I do a form of product development and have 20-40 different components in a design. With instances of those, I get to maybe 400 components in a design. I feel that this is easy to manage in a single file.
HI PeterD:
No Caton, normal and smooth？
不会卡顿，正常很流畅？
Hi Paul and Liangfen.
If I was to go back to the single part file system you are suggesting, does this mean the broken or compromised linking I experienced in the previous version has been fixed.
Some of my models would include the bin lifter, Body systems, trucks,Hydraulic components, lines and electrical wiring, switching etc, Hooklift units from STEP files and all the accessories the client requested. So you can see there would easily be around 2,000 plus pieces in the system. See customer photo below.
I was getting all sorts of weird error messages on loading when I created all the components as single files, stored them in a network share on typical system build hierarchy, see graphic below. This is on the second drive of my computer which is the local copy of dropbox. I was using an internal NAS for this but it is currently offline.
In Inventor I would create the individual components then weldments and assemblies within that same folder.
These components are used across a wide range of systems. So I would just need to insert them as components/weldments/assemblies etc.
The big question I have is this worked very well across the network in Inventor way back to 2013 when I started with the program. Surely in this day and age of 64 bit operating systems and cloud computing and storage systems, ZW3D should be able to securely and properly work with the same paradigm I would hope.
Please correct me if I am wrong.
I just don’t want to go through all the work to update the systems to find I need to update to a different system.
Regards
Ken.
HI Russty:
The new format of zw3d 2022 is just the same as that of inventor, which can make you adapt to zw3d faster! Good luck!
ZW3D 2022新装配格式他刚好跟inventor方式相同，可以让你更快的适应ZW3D！祝你好运！
If the design meets a problem, we are all with you and we will solve it together!
如果设计遇见问题，我们大家都与你同在，我们一起解决它！
Hi Liangfen
It did not go well at all.
I created a directory structure on my second drive of my laptop.
This replicates into the cloud on Dropbox.
As you can see there is minimal nesting.
All file names are done without spaces, only hyphens
I created two simple parts in the D6098B_Grab folders.
I then created a simple pin structure with a grease nipple downloaded from Traceparts.
I then saved, or attempted to save the assembly.
I then clicked Yes because obviously I wanted to save the file.
This is what is left of the file and there is no .z3 file in the sub directory.
There is a .bak of the file but it is corrupted.
Any suggestions.
This is the exact same issue I had before. Paul (Cowboy) gave me suggestions on file structures and names which seem to fix the problem. But having to do the complete drawings and modelling on the local hard drives is not a very sound, safe or I would suggest clever thing to do.
Thanks
Ken.
HI Russty:
I’m sorry, I’ve been using single file mode design. Maybe I haven’t met the problems encountered in your multi file mode design process! I designed and used partsolution. You can see that my operation is OK.
很抱歉，我一直使用单文件模式设计，或许你的多文件模式设计过程遇见的问题，我还没遇见过！我设计使用的是 PARTsolution，你看我的操作没有问题。
Ken
Are there any latency issues with Dropbox uploading to the cloud which might be affecting this? i note that you used to use an NAS which might not have had the latency of Dropbox.
Looking at your post, I was impressed by the size of this project, it reminded me of my peripheral involvement last century with a company building a bunch of big diesel electric locomotives. They had set up a drawing office using a Dassault CAD system with a licence cost over $1million for, I think 6 seats. The office ran 2 shifts to get 12 engineers on the system and the local college ran a course to train the engineers. $1million would buy a lot of seats on ZW3D. 25 years later, I was on a train with 2 of these locomotives from one side of Australia to the other, about 4500km.
I am very interested in the single/multi object file debate. To start with I have very little experience with ZW3D version of a single file system but it would seem that there are definite benefits for either approach. Based on Paul’s comments, I would like to make a few points for what they are worth.
Single object file system has big advantages for single users or a tight team on a network. The ability to open parts or the assembly without having to close the part you are working on would be a plus. Paul’s system of part numbering needs a method to relate a part number to a description. Garbage_compactor is more meaningful than 12345A to people not in the direct design process.
Multi object file system has some advantages. All the related objects are automatically gathered into one file if needed for transfer to somebody not on the network. You can pick out which file to open by looking at the file name without having to consult a list of part numbers.
