How come mates are "suppressed" or "unsupressed" while components are "suppressed" or "resolved"?
Why does Solidworks persist in inconsistant use of nomanclature?
I suppose I could see the difference in application of the terms but it seems contradictory or confusing.
Just a thought.
paul
Supressed/Lightweight/Resolved/Unsupressed are really not the same. In context of an assembly a component can be: Supressed- it, and all its children mates,in-context references, ect. completely discounted from the assembly Unsupressed but lightweight-above items visible and updated based upon the latest time the component was in a resolved state. Used when dealing with a larger assembly to reduce overhead, but may not be 100% accurate as lightweight sub-assemblies/parts may have changed since their last resolved state. Unsupressed and resolved-the most accurate condition of an assembly. The component/sub-assembly and associated references are updated to its actual current state.
Its really a speed issue. Working on a 5000 piece assembly in a fully resolved state will be much slower, but much more accurate than working on the same assembly in lightweight mode. Thankfully, you can selectively resolve only those parts/subs necessary to ensure accuracy in the area of the assembly that you are currently working. There is no lightweight state of a mate, its either there... or not.
"Brian" wrote in news:1132067680 snipped-for-privacy@spool6-east.superfeed.net:
It does make sense actually. And I do see the functionality of the various states of components and mates.
And I suppose the nomenclature is what it is. After all "un-resolved" is a poor substitute for "suppressed"
cheers pm
I agree totally! they need to change the names.
Steve T.
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.