SolidWorks User Group Network Technical Summits

It’s another year, and Richard Doyle is moving a full steam putting the 2008 Technical Summits together.   If you haven’t attended one yet, I invite you to read my review of the San Jose Technical Summit in 2007 to get an idea of what to expect, and the benefits of attending.

Briefly, they include training and discussions on a variety of topics including sheet metal, drawings, weldments, and assemblies.  They also have seminars on newer functions such as RealView Graphics.  COSMOS, PDMWorks and other third party applications are also covered.  For a sample agenda and more information, please visit the SWUGN website.

Here’s the remainder of the schedule this year.  Even if one is not near your home town, I recommend attending the closest one to you.  It will be well worth the trip, especially if you need an alternative because you cannot make it to SolidWorks World.   RSVP soon if you are near Orlando, FL or Nashville, TN! 

Orlando, FL – 3/18

Nashville, TN – 04/09

Oklahoma City, OK – 5/20

Baltimore, MD – 6/17

Vancouver, BC – 7/22

Minneapolis, MN – 8/19

St. Louis, MO – 9/23

Salt Lake City, UT – 10/21

Chennai, India – 11/18

Los Angeles, CA – 12/16

Various SolidWorks Discussion Forums (Part 2)

To continue with Part 1 of this article, here are more SolidWorks related forums.

Solidmentor Solid Forum– This site is well organized and contains many resources, including forums dedicated to SolidWorks discussions.  It lists posts by topic in the Solid Forum area.  Membership (free) is required to participate.  Activity is low, with new posts appearing on a weekly to monthly basis; though when new messages appear, replies appear in rapid spurts thereafter.  The forums on Solidmentor have an unfinished feel to them.  I think this is why activity is still very low despite the popularity of the general website.  At this time, I do not recommend the Solid Forum, though I do recommend the overall Solidmentor website.

SolidWorks Forums– This is the home site for the forums managed by SolidWorks Corp.  Forums exist for practically every nuance one could imagine within a SolidWorks discussion, such as Assemblies, BOM, Design Tables, Surfacing, Routing, Toolbox, COSMOSWorks, and User Groups (just to name some).   Within each forum, messages are ordered by most recent activity.  Personally, I’m not fond of the fact that so many categories for forums exist on the site.  Membership is required to view and participate in discussions.   Membership is technically free.  SolidWorks Corp frequently watches the forums for their own purposes.  Some people don’t seem to like this fact.  There are a lot of knowledgeable participants, several of which are SolidWorks Corp employees.  This means that most inquiries are addressed quickly.    This is by far the largest SolidWorks forum site, with tens of thousands of members.   Participation is heavy.  However, participation does not seem to include most members.   One point of caution, be sure to use the non-Java interface.   The site is well moderated.  I recommend this site, in part because of the activity level, and in part simply because it is the main site for SolidWorks discussions, and it is run by SolidWorks Corp itself.

SolidWorks Yahoo! Group– This is main SolidWorks based forum on Yahoo! Groups.  It is dedicated to SolidWorks.  Topics can be listed either in order of recent activity, or by topic.  Membership (free) is required to participate in the forum.  This group provides a significant number of other resources, such as download, weblinks, and polls.  Activity occurs on an hourly to daily basis.  I personally co-moderate this group.  I recommend this group for the activity level and additional resources; oh and yes, also because I help run it.  🙂

SolidWorks-APl Google Group– This is a Google group that is specifically for discussions regarding SolidWorks API.  It lists posts by most recent topic.  Membership (free) is required to participate in discussions.  This group is a good place to ask API related questions.  It is for more advanced users.  The group has seen more activity in the past than it does now.   However, if someone does post a question, it is often answered by others fairly quickly.  It appears to be loosely moderated.  Activity is weekly to monthly.  I do not recommend this group because of its low activity.

SWcad– This is another Google group.  It is dedicated to SolidWorks related discussions.  It lists posts by most recent topic.  Membership (free) is required to view and participate in discussions.   Activity is on a daily to weekly basis.  It is tightly moderated.  New users are placed on probation.   I do not recommend this group due to low activity levels. 

Please comment if you know of any other groups.  Feel free to check out all the groups I listed, even if I do not recommend them.   Some that do not suit me may work well for others.  However, I personally visit and participate on all of these sites.  Also, feel free to comment on my opinions here.

Various SolidWorks Discussion Forums (Part 1)

There are more than a few discussion forums available for people looking for SolidWorks specific conversations online.  Here’s the list of all the forums I use (in alphabetical order), with a quick personal statement of my opinions.  Feel free to add to my commentary, disagree, or even mention others. 

