huge "replace components" project

[oldanics]

I have a replace component problem.

Ok, the best I can describe my problem is we have two main folders. "Fixtures" and "standard parts" The fixtures folder has about 30 sub-olders each dealing with a specific fixture we make. The Standard parts folder is similar, but with folders such as ballast, lamps, sockets, and the dreaded hardware.

In the hardware folder, previous engineers would draw a screw, name it 8-32 screw", "20035229" (for the part number), etc. Nothing has a configuration with it, the 8-32 is just that, one 8-32 screw.

We use hundreds of hardware components, and I recently made a subfolder in the hardware, labeled "fasteners" which has models for screws, nuts, and washers. Every distict item we have, i created a configuration with the appropriate part number and size using design tables. So 200 pieces of hardware are divided into 15 files.

Here is the question. Is it possible to select an old piece of hardware that is used in multiple folders, in multiple assemblies, and replace it with one of my new pieces using the correct configuration. Or must I do everything assembly by assembly?

And

Can I take two different models, and somehow link together specific features so the mates don't get messed up when i replace a component.

 

[ctopher]

Check into SolidWorks Express.

Chris
SolidWorks/PDMWorks 08 3.1
AutoCAD 08
ctopher's home (updated Aug 5, 2008)
ctopher's blog
SolidWorks Legion

 

[CorBlimeyLimey]

Ummm ... wanna try that again Chris?

 

[DesignerGuy16]

My work was in this kind of predicament when I started.

They were originally 2 design groups in 2 locations and merged back into one building on one server, but had so many duplicates, different fasteners, etc.

I ended up making a new "parts library", setup everyone's computer with file references to the new library, and new fastener library I created.

The fasteners/hardware will be harder than just replace and good. If they're single parts you won't have much replacability. You'll more than likely have to go assembly by assembly and do it as you come across them. That's what I'm doing here. I'll move and purge purchase parts as I come across them. Because it was so bad I don't care if I break old models, I'd rather the library be correct and we can fix a few mates the next time that model is used.

There's really nothing better than drawing the line in the sand. Just stay diligent and you'll get through it and really clean up.

James Spisich
Design Engineer, CSWP

 

[Bwaggoner]

we had a similar issue where we needed to change a location of a shared forlder that a lot of files were being referenced from. We wrote a macro that read the assembly references and listed them out. We then looked into the new directory to see if we could find the exact same file name match. If we were successful then we changed the reference to the new location.
This was done at the assembly level.
Also it was done using the Doc. Manager so SW didn't have to be active.
I'm guessing you could look for configs as well. If you want to look at what we have I can send it to you or post it.

 

[ctopher]

CorBlimeyLimey,
I misread.

Chris
SolidWorks/PDMWorks 08 3.1
AutoCAD 08
ctopher's home (updated Aug 5, 2008)
ctopher's blog
SolidWorks Legion

 

[oldanics]

Bwaggoner, A post of that example would help. Actually all you guys have been a pretty good at helping so far.

Charlie

 

[CorBlimeyLimey]

Chris,
I was referring to your "SolidWorks Express" reference. I assume you meant SW Explorer. The Express seems to be more about AutoCAD these days.

 

[ctopher]

Sorry...
Thank you. Yes I did mean SW Explorer. Not a good week.

Chris
SolidWorks/PDMWorks 08 3.1
AutoCAD 08
ctopher's home (updated Aug 5, 2008)
ctopher's blog
SolidWorks Legion

 

[Bwaggoner]

I hope this helps, I will try to help where I can.

This does use the SW Document Manager so you will have to contact SW to get a key if you don't have one.

 

[TheTick]

How far have you gotten into this? You may have problems with internal ID's of components. This will cause trouble with the mates.

If the components you replace are derived from a common ancestor, then there should be little trouble. If components were created independently, then mates will fail due to internal ID being different.

 

[oldanics]

TheTick and everyone else,

Some items were created using existing parts, and some files were created independently. For those created independently, is there a way I can change the name for say a certain face to mimmic that of the part I will be replacing.

Ex. Can I open up "Bolt A" in folder 1, and "Bold B" in folder 2. Clicking on say the bottom surface of the each bolt head (places where a mate was likely to been made) and somehow naming there face to be identical? Even though Bolt A and Bolt B were modeled differently.

I just finished the new hardware folder and have only attempted replacing the hardware on two or three assemblies.

Charlie

 

[Bwaggoner]

I'm pretty sure it will go back to what TheTick was talking about (internal ID's) will be different.
You can accept the error but you might have some mates to fix.

 

[smcadman]

You didn't say whether or not you started off with Toolbox parts, but if you didn't you can expect to fix many mate errors. Many years ago before we used Toolbox they would draw a screw from scratch and they were all modeled differently depending on the user. Some used revolve, other used extrude, some had the screw axis going through Z, others through X and even Y (no rhyme or reason).

Needless to say, you couldn't simply replace one screw with another without fixing all kinds of errors. Good luck and have patience.


Flores

 

[EEnd]

The help entry for replace component says that the software will automatically match named entities while rebuilding mates during the replace operation. If renaming entities in your old fastener parts does not break existing mates, you could try renaming entities to create matching names in all of the old and new hardware before attempting the component replacement.

If that doesn’t work, once might be able to use the API to automate the mate reconstruction. I am envisioning a table of the feature names of the old hardware and the corresponding feature name of the new hardware. The macro could then scan through each assembly, use the table to match up parts for replacement and either fix or recreate the mates. I expect that creating the macro and populating the table would both be significant undertakings.

Eric

 

[DesignerGuy16]

There's no real way to fake the one model to equal the other in the sense they'll be interchangable if they're different. That's why with things like fasteners it's better to start with one base model, and make new models as copies of the original. That way everything is interchangable and replacable without messing up a ton of mates.

Don't be afraid to break old models if you're trying to fix things. It's going to happen, and it's better to deal with it and have a better reference library going forward instead of using bad models, or models that have copies etc. Garbage in, garbage out in that sense, but with the copies it can be a real pain if you're trying to work on a lot of different things. Can be worse breaking models this way because one day you could replace the model, and the next day it's broken again because you have a different copy of the model open. You want to set it up so you only have to fix it once.

James Spisich
Design Engineer, CSWP

 

[TheTick]

I just did an experiment with named faces. It worked; I was able to swap two completely different models in an assembly where the mating faces had the same name.

The downside is that not only do the faces have to have common names, but each assembly would have to be opened and saved to "record" the face names before executing the swap.

 

[DesignerGuy16]

Was just trying to say the easiest way is to just make a new one and fix it instead of what you're saying. =p

Even more so if you have multiple files with multiple names for the mating face you want to use.

James Spisich
Design Engineer, CSWP