1. Home
  2. Solidworks CAD Design software
  3. Re: STEP files from PRO/E

Re: STEP files from PRO/E

Absolutely mention it! No harm done in bringing an issue to the attention of those that might help in resolving it. As you state, you use whatever tools are necessary to get the job done. If you want to use SolidWorks, but it won't do the job, then it won't get "fixed" if they don't know about it. It never hurts to ask a question if it is done in a positive way.

WT

> Please understand this is not intended as a bash of Solidworks.

Solidworks

is our primary CAD software and for the most part we love it. I did see > something interesting the other day. One of our customers uses PRO/E to > design these sheetmetal brackets that we manufacture for him. He has been > sending STEP files exported from PRO/E. We always get face import errors > when importing into Solidworks, we expect this. Using all the tricks I know > of I can't get the PRO/E STEP file to unfold as a sheetmetal part. What I > eventually end up doing is inserting the imported solid into an assembly > file and then build a duplicate on top of it using what I can of the > imported geometry. On this last go round I download a trial version of a > program called 'TransMagic'. It is suppose to clean up translated solid > data and fix any errors. When I ran the STEP file through this program it > fixes and repairs the file saying that it is 100% usable. But when I import > this result into Solidworks I still get the same face errors. Doing the > SolidWorks diagnosis on the import fixed the face errors but leaves gaps > that can't be fixed, so I end up with imported surfaces..... BTW I have the > customer set the precision in PRO/E as high as it will go and regenerate the > part before exporting the STEP file (this usually works). > > Now this is the part where I'm not intending to bash Solidworks, I just want > to call it to someone's attention. The original STEP file loads into > inventor (yes we do have a legal license) and will unfold as a sheetmetal > part just fine. Since we are a job shop time is of the essence, this works > so good I now must learn enough inventor to make a drawing of the part. > > We will be going to a 2004 rollout similar next week, should I mention this > to the VAR. or company reps that will be there? > -- > Jeff > > > > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system
formatting link
Version: 6.0.507 / Virus Database: 304 - Release Date: 8/4/2003 > >
Reply to
Wayne Tiffany
Loading thread data ...

Jeff,

Hmmm..... we recieve STEP files from Pro quite often. No problems with either SW2001+, or 2003.

Not neccesarily defending SW, but it could be the out put from a specific build or version of Pro that's the culprit.

At any rate, you "SHOULD NOT" need a third party file fixer for STEP. That defeats the whole purpose of the specification. We might as well go back to IGES.

Regards

Mark

Solidworks

Reply to
Mark Mossberg

You're describing what sounds like 2 different issues, import errors and sheetmetal (flatten) errors. These issues can be independent of one another.

I can't comment on the first issue, however, I have a friend who deals with pro-e step files (sheetmetal) all the time.

While he rarely gets errors, he does run into the inability to flatten (more often than not). He frequently has to add some bend relief(s). Since I don't use pro-e, my guess is pro-e is not quite as picky as solidworks when it comes to proper bend relief's.

Reply to
kenneth b

From my experience with Pro/E STEP sheet metal files, our errors were usually caused because the corner areas (where the flanges meet) met at one common edge, i.e. there was no gap. SolidWorks really doesn't like this. See if you can ask them to change a feature in Pro/E before exporting so that the corners where flanges meet have at least a little gap. This helped us a lot.

Todd

Solidworks

Reply to
TT

Not only would I mention it, take the file with you and let them try to import it and try to use it.

Reply to
1

Actually I had the customer go back and modify his model so that there is a .001 gap between overlapping faces and coincident edges. But when imported there is a big red explanation mark on the imported solid. When I run the diagnosis it tells me there are 9 faulty faces. I just went back and check for consistent material thickness and proper inner and outer bend radii and all this looks good. I would be willing to save a SolidWorks files of the imported STEP file and email to anyone who would like to take a look. I'm importing with these options set:

Surface/solid entities Try forming solid(s) B-Rep mapping

Perform full entity check and repair errors

Document template specified unit

Sorry I can't send the STEP file because it would be so easy to see who the customer is. If you would like to have a go at it, drop me a line at:

snipped-for-privacy@NnmbyersprecisionNnm.com (remove the (3) "Nnm" occurrences)

Reply to
Not Necessarily Me

I forgot to mention one other note of interest, when I build my own model on top of the customer's model I am able to duplicate almost exactly the bend relief that he has in his model. And as a final test I do a volume check on the two models and get about .014 difference between the two.

I just found out this morning that the customer put this job on hold for re-engineering anyway. Oh well what's 4 hours of trying to import and then having to build from scratch anyway. It's a good thing I don't work for the post office....

Reply to
Not Necessarily Me

what the heck, i don't have not much experience with repairing imported geometry, but i'll take a look at it.

i'm more curious to see how the model looks (bend relief's). it appears that pro-e might give the user a false sense of correct modeling techniques for sheetmetal parts (lack of bend relief's). even if the part is cut with a laser or water jet, you will need more than .001" gap. i know this is a delicate situation, but you might need to show the customer the proper way to incorporate somewhat reasonable bend relief's in sheetmetal parts.

does the part have lances? i've seen these cause more problems than anything else (aside from corners with flanges butting into each other).

Reply to
kenneth b

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.