Before you open the assembly click references and change to location there.
I'll bet you will get large bolts if you don't have their bolts with the
IMO - You should have them go to File\Find References and have them save all
the parts to one directory and have them send that to you. That way you are
at least starting with their original bolts.
Words fail when it comes to describing how far SolidWorks has missed the
mark with Toolbox. The only thing I can think is now that it is not
sold separately, but bundled together with other things, they are no
longer concerned about the viability of this product. Sometimes there
are ways to get Toolbox to do what you want it to do, but most
frequently, when presented with the facts about file naming, custom
properties, compatibility of Smart Fasteners with custom parts,
"collaboration" with offsite users, setting up a networked library that
works properly, issues relating to PDM applications and general
customization, many companies opt to turn off Toolbox and develop their
CAD is not just about images shaped like parts, it's also about the data
attached to those parts that describes the non-geometrical attributes.
It is true that Toolbox has improved a lot over the past couple of
years, but the underlying fundamental flaws are still there. I have
spoken several times with the product manager at SW for this product and
it looks to me that there are people who understand the problems, but
people at SW higher up the ladder are giving other projects higher
How many people are using the Deform feature on production models? How
many people are using the new mold tools? Add those up and multiply
them by 100 or even 1000, and I don't think you will begin to compare
with the number of users who have been stymied by Toolbox's flaws. Ask
tech support which Office add in generates the most angst (prior to
To be specific, these flaws include:
- library installs with config creation as the default and only one size
config of each part, ENSURING that new installs and file sharing will
cause problems with missing configurations unless steps are taken to
circumvent Toolbox or do a lot of manual config creation.
- there is no convenient or efficient way to add company specific
descriptions, part numbers, materials or finish data en masse to all the
size configs. there are a couple of workarounds, the best of which is
probably creating the configs beforehand somehow and then autocreating a
design table and use that to add custom props
- custom standards or user added parts cannot be used with Smart
- you cannot use Toolbox AND PDMWorks properly at the same time. one of
the benefits of PDMW is that it takes your parts off of the network, and
you work locally without conflicts. Toolbox INSISTS that your parts go
on the network, and until recently, they didn't provide a workable
method for avoiding file access conflicts. Also, unless you have
duplicates of your Toolbox parts put in the PDMW vault (duplicate files
is a definite "don't do this" PDM situation), you don't have any
information available via PDMW reports or property searches for the
PDMW is a great product for the price. The ironic thing is that the
same person manages both products. The responsibility for this irony is
the lack of commitment from people higher up the chain who don't
experience the pain of implementation, management and everyday usage
with this product.
So I lied when I said "words fail".
Good points Matt.
How the heck do you market integration though?
Areas that need integration are:
Library/Palette directories and with
(piping parts also)
non-MSoft servers like Samba on Linux
(even a gpm that correctly setup and ran the existing server in Wine would
new SW releases (the vault conversion process)
Did I miss anything?
ooh, piping parts. ick. hmm, never tried it, but it sounds messy.
Actually, these work well, as long as you don't mind the fact that it
doesn't track configs as separate documents or part numbers. You can
search config names, but not directly. You have to do an initial search
using the Generate Report, and then dbl click in the config column, and it
will let you search that column for a string.
I recently set one up on Novell. The vault data can be on a non-MS OS, but
the service has to run on MS. It's not a great idea to do things this way,
but it does work.
Personally I haven't have any problem with this, especially after seeing
how other PDM products handle it (or like SmarTeam, don't handle it). You
can even mix PDMW2004 with SW2003, except if you have SolidWorks Network
if you do a report on an assembly in PDMW, you can output a text bom.
Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.