Pt translation...

[Scott]

Assembly - Assembly statistics under Tools

Part - Feature Statistics under tools doesn't give you a number but shows you show much time it it takes to rebuild each feature.

Regards,
Scott

"Marco Flores" wrote:

Does solidworks has the capability of show you how many parts do you have in your assy?

Also haw many features do you have in your Part?

I need to know in my assembly the total of parts and features that I have.

Regards.
Marco.

 

[Marco Flores]

Does solidworks has the capability of show you how many parts do you have in your assy?

Also haw many features do you have in your Part?

I need to know in my assembly the total of parts and features that I have.

Regards.
Marco.

 

[Edward T Eaton]

Scott-
feature statistics gives the number of features - its in the second line of text, right under the part name. 939 features in my current part. It also gives the total rebuild time, so I know how long I should take to go to the fridge and back (193 seconds)

"Scott" wrote:

Assembly - Assembly statistics under Tools

Part - Feature Statistics under tools doesn't give you a number but shows you show much time it it takes to rebuild each feature.

Regards,
Scott

"Marco Flores" wrote:

> Does solidworks has the capability of show you how many parts do you
> have in your assy?
...

 

[Paul Salvador]

Hmm,... I wonder,.. if you move the fridge closer, do the rebuild times increase??

(btw, my current master part: has ~500 features (6 solids now but will have 12 parts later, using insert part in parts, not split parts), ~60 seconds to rebuild)

.. ;^)

"Edward T Eaton" <ed'remove_this'> wrote:

Scott-
feature statistics gives the number of features - its in the second line of text, right under the part name. 939 features in my current part. It also gives the total rebuild time, so I know how long I should take to go to the fridge and back (193 seconds)

 

[Scott]

All be damn, I missed that.

Thanks Ed,
Scott

"Edward T Eaton" <ed'remove_this'> wrote:

Scott-
feature statistics gives the number of features - its in the second line of text, right under the part name. 939 features in my current part. It also gives the total rebuild time, so I know how long I should take to go

to

the fridge and back (193 seconds)

"Scott" wrote:

> Assembly - Assembly statistics under Tools
>
> Part - Feature Statistics under tools doesn't give you a number but

shows

> you show much time it it takes to rebuild each feature.
>
> Regards,
> Scott
>
> "Marco Flores" wrote:
>
> > Does solidworks has the capability of show you how many parts do

you

> > have in your assy?
> >
> > Also haw many features do you have in your Part?
> >
> > I need to know in my assembly the total of parts and features that

I

> > have.
> >
> > Regards.
> > Marco.
> >
> >
>
>

 

[Edward T Eaton]

Hmm,... I wonder,.. if you move the fridge closer, do the rebuild times increase??

Don't you mean decrease? I'm thinking about filling a bucket with ice that I can use to keep refreshing beverages at my feet so I can work really fast (or not care so much when things slow down)

(btw, my current master part: has ~500 features (6 solids now but will have 12 parts later, using insert part in parts, not split parts),

Yeah, my part was pretty spry a couple of weeks ago.
Don't get me wrong, Its not a dog at all - I'll be happy to take 3 minutes for a complete regen on this, especially since I always work with 'verficiation on rebuild' active (the model will speed up quite nicely if I don't have that on, but I have vowed never to take it in the ass on bad data again). BTW - This model has multi bodies, surfaces, lot of replace face and delete face (how did we ever work without those two?), in-context, configurations - you know, all the stuff that should cause tons of problems. And guess what - I get MAYBE one crash every 25-40 hours! SW2003, SP3.1 has been phenonenol for me! Its brought me back to the days of SW99, when you could really count on the software and it would deliver (with the exception below)

About the split parts - good move to avoid them. I'm currently taking notes and I'm hoping to post something authoritative when i get the chance, but in the short term it looks like there is no end to the number of ways you can mess the things up. Using the split feature to chop a model up WITHOUT exporting the bodies might be handy, but saving off the parts with the split command is looking to be scarier and scarier the more I explore it. On the other hand, inserted parts with the first feature dedicated to 'deleting bodies' has been bomb proof (when I get errors, they are instantly fixed and all of my data is intact). Thats been reassuring because I had to take my 900+ feature part, create four parts off of it and add a couple hundred features (plus in-context refs and configurations) to each of those.

Cheers (the rebuild is done)
-Ed

.. ;^)

"Edward T Eaton" <ed'remove_this'> wrote:

> Scott-
> feature statistics gives the number of features - its in the second

line

> of text, right under the part name. 939 features in my current part.

It

> also gives the total rebuild time, so I know how long I should take to

go to

> the fridge and back (193 seconds)
>

 

[Navy Diver]

Paul,
have you tried the 'RedLight' add-in for rebuilds?