A lot of my work is making variations on a template to generate drawings and BoMs for a fabrication workshop. Multi object files allow a single equation set with many conditional paths to drive the template parameters with the equation set included in the project file so that the file can be moved off a network onto a standalone machine without concern about configuration of file locations, handy for site visits. In a multi object file, I use one equation set to control the parameters for all the parts in the assembly. I am not clear if this can be done in single object assemblies. This also allows a snapshot of each variation of the template to be archived as a single file very simply which can be opened by a machine outside the network if required. You can have an archive with a simple name or project number for each iteration of the template, keeping the project file with a unique name and all the parts inside the assembly with common names across the template. For example, a toolbox supplied against order 2345 would be filed in 2345.Z3 but would contain parts such as Assembly, base, back, left_end, right_end and lid in common with other iterations of this type of toolbox which allows drawings to have both order number and part name for the fabrication shop.
I hope this debate can be developed as it is obvious that people’s preference will depend on how they are using ZW3D.
Jim
The question was why use SO.
For small single use operation 9make the part once move on) Multi object is fine.
But as the re use and management of parts becomes and issue, have ONLY one version is a part is critical. Multi object CANNOT deliver as there will inevitably be multiple copies p[resent across multiple version files.
As we say, horse for courses. Use the right approach for the job.
Cheers - Paul
Hi Guys,
The path suggestion in my post is critical. ZW will hunt for objects from whichever is closest. If you have more than one copy, you might not get the one you expect. This causes chaos. That is not ZW fault.
If you are making variants, then al;l this should be done at the assembly level in which case there are NO issues I can see in SO mode apart form managing the variants - which is which?
Equations etc should also be more stable as there only one source of truth with SO.
There is little difference computationally MO/SO re connections to other objects. Software still has to find and locate.objects.
Apart from the vast amount of work in converting big MO to SO I cannot see any real reason there should be an issue.
Personally I only want to use locally data then have a backup copy which I can get to in an emergency.
I am not familiar with how ZW3D manages in a multiple user environment as I have never run it in that scenario,
FYI I am living in a truck at present whilst building a shed and will be having a house built next year. My internet is Hotspot from phone and I do not spend much time on the PC hence my replies are shortish and sporadic.
So keep up the good work folks.
Cheers _ Paul
1 Like
HI Cowboy99:
Thank you for sharing. As you said, I’ve been giving them suggestions so that they can add sketch no reference mode, but I haven’t seen it for years. SOLIDWORK supports the function of sketch & punching, which is very convenient to avoid unnecessary connection and other errors!
感谢你的分享，正如你所说，我一直在给他们建议，让他们可以增加草图无参考模式，可是这些年我一直没看到，Solidwork它就支持，草图&打孔那功能很方便，避免不必要的关联，以产生别的错误!
Hi Jim, Paul and Liangfen
First off, Jim, are you the Jim Beetson i know from the body builders in Sydney, I am Ken Russ from Russ Equipment in Brisbane. I have watching your messages for a while now and keep wondering?
Now to the discussion at hand. When I developed the system in Inventor I created the file structure below on a network drive.
As you can see ther folders for drawings, dxf and pdf files were outside the individual folders and contained in a single area to make them easier to access.
Then each job, whether is be the assembly of the waste body or a customer job has it’s own folder/s
Further down this tree there was a another folder called components, and under that the different parts assemblies etc.
So each part or component was only drawn Once and reused in the job folder to create the assemblies. Any modifications needed for the specific job was done inthe job folder and saved there.
This is what I was hoping ZW3D would do as well. This is the process I tried to set up with that simple pin weldment.
I created a folder and in that folder did the pin, the retainer washer as single part files, and then created the assembly/weldment also in that folder. Then the next part/assembly etc with the intent to make the complete bin lifter system, with all motions and constraints in that folder as well.
I would drag the final bin lifter assembly out and put it into the job drawings as a single component/assembly.
More to come in next message
Part 2
This way the bin lifter is always the standard bin lifter, any changes or updates needed go in the bin lifter folder and nowhere else. Any changes required, just for that job go in that job folder.
Where I seem to have trouble is in Inventor this file structure shown here was on a network server accessed via wifi in the office. I then used Windows Offline storage command to replicate the structure on my second hard drive of the laptop. Each morning when I came into the office any changes made where automatically updated across the network.
