and suppress bodies because hide per config are not hiding or will hide but when the file changes or regens (ctrl-q) or switching to other configs, they unhide again. I've had to update/modify a SW2003 model into SW2004 just last night and this was a major problem (not too mention the geometry failures, which took over 5 hours to repair)!! ... Seth Renigar wrote: > > Yes, I have used that method on small assemblies where I can do it fairly > quickly. > > The way I work and create my assemblies though, I don't ever like to > suppress anything. I basically only use the configurations for hiding > parts. For example, as a mold designer, I create my mold assemblies and > have a configuration for: Complete Assembly, A-Side, B-Side, and B-Side > Ejected. In most of these configs I am simply hiding what I don't want to > see. > > I am really leery to suppress parts in am assembly. I used to do that when > I first started using SW back in '97. But, I ran into some problems at the > time (can't remember what they were) and have simply never revisited the > idea since. > -- > Seth Renigar > Emerald Tool and Mold Inc. > (Remove "SpamFree-" from my address) > > "Mike J. Wilson" <m@w.com> wrote in message > news:9ffe1dbbb8bf22d8d428e8c5263324ba@news.1usenet.com... > > I guess I should mention the fact that you can always make > > a configuration with your fasteners suppressed, then run > > the detection. Of course there are problems with that method > > as well. > > > > Mike Wilson > > > >

I added some code to my macro so that you can open the interference volume as a part in a new file (sorry, not in the assembly file like MDT does). I had to generate the interference bodies anyway so it was just a couple of additional lines of code. Let me know if you want to try it out. Eric "Mickey Reilley" <mreilley@hotmale.fix.this.com> wrote in message news:<Lxffc.22566$bo2.12166@newssvr27.news.prodigy.com>... > It sounds like an improvement over the way SWX does it, but it's not what > I'm after. I want actual solid bodies where parts interfere. > > > "Corey Scheich" <cscheich@garlockequip.com> wrote in message > news:c5jue5$2j5sc$1@ID-200385.news.uni-berlin.de... > > Was Eric Zuercher's solution not adequate? > > > > "Mickey Reilley" <mreilley@hotmale.fix.this.com> wrote in message > > news:FPefc.51271$Ge3.29839@newssvr25.news.prodigy.com... > > > > It could be done, by making a part from the assembly, then using the > Common > > > > part of Combine to get the overlapping parts. Sure would be nice if SW > would > > > > do it for us, though. > > > > > > Maybe one of the SWX programming gurus on this board could come up with > a > > > macro or other custom applet that could do this. I'd pay. I bet others > > > would pay. (Did I mention I'd pay?) > > > > > > > > > > > > >

I can't comment on SP3.0 cause I am still on SP2.1. I have not had any MAJOR problems with this un-hiding issue. Although it seems like I have seen this happen a couple of times. I plan on upgrading to SP3.0 today or tomorrow. > I've had to update/modify a SW2003 model into SW2004 just last night and > this was a major problem (not too mention the geometry failures, which > took over 5 hours to repair)!! Now this I have seen... I see it on every major release. It is a major PITA. -- Seth Renigar Emerald Tool and Mold Inc. (Remove "SpamFree-" from my address) "Paul Salvador" <p.salvador@verizon.net> wrote in message news:407DB831.AEC1C45D@verizon.net... > Seth, > > I agree, I prefer hiding bodies as well but... let me ask you about > visibility or hiding issues? > Don't you see a problem with bodies unhiding in SW2004 sp3? > > I've actually had to go back and suppress bodies because hide per config > are not hiding or will hide but when the file changes or regens (ctrl-q) > or switching to other configs, they unhide again. > > I've had to update/modify a SW2003 model into SW2004 just last night and > this was a major problem (not too mention the geometry failures, which > took over 5 hours to repair)!! > > .. > > > Seth Renigar wrote: > > > > Yes, I have used that method on small assemblies where I can do it fairly > > quickly. > > > > The way I work and create my assemblies though, I don't ever like to > > suppress anything. I basically only use the configurations for hiding > > parts. For example, as a mold designer, I create my mold assemblies and > > have a configuration for: Complete Assembly, A-Side, B-Side, and B-Side > > Ejected. In most of these configs I am simply hiding what I don't want to > > see. > > > > I am really leery to suppress parts in am assembly. I used to do that when > > I first started using SW back in '97. But, I ran into some problems at the > > time (can't remember what they were) and have simply never revisited the > > idea since. > > -- > > Seth Renigar > > Emerald Tool and Mold Inc. > > (Remove "SpamFree-" from my address) > > > > "Mike J. Wilson" <m@w.com> wrote in message > > news:9ffe1dbbb8bf22d8d428e8c5263324ba@news.1usenet.com... > > > I guess I should mention the fact that you can always make > > > a configuration with your fasteners suppressed, then run > > > the detection. Of course there are problems with that method > > > as well. > > > > > > Mike Wilson > > > > > >

Similiar Articles:

Override interference detection errors??? - comp.cad.solidworks ...
For some reason I thought "Advanced Hide/Show" would work for this, but I guess Interference Detection takes into consideration hidden parts as well?

interference detection issues - solidworks - Mofeel Groups
Override interference detection errors??? Hello All I use the pem nuts/standoffs for sheetmetal design Pems jam into the sheetmetal by design.

7/25/2012 12:20:12 PM