repairing a save bodies failure

I know of no way to resurreuct, and would be interested to learn if anyone came up with a trick. The SWx developers know about this problem. I spent a bit of time on this topic in two of my SWx World presentations this year (will be posted to dimontegroup website REALLY soon). The best, safest, most robust method is NOT to use 'split part' or 'save bodies' which are easy to break and basically impossible to recover from without losing additional features int he child part. Instead, start a new part, insert>features>part (selecting the master part to insert into the new model), and use a 'delete bodies' feature to remove all of the bodies except the one you want in the child part. I've been doing this for years and it has ALWAYS been fully recoverable, along with other advantages - you get planes, can make relations to other bodies before you delete them, etc.

BTW - in my experience, hiding bodies only screws up 'split part', not 'save bodies' (which is easily screwed up by other things). Is it possible you meant 'split part'? In this specific situation I found that rolling above the split part, showing the bodies, and rebuilding resurrected everything. I sometimes had to close out of everything and reopen in order to repair. But still there are so many other, non-recoverable ways to mess up split-part (and make files) that the practice is banned in our office.

Thanks for the advice. I think I will try out you alternate method next go around.

No it's definitely Save Bodies. Knowing it's a problem I will try to avoid the practice in the future.

Dave

Well, of course you might get the answer that you're hosed. But that's not true, so ignore it if it comes.

This is my little secret, cuz everybody else thinks you're hosed, so I'll only tell you this as long as you promise not to tell anyone else. I don't consider this a "proper method". A proper method would include fixing the software, but until such future date when that might happen, I have a fall back plan (messy workaround):

- make a part with two solid bodies

- RMB on the solid bodies folder and Save Bodies to Body Right and Body Left

- open Body Right as a separate part and add features.

- Save Body Right

- roll back before the Save Bodies feature in the base part

- hide Body Right

- roll to end

- edit Save Bodies feature, see only one body in the list, hit the green check

- roll before Save Bodies feature

- show Body Right

- roll to end

- edit Save Bodies feature, still only one body, what was Body Right now has some generic name

- change generic name back to Body Right

- hit the green check, first it asks you to overwrite the existing Body Right, but then it tells you you can't because it's still open

- exit command, close out of the Body Right part window, go back and save Body Right and overwrite the file

- open Body Right on its own. It's missing the features you added.

you're hosed. this is the point where you are now.

Try this,

- before redefining the Save Bodies feature, move Body Right to another folder

- close Body Right

- now redefine the Save Bodies, creating a new Body Right

- move Body Right back to the original folder, overwriting the newly redefined file

- open Body Right and hit ctrlQ.

- Everything should be ok.

Is this a mess? Yes. Are you hosed? No.

Good luck,

Matt

"- before redefining the Save Bodies feature, move Body Right to another folder

- close Body Right

- now redefine the Save Bodies, creating a new Body Right

- move Body Right back to the original folder, overwriting the newly redefined file

- open Body Right and hit ctrlQ.

- Everything should be ok"

That's the kind of thing I was asking for. Nice workaround, Matt. That is one of the reasons I am vigilant to never say 'you can't do that in SWx' - there always seems to be a way. That said, I will stick to my guns that insert-part is the best practice for simplicity, stability, and flexibility. However, it's nice for the other guys who don't follow this best practice to have some sort of safety net, and I am sure they will be grateful to you for sharing it.

-Ed