Export bugs to Autodesk

[Elrick]

Greetings

Can someone please refer me to a page or know some workarounds to get the orientations correct when exporting to Inventor and Flow Design? I exported my main assembly, which have many sub assemblies, in many different formats but the assembly keeps importing some sub assemblies with different orientations and not as they were orientated in the main assembly.

I export and import parts to save loading times and to get all parts to have the same origin. This bypasses constraining parts which cuts down on configurations.

Any help will be appreciated.
Thanks



Date: 18 June 2015 10:24:39 AM
Geomagic Design™ 2014
Geomagic Design Version:[ PRODUCTVERSION 15,0,1,15081 ] 64-bit

 

[bigseb]

Just a guess here but have you tried an assembly Boolean and then exporting?

 

[Elrick]

I havent tried that yet Sebastian. I will try this too. Thanks

 

[Elrick]

Got it to work. But not with my latest assembly I had to make. Busy reassembling my drawings which got corrupted for the 3rd time now. Configurations messes up assemblies if you're not careful enough with them. I will need to figure out why these assemblies disorientates when exporting otherwise I have more problems.

 

[Elrick]

The same assembly which weren't able to make it into Autodesk exported to Adobe and Keyshot flawlessly in shape. It took ages for the PDF but it worked. I seriously cant work with the original assembly anymore. Every time I give some geometry dimensions its like it need to update in 15 different configurations. Losing too much time this way. Original assembly existing of 1350 parts takes more than 4minutes to load and the new one less than a minute. Can I make the assumption that I will be using 4X more time when working with the original assembly? Apart from the delay in the initial opening time with the original assembly there are errors which support couldnt help me fix. Which is why I started a fresh assembly. The biggest concern for me is to keep the same origin with all the different parts. But to redraw every single part aint an option.

I do know which sub assemblies are causing the errors in the original main assembly. Should I rather focus on fixing these or would it be better to continue the new assembly not very compatible with Autodesk?

Any advice and thoughts will be helpful.

Thanks

 

[bigseb]

Please report all of your issues so far to Support. If they can look into it would help a great deal.

 

[bigseb]

Did the Assembly Boolean not do the trick then? Iwould have thought that would turn it into one solid, with no movement whatsoever. Again, I haven't ever tried it myself.

 

[Elrick]

I first tried the original assembly before I attempted the boolean with new one. If that didn't work I would've tried your recommended way. The problem is that the same thing happens between the original assembly and Inventor. Where you need a tree to work from. The guys from Durban who designed the engine are on Autodesk. So the stuff Im sending them needs to be sound. But if this aint a common problem I will take it to support. Having a feeling the problem lies with Autodesk since Keyshot and Adobe handles it much better. I should probably consult their support as well. Just want to make sure I have enough info before I realize I could've done something better.

 

[bigseb]

How big is the assembly when exported as a step file?

 

[Elrick]

About 460mb..

Have to add the stp 203 was problematic and the 214 successful when I had to send them data. All other formats were problematic...

 

[bigseb]

About 460mb..

Have to add the stp 203 was problematic and the 214 successful when I had to send them data. All other formats were problematic...

That's big... if it had been smaller I would've said email it to email so I can test the import on Catia and Creo...

 

[Elrick]

Thanks! Im sure it would've worked. I had a friend who checked it out on Solid Works. It appeared to export correct orient wise. So I think it boils down to the transition between GMD and Autodesk. We've had this trouble since we started with alibre. I believe the parts I received from them weren't "water tight". Overlapping figures and that sort of stuff. Realized this is the cause for the transparent surface problems. Would love to get my hands on Catia!!!

 

[Elrick]

If im the only one with this problem I will need to find workarounds. Like always

 

[bigseb]

Going between packages is never easy. GD exports aren't perfect either, as I mentioned here.

You can always drive down, hey? :wink:

 

[bigseb]

If im the only one with this problem I will need to find workarounds. Like always

If you have the time: create parts (Boolean union) from all sub-assemblies and export them as step. Re-import them as dumbsolids and save. Create a new main assembly from these dumb solids. Union that assembly to create a solid. Export as step.

Now you should have one single part where nothing can shift.

 

[JST]

The same assembly which weren't able to make it into Autodesk exported to Adobe and Keyshot flawlessly in shape. It took ages for the PDF but it worked. I seriously cant work with the original assembly anymore. Every time I give some geometry dimensions its like it need to update in 15 different configurations. Losing too much time this way. Original assembly existing of 1350 parts takes more than 4minutes to load and the new one less than a minute. Can I make the assumption that I will be using 4X more time when working with the original assembly? Apart from the delay in the initial opening time with the original assembly there are errors which support couldnt help me fix. Which is why I started a fresh assembly. The biggest concern for me is to keep the same origin with all the different parts. But to redraw every single part aint an option.

I do know which sub assemblies are causing the errors in the original main assembly. Should I rather focus on fixing these or would it be better to continue the new assembly not very compatible with Autodesk?

Any advice and thoughts will be helpful.

Thanks

Did you use "project to sketch", and check the box for "maintain association to source entity"?

Because if you did, that would help explain some of the long delays. I have found that while that may be nice as a way to keep everything up-to date, it also makes each and every operation take a long delay time while all the associations are compared and updated. Reminds me of doing autorouted PCBs on an IBM PC /AT (if anyone else here even remembers those).

A lot of configurations presumably does a similar thing, and the combination might be very bad.

Great ideas, good features, but more suited to something like a Cray.