Circular Reference Test

[handleman]

I'm getting ready to submit an SPR on this issue, but I wanted to make sure I'm not smoking something first. Could someone on an older release or SP of SW (I'm on '07 SP5) and/or someone on SW08 just try to add a BOM to the drawing in the attached file? Please save all your other work first as this causes my SW to crash with the "pure virtual function call" error.

I know that circular references are undesirable in general, but I know I've done this sort of thing before, and all the time. Basically, I have an assembly (Assem1) that references a subassembly (Assem2) that references back to the original assembly. However, in the configuration of Assem2 that is used in Assem1, Assem1 is suppressed. The drawing view of Assem1 has an alternate position that shows Assem2 (with Assem1 suppressed) phantomed in. I can insert a BOM before the alternate position view is created, but if I then create the alternate position view SW again crashes.

If anyone can create a BOM on this drawing with the alternate position please let me know your version and SP.

Thanks!

 

[Standing]

Using SolidWorks 2008 SP 1 I had no problem inserting a SolidWorks BOM.

Bradley
SolidWorks Premim 2007 x64 SP5.0
PDM Works, Dell XPS Intel(R) Pentium(R) D CPU
3.00 GHz, 5 GB RAM, Virtual memory 12577 MB, nVidia 3400

 

[Eltron]

No problem here on '08 SP1, either. Have another toke...

Dan

http://www.eltronresearch.com

 

[CorBlimeyLimey]

No problem here with SW07-SP5.1 ans SW08-SP1.

Must be something at your system???

 

[handleman]

Thanks for the help, guys. As I was pondering on this, I realized that I didn't specify the BOM type. I can insert a "Top level only" type or an "Indented assemblies" type with no problem. It's just the "Parts only" type that kills my system. Unfortunately, that's the only type we ever use, which is why I didn't think to specify it previously.

If it's not too much trouble, can you give it another shot with the "Parts only" type?

By the way, the other options I use are:

Reference the Default configuration
Check "Display as one item number" and "Display configurations of the same part as separate items"
Un-check "Keep Missing Items"
Check "Quantity of dash "-""
Start at 1
Increment 1
"Follow assembly order" is Off
"Do not change item numbers" is Off

Thanks again!

By the way, CBL, are you really using 2007 SP5.1? Is that EV? I don't see it on the download site.

 

[Eltron]

Turns out you may not be smoking anything after all. I don't get the "Pure Virtual Function Call" error, but she definitely hangs up on me. That's a strange one, handleman.

Dan

http://www.eltronresearch.com

 

[CorBlimeyLimey]

Oops, SW07-SP5 (not SP5.1) I'm getting ahead of myself!

Yes, crashes to Desktop under the conditions listed. I can't try with SW08 till I get home.

Hmmm! Maybe you will have to cancel your vacation and stay till you find a fix.

 

[handleman]

I'm about 99% sure that it's getting hung in a loop due to the circular reference. I looked at the Rx performance log and there were a couple of stack overflows in there.

I know circular references should generally be avoided, but if it hadn't worked before I would chalk it up to something that you shouldn't be doing.

Thanks, guys!

 

[Standing]

I tried the “Parts Only” and etc. SolidWorks 2008 sp1.0 hangs up on me. Had to “End Task” to get SolidWorks 2008 sp1.0 back.

Bradley
SolidWorks Premim 2007 x64 SP5.0
PDM Works, Dell XPS Intel(R) Pentium(R) D CPU
3.00 GHz, 5 GB RAM, Virtual memory 12577 MB, nVidia 3400

 

[handleman]

OK, so I sent in an SPR. Here's the initial response from my VAR:

After looking through your Rx I noticed you are on SP 2.0 for 2007. I have looked through some old cases and identified similar issues to yours that were remedied by upgrading to the lastest SP. In 2007 the latest SP is 5.0. Also, SolidWorks 2008 is out and is already up to SP 1.0. My suggestion would be to upgrade to either of these versions and then we can see if the issue persists.

No idea what made him think I'm on SP2.0. All the xml and log files show that I'm on 5.0. Based on everyone else's results here, I'd say he didn't even attempt to recreate the issue.

This sort of thing is why I have very little confidence in our VAR.

 

[Eltron]

Sounds like a canned response to me. Get them on the horn and make them go through the actual motions, and they'll probably be enlightened...but I wouldn't hold my breath.

Dan

http://www.eltronresearch.com