Translation Pro/E <--> SolidWorks ?

Hi. Thanks in advance to anyone that can help me...

My company has been using Pro/E for about 7 years. (Currently on Wildfire

2). We are looking to team up with a vendor, but this particular vendor uses SolidWorks. Ideally, we would like to be able to send files back and forth, and have us both be able to work on those files. In other words, we want to be able to translate files from one software to the other while saving the model tree history. So far in tests, we have been able to get SolidWorks to read Pro/E's model history, but Pro/E has been unable to read in anything other than a dummy solid.

Has anyone faced this problem before? Are there any solutions? We've looked for third-party translation software as well, and haven't been able to find anything. If anyone has any experience doing this and has some wisdom they can share, it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

-Bob M

Reply to
Dr. Bob
Loading thread data ...

There are no solutions. Pro/E does not read the model feature history of imported files.

Reply to
Ben Loosli

I wonder ... If you were using SW 2004 and they were using SW 2005; what would the options be? I think the same answers would apply here.

Reply to
Jeff Howard

Naturally, everyone will be ecstatic when Pro/e licenses Spatial's ACIS kernel to support AutoCAD, Catia; when SW and UG license Granite and ACIS to support Pro/e and the others; when Catia, UG, ACAD, Pro/e license the Parasolid kernel to be able to read UG and SW files. Or, when they all get through screwing around and support the STEP development efforts to produce a parametric, feature based, associative solid modelling neutral file.

But, as it stands, without these guys licensing each other's modelling kernels (Parasolid, ACIS & Granite are all commercially available for "interoperability"), we're left with featureless, nonparametric (often nonsolid) translations via STEP, IGES, SET, etc. There isn't anything else.

I've seen SW's claim to translate the Pro/e model tree and produce a translated part with "features". The claim makes good ad copy, but lousey models. It's nothing more than an IGES with feature names: no parametric control/variability, no associativity, no real features. Pro/e is straighforwardly bent on giving users dumb solids, and, like the king on his thrown, trying to dictate the course to others while remaining obdurately 'neutral'. UG and Catia seem even more aloof, but this could be merely my ignorance.

No, Bob, I'm afraid no one does feature based, parametric and associative translations from one kernel to another. And, collectively, they couldn't raise a blister with the effort they've made toward such a 3d neutral file format. You should buy a seat of SW and they should buy a seat of WF and just duplicate each other's modifications and keep these files in your own software's native format. You can exchange drawings in PDF format; cooperation has gotten at least that far.

Reply to
David Janes

Correct me if I'm wrong. "Features" are overlaid, relative the "kernel", functions and database structures. Cobalt won't read Inventor won't read ... yadadada native files, preserving parametric relationships and history even though they share the ACIS kernel. Parametric feature for feature translations for mid range price are a pipe dream once you get past booleaned primitive shapes. There are a few companies that develop translators (1 seat ~ cost of 5+ SW or WF seats) for Catia, Ideas, Pro/E, UG. Even with those there are features that don't have a comparative target system function to plug the input data into so they resort to an un-feature representation. How's SW going to represent some of Pro/E's features; VSS, curve by equation, ..., ..., maybe even some method of datum definition? If Bob's not sellin' SW, he should buy a seat if he thinks native data swapping will help turn a buck.

Reply to
Jeff Howard

SolidWorks is so cheap and easy to learn just by a set of it and do your work in Solidworks.

Reply to

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.