Reverting to SE V20 from SEwST

[Incinerman]

Thought I would warn you:

If you revert to SE V20 after saving any traditional mode file in SEwST you will NOT be able to open the file again in V20. I thought this only applied to Synchronously generated parts and assemblies; unfortunately not.

I tried to revert this morning after having had stability issues with the new version, and problems with assembly constraints in the trad environment.

 

[donyoung]

SE and other CADs are not downward compatible. So once saved
a document in SE-ST (internal V100) then there is no way
to return other then using a neutral format (Parasolid, Step).

A document created or converted from traditional mode into
ST mode is also a one-way.

dy

 

[KENAT]

Yeah, this goes with every version. I've never worked out all the circumstances but sometimes opening even without saving seems to do the same thing.

KENAT,

Have you reminded yourself of faq731-376 recently, or taken a look at

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

 

[Incinerman]

At least the re-install of SEwST seems to have cured the problem I had with assemblies. Can't see as I will ever use ST itself though - wasted a good many hours playing with it! IMO it's a different CAD product, not an upgrade or addition to the SE I am used to, and represents a totally different way of model construction that does not suit the kind of parts I design.

 

[KENAT]

ditto, at least till I get my head around its implications.

KENAT,

Have you reminded yourself of faq731-376 recently, or taken a look at

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

 

[Gemnoc]

This is something that is highly annoying, this lack of retro-compatibility. Considering SE has feature recognition for imported geometry (although I've never used it since we have the Foundation version and it's not included), I'm sure it wouldn't be that difficult to program translators to convert to an older SE version.

They will never do it because they want to force their users to upgrade. I know every other company does it, but it is still callous.

 

[donyoung]

[...]
I know every other company does it
[...]

the word 'every' is not correct when addressing parametric
3D-CAD vendors like PTC/Adesk/Siemens and possible others as
well. The have in common that they lack backwards compatibility.

dy

 

[Incinerman]

The worst thing about it is that they have changed the interface that had become familiar, and second nature when drawing. Whilst I like the new layout, it has resulted in quite a few support calls, and it is taking time to get back up to speed. I have also noticed that a fair number of default settings are different in SEwST, even in trad mode, compared with V20. This has meant a lot of delving into options and settings that I never actually looked at in the old version, just to get it to work the same way. SEwST is also less stable than V20. I have had several crashes since installing it, one type of which I can reliably provoke.

Ah well, I suppose I'm getting better value from my maintenance subscription!

 

[Gemnoc]

Well sure Don, I should have said "every other parametric modeler vendor" instead. All that because I wanted to have 2 less words to type. ;-)

 

[beachcomber]

As I have said in another post, it looks like my current employer has no plans to upgrade any further. V20 does everything they want, ST doesn't work (fully) yet, and the new interface on V21 would just slow us down due to initial learning curve.
They may not even bother with annual mainteneance - after all, you've paid for the license again over 3 or 4 years, so why not just buy a new one then if you need it.
Now, saving as a previous version - that would have been a useful update for SE21 !!


bc.
2.4GHz Core2 Quad, 4GB RAM,
Quadro FX4600.

 

[CorBlimeyLimey]

The reason being quoted, by the CAD companies, for their products inability to be "backwards compatible" is that newly introduced types of features would not be recognised by older versions. It will be interesting to see if V21 with ST (i.e. without features) will be able to read higher versions, and if not, what excuse will be given.

Will SEwST be the end of the "backwards compatible" conundrum?
I hope it is, because then others will have to follow suit.

 

[donyoung]

Hi,

V21 (internal V100) will not be able to read a file created by a higher
version. ST does not mean that there are no features it does mean that
there is no history any longer. Also 'Synchronous Technlogy' describes the type
of solver. The word 'synchronous' in 'Synchronous Technlogy' doesn't
refer to a modeling process, but rather refers to what's known as a
synchronous solver. This enables the CAD program solving the explicit and
inferred constraints at the same time. It does not use a history tree, but
rather holds user-defined constraints in groups associated with the surfaces
to which they apply. It can be seen as an extension of what KeyCreator,
SpaceClaim, to name but a few, already doing and what has been implemented in
SE as 'Direct Editing'
Note, however that NX (V6) implemented ST in a complete different way

dy

 

[Incinerman]

I'm not saying ST isn't a good product, it's simply that the change from a history tree with dimensional constraints implemented at the sketch level, to what seems to be a surface based constraint system with no sketches renders the majority of my modelling methodology developed using previous versions of ST entirely redundant. Indeed, I don't seem to be able to find a way of modelling certain parts in ST that are very simple the traditional way.

I model pipe flanges, pipework, vessels, brackets and frames with a fair amount of sheet metalwork. Individual parts are extremely simple, and build into complex assemblies. It is easy to modify the parts, as most of them contain only 3 to 5 features, so ST offers nothing of value.

To me, ST looks like a different CAD package, and not an upgrade of SE v20. If I was starting with a clean sheet to procure a CAD package for the sort of work I want to do, I would be unlikely to pick SEwST. If I was designing complex plastic mouldings or die castings, it might be attractive.

Even then, for anyone with experience using "traditional" sketch / history tree solid modellers, ST represents a steep re-learning curve.

I don't know why they didn't make it a stand alone product - after all, the ST files are incompatible with the traditional workspace anyway.

 

[CorBlimeyLimey]

Don,
Sorry, my post should have read (without feature history) ... obviously the part will still have features, but they will be a collection of solids/surfaces rather than a specific type of feature (eg. extrude or sweep).

If SEwST can edit 'dumb' solids, regardless of CAD vendor or version, it should be able to do the same for its own product. Only time will tell, but if that turns out not to be the case, then surely the finger must point to SE for forcing that inability.

 

[donyoung]

[...]
If SEwST can edit 'dumb' solids, regardless of CAD vendor or version,
[...]
that's what marketing tells you ... OTH you could do that with V20
as well (with some limitations). The imported part is just a block
no more no less. IMHO you won't see that a file created by SE
Vxx can be opened in SE Vxx - x

dy

 

[KENAT]

Based on what I've seen even if "V21" can't open "V22" directly then on the ST front, if you convert the "V22" to dumb solid and pull into "V21" you'll be able to work on it OK.

You will have lost some stuff, like any MBD etc but frankly from what I've seen of how they envision ST being used I'm not sure how much of a problem this is.

KENAT,

Have you reminded yourself of faq731-376 recently, or taken a look at

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

 

[donyoung]

[...]
convert the "V22" to dumb solid
[...]

or in other words: save it in neutral format (applies even when the
file is an ST mode one). Then you could work on it in ST with all
'features' available or trad. mode (limited to the 'Modify'
commands). A trad. mode file can be converted(!) to an ST mode
file.

dy

 

[KENAT]

Ooh, I just thought, if you use JT then you'll get some of the information through.

KENAT,

Have you reminded yourself of faq731-376 recently, or taken a look at

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

 

[donyoung]

Ken,

an ST-mode file (block plus hole) exported as .jt will come in
as single block 'base feature' with the hole there but not as
a separate feature. Using 'Feature Recognizer' one can try
to recreate some of the 'features' (not available when using the
ST template on import)
So it's just similar to importing a Step, Parasolid, ...

dy

 

[KENAT]

I thought the big deal with JT was it could bring through the PMI and that type stuff, that's what I was thinking of, not feature history or that kind of thing.

KENAT,

Have you reminded yourself of faq731-376 recently, or taken a look at

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?