3DCADForums – This website has forums for AutoCAD, CATIA, Inventor, IronCAD, ProE, Solid Edge, SolidWorks, UG/NX, VX CAD/CAM, and 3D Studio Max.   Membership (free) is required to participate in discussions.  It lists all topics in order of most recent activity.  This forum seems to attract very little attention from SolidWorks users.  I find that the site loads very slowly.  Additionally, advertisement placement is very distracting.  I do not recommend this site.

comp.cad.solidworks (link is via Google Groups) – This forum is accessible via many usenet readers.  It is SolidWorks specific.   Many SolidWorks users frequent this group.   It is not uncommon to find new postings occuring hourly.  Depending on access method, topics are listed in order of topic creation.  The forum  environment can range from extremely helpful to extremely hostile.  I cannot recommend this forum to new users.  It is OK for experienced users who have a thick skin.

ENG-TIPS SolidWorks 3D CAD products Forum – Eng-tips is a vast site with a diverse selection of topics covering many different Engineering related fields.   It requires membership (free) to participate in its discussions.  It lists topics by most recent activity.  It is heavily moderated.  This can be beneficial at times, but also detrimental at other times.  Contact between members is limited to the website itself.  Email addresses are banned.  It does have some advertisements, but they are not intrusive.  The site owners send out infrequent spammish emails (one email a few times a year).  Because of these facts, this site has many detractors.  However, in my mind, the advantages outweigh the disadvantages on most days.  There are many knowledgeable contributors that frequent the site.   Additionally, I have found this site to be a good source for API assistance.  One further advantage is that there are a bunch of other engineering related forums that make this a convenient one-stop location for those who have interests outside of SolidWorks.    Activity occurs on a nearly hourly basis.  I recommend this forum, with the caveat that one should expect its strict rules to be heavily enforced.

mCADForums – This website has forums for AutoCAD, Inventor, Mechanical Desktop, SolidWorks, Alibre, Pro/E, Solid Edge, GrafiCalc, many user groups, and some general engineering discussions.  It lists topics by most recent activity.  Membership (free) is required to participate in discussions.  It seems to attract very little attention from SolidWorks users.  However, activity may be increasing.  It has advertisements that are slightly distracting.  I do not recommend this site to SolidWorks users solely based on the fact that activity is light.

Part 2 of this article will list other sites, including consideration of the main SolidWorks forum.

SolidWorks World 2008 Day 3 (Jan 23) Breakout sessions

My first breakout session of the day was SolidWorks Sheet metal: Why do I do it like this or that?.  This session went into a lot of detail about sheet metal functions in SolidWorks.  There was discussion covering tears, closed corners, dimensioning preferences, K-factors, when to use normal cut, and the fact that all thicknesses on a sheet metal part need to be identical.  One good point was that closed corners work only when the flanges have the same parent feature.  Like all good sheet metal presentations, miter flanges where also discussed.  One problem I had with the presentation is that way too much time was spent on discussing creation of flat patterns.  When several attendees confronted the presenter with the fact that flat patterns are not often necessary for a designer to create, he argued the point without really understanding why the attendees contested it.  According to ASME Y14.5M-1994, the drawing represents the final product.  Adding intermediate steps (such as flat patterns) are unnecessary since the vendor is responsible for the final product represented on the drawing.  Besides that, most sheet metal shops are much better at determining K-factors and knowing their shop’s limitations than most designers.  I think more information could be packed into the presentation if less time is spent on flat patterning.

After lunch, I attended Leveraging the Design Tables and Configurations….  Many points where covered.  Here’s a few.  It is important to establish a good naming convention for configurations.  Effort must be taken to determine how the model will be represented (drawing, BOM, literature, etc).  Utilize folders in the Model Assembly.  Utilize formulae in the Design Table instead of equations area.  One good point was the suggestion to save backup copies of design tables outside of SolidWorks in Excel itself.

My final Breakout session of SolidWorks World 2008 was Demystifying PDMWorks Workgroup Triggers.  Although I’m not familiar with PDMWorks API, I did learn something about what is possible in PDMWorks.  Also, I learned about the setup required to utilize the triggers. 

I didn’t take many basic how-to Breakout sessions this year.  My main focus was on developing my skills in configuration, customization, more detailed how-to’s, and set up.  I made sure I attended several API related sessions.  Overall, I feel the experience was something that I would not want to miss.  I’m glad I had the opportunity be involved in this experience. 

