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.
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required