"Paul Salvador" wrote:

Hmm,... I wonder,.. if you move the fridge closer, do the rebuild times increase??

(btw, my current master part: has ~500 features (6 solids now but will have 12 parts later, using insert part in parts, not split parts), ~60 seconds to rebuild)

 

[Paul Salvador]

Hey Ed,

Yep, decrease. (I'm using mailgate.org (on location contract) and I don't proof much using it.)

I know you wrote about the split part issue and I took note of it but when I've used it, it's pretty good. Although, I still lean towards insert part because of past methods and it still makes sense to me it should be this way (if they add sketches, better positioning, coordinated systems,..it will kickass).

And, I agree, the stability of sp3.1 has been impressive!

Otherwise, I have not had many problems except for the typical workarounds due to surface issues (problems with edges, extending edges, trimming in different orders (mutual trim limitations), copy-extend-offsets, edge degeneration (there seems to be tolerance issues again),.... it's driving me knuts)

The wierdiest thing that has happened recently is with insert part. This error showed up when the surface option was checked...

"Some resulting bodies cannot be identified from the saved information."

It went away after I did more work on the model (added features) it refered too but there is no way to track down what is was because I have to move forward, (I have no time to send the data so I sent the error message image and explained). There was nothing wrong with the model (no errors, ctrl-q'd) and in fact it's been stable since last year when I created the skins for the early layout, it's very clean.

..

 

[Paul Salvador]

Actually, I did and I'm sorry to say (sorry Philippe), for the way I work, that program created some odd hangs with my files and it slowed me down quite a bit.

The whole point of design driven software is for the model to update and I have to rebuild my models constaintly so the children have to update.

And, it crashed SW, so I removed it.

The program I thought was kind of kewl was "Spliner" but it also crashes my SW install (sorry again Philippe).

..

"Navy Diver" wrote:

Paul,
have you tried the 'RedLight' add-in for rebuilds?

 

[Ray Reynolds]

feature statistics gives the number of features - its in the second line of text, right under the part name.

The only thing I don't like is the fact that is also counts Sketches. That kind of inflates the feature count to some degree.

 

[Philippe Guglielmetti]

"Paul Salvador" wrote:

Actually, I did and I'm sorry to say (sorry Philippe), for the way I work, that program created some odd hangs with my files and it slowed me down quite a bit. > And, it crashed SW, so I removed it. The program I thought was kind of kewl was "Spliner" but it also crashes my SW install (sorry again Philippe).

No problem Paul, but I can only correct bugs that are reported, so please tell me what went wrong and how. Nobody else reported SW crashes or hands with RedLight, I really want to know what happened! This is a real problem for me, and I guess for other SW partners : we do our best to make useful software, release it as shareware or even for free, but it is simply impossible to test it in production conditions, we need your help and feedback...

 

[Devin]

Can anyone point me to a good pt translation routine that translates a 3d point given two 3d points as the translation vector.

TIA,

Devin

 

[Devin]

Got it...

(defun vector_translate ( pt v1 v2 / i j vec )
(setq
vec vector_2p v1 v2)
)
(if
vec
(setq
pt
(mapcar
'(lambda (i j)
(+ i J)
)
pt
vec
)
)
)
)

(defun :VECTOR_2P (pt1 pt2 / )
(if(equal pt1 pt2 1e-10)
nil
(mapcar (function (lambda (i j) (- j i))) pt1 pt2)
)
)

Devin

 

[Bobby C. Jones]

You can define a vector by simply subtracting the beginning point from the end point. Then simply add that vector to the existing point to obtain the new point.

(defun GetVector (startPoint endPoint)
(mapcar '- endPoint startPoint)
)

(defun MovePoint (vector point)
(mapcar '+ point vector)
)

(MovePoint (GetVector '(3 3 0) '(5 5 0)) '(1 2 0))
(3 4 0)

 

[Doug Broad]

Simplification:
(defun vector_translate (pt v1 v2)
(mapcar '+ pt v1 (mapcar '- v2)))

 

[Doug Broad]

Correction:
(defun vector_translate (pt v1 v2)
(mapcar '+ pt v2 (mapcar '- v1)))

 

[Devin]

Thanks Bobby,

That's very simple for me to understand. Which is what I need.

Devin

 

[Devin]

Thanks Luis,

Will that work for 3d points?

Devin

 

[Devin]

Wouldn't it be rather...

(defun vector_translate (pt v1 v2)
(mapcar '+ pt (mapcar '- v1 v2))
)

 

[Devin]

Correction...

(defun vector_translate (pt v1 v2)
(mapcar '+ pt (mapcar '- v2 v1))
)