I also was working as if on my local harddrive.
I have a similar thing here now, where I am working on my Dropbox on local drive folders and have created a very small tree structure to test the theory, as shown below. This works as if they are my local drives and uploads automatically at a set time. There should be no latency or networking issues.
The NAS at present is having a conniption. We moved house and it refuses to join this network, it is off at the doctors getting it’s two covid shots and a booster. When it comes back, I am looking at creating the folder structure on my second drive (F:) then running a backup to the NAS three times a day for incrementals and a full every five days. Sort of what Paul is doing now. And sort of what I understood to be happening with dropbox.
It failed at the first hurdle.
From what Paul is saying I might try to hard write the file paths into the configuration, but then also there is only one of each of these parts on the computer and all of them are within two folders of the assembly model.
Hi Paul
I see you suggest to turn off all auto file path searches and manually create. Where and how do you do this?
Are you saying I should hard enter the folders for each of the sub assemblies I am inserting from, or is there something else you are suggesting.
Sorry if I am sounding a bit dense, but there is a lot of parts/assemblies going into my models.
Ken.
HI Russty:
你可以试试设置这两处！
You can try these two places！
Hi Lianfen
Thanks for that information, but want I am looking for is a bit more information.
I have created the working folder and set that for each model/part/drawing I am working on.
But if, as Paul says, stop auto search and hard enter the paths, What paths do I need to enter.
Using the file tree from before, Do I just put in a file path to the top of the tree, in this case aaa_Drawing and click the include sub folders, which will give me access to the sub assemblies/components for the upstream assemblies, or do I need to hard path down to each folder in the tree for these sub assemblies.
Thanks
Ken
Hi Ken
Yes it is me, I retired about 6 years ago and we sold the business, I am doing a bit of consulting with the new owner to keep my mind exercised. I should have thought of you when I saw the compactor project. If you have to hard write the path for your files, won’t you have to pile everything into a very limited number of folders and use Paul’s part numbering system to be able to find anything? Paul, perhaps you could give us a mud map of the file/folder structure you use as an example of something which works.
Jim
Hi Jim
Yes, that is my concern, which is why I asked if i could just hard path to the top level folder and then choose the use lower folders options on the search dialogue. This is how it worked in Inventor, you would nominate a Project file (ipj) file and in their you would select the top of the file tree, which was the drawings level and select it to use everything under that.
Unfortunately, I have just completely restructured the tree, put it on the second drive of my laptop and rebuilt everything from scratch using the SOM. It went together great, then saved.
Unfortunately when I went to exit I of course hit save as a last before the file closed and it crashed it just like yesterday. So Now I am working on putting the whole thing onto the Second drive outside Dropbox and trying again. This is why I am only playing with this simple pin assembly.
I did notice though as Liangfen said, it is very inventor like in the process now. Just seems to be a bit of something hanging around, so I will kill off my user file again and see what happens.
Ken.
Hi Jim
Forgot to say before my numbering system is generated in an Access Database and the file name is appended with WEL or ASS as required to quick distinguish between them.
Lianfens image of the search path options has the default AutoSave, Auto Record and Auto Search.
These need to be turned off.
Also one of the right hand icons, sets that all subfolder of selected path are searched. This needs to be on for ALL manually set folders.
Now you should have precise control of where your files are being accessed from.
The backup that works for me is to use Microsoft Onedrive and set the entire CAD data file in the Onedrive folder. If anything happens I can go the Onedrive folder and recover a dated version. Works in an enterprise environment but you may have to make some settings so Onedrive is only recording in one direction. However I do not do Onedrive admins.
Personally I’d keep the number of folders as low as possible and allow part numbering to manage sub assemblies etc. Folders become the pain if you decide to move any or rename. A single folder(bucket) for All parts is much more robust and you’ll never have an assembly fail due to missing parts.
With the assy file type you can keep all sub assembly in the same bucket too.
If they need to be different for a unique application they should be a new part number.
But Onedrive is not a PDM/PLM system it is just a backup remote access tool.
Unfortunately Dassalt just bought the best cloud PLM/PDM management system called Upchain. I tried to get ZW on board but both ZW and Upchain felt it was too hard. Too late now.
ZW3D desperately needs an enterprise level file management system.
Cheers - Paul