Drill and Tap; and calloutformat.txt (Part 2)

This entry is part 2 of 4 in the series Hole Callouts
*This article is continued from Part 1.*
*Updated some references to support current SOLIDWORKS versions [4/21/2019]*

Tip to use Simplified Threaded Hole Callouts

SOLIDWORKS has an usual method to control hole callout formats. Most other types of callouts are managed from with SOLIDWORKS settings.  However, hole callouts are controlled with an obscure file buried deep within its folder structure on the hard drive.  That file is calloutformat.txt (X:\Program files\SOLIDWORKS Corp\SOLIDWORKS\lang\english).  Additionally, there is also a calloutformat_2.txt.  What’s the difference between these files?  Calloutformat.txt is the default file which SolidWorks uses to determine how to form threaded hole callouts created with the Hole Wizard.  This file establishes the rules to show both the nominal drill diameter and the thread detail in a leadered note.  This is the most common method for threaded hole callouts. However, as mentioned, this method has flaws.

Thankfully, SOLIDWORKS provides an alternative with simplified callouts.  The user doesn’t have to go through and modify each and every callout instance in calloutformat.txt.  As obscure calloutformat.txt is, one would expect the alternative to be even more obscure; and it is!  The alternative file is calloutformat_2.txt, with no identification or in-file description to tell anyone of this fact.

Tip/Trick

Here’s the tip to use simplified threaded hole callouts. Before SolidWorks is started, launch Windows Explorer and goto X:\Program files\SOLIDWORKS Corp\SOLIDWORKS\lang\english (or similar, depending on SOLIDWORKS installation location). Rename calloutformat.txt to calloutformat_1.txt. Rename calloutformat_2.txt to calloutformat.txt. (Make a backup copy of course.)

The one drawback is that SOLIDWORKS uses different methods to callout the thread between the calloutformat.txt and calloutformat_2.txt.  This places a # in front of every threaded hole callout in this simplified format, and leaves off the series designation.  The work around for this is to simply open calloutformat_2.txt with Notepad, then use pulldown Edit>Replace to replace “<hw-threadsize> <hw-threadseries>” with “<hw-threaddesc>” in all instances prior to the renaming.  (Again, always make backup copies!)

Additional Networking Tip

Once calloutformat_2.txt is modified and renamed to calloutformat.txt, copy it to a network drive location that is available to all other SolidWorks users.  On each system, goto pulldown Tools>Options>File Locations>select Hole Wizard Favorites Database.  Point the folder to the network location of the new calloutformat.txt.  Also point Hole Callout Format File to the same new folder. There are various methods to save this setting for future installs and updates, such as  Copy Settings Wizard or Admin Image.

P.S., Cosmetic Threads

One caveat to this whole story is how SOLIDWORKS automatically labels cosmetic thread annotations on ANSI standard drawings.  When you create the drawing view that contains the cosmetic thread, you get a surprize; something like “8-32 Machined thread” is added. It doesn’t really conform to any standard, and cannot be edited at the Part level within the cosmetic thread feature (unless you use a customized thread called “None”).  This callout can be inserted on drawings of other standards, such as ISO, by right-clicking on the cosmetic thread and selecting “Insert callout”.

If edited manually in the cosmetic thread feature properties, one can enter anything they want, and that will be the callout for the cosmetic thread on the drawing. If you want your threaded holes to say “Stop poking me!”, your hole callout will say “Stop poking me!”.  But there is no automated method to use the correct callout without directly entering it within the cosmetic thread’s property field and using a custom thread. One advantage is that if this field is edited, it does automatically update drawing where it appears.  However, if I’m relying on Hole Wizard information, I wouldn’t want to use the cosmetic thread annotation callout on my drawing anyway.

Drill and Tap; and calloutformat.txt (Part 1)

This entry is part 1 of 4 in the series Hole Callouts

Sooner or later, the topic of how to callout a threaded hole comes up in pretty much everyone’s career in the Mechanical Engineering field.  I’ve seen the nature of those discussions be straight forward, but I’ve also seen angst riddled arguements.  Though this isn’t a SolidWorks specific topic, it is important to its users. This is because SolidWorks specifies hole callouts differently in different scenarios.

The conventional rule (within ANSI Inch) is that a threaded hole should be called out as a leadered note showing its nominal drill size and depth on the first line, and the thread size, threads per inch, thread series designation, thread class and thread depth on the second line.  This is common practice, so most people are comfortable using it.

Example (without use of symbols):
2X .190 DIA .190 DEEP
8-32 UNC-2B .164 DEEP

Of course, this method has flaws, which I’ll get into later.

I’ve seen two extremes as well.  At one extreme, the threaded hole callout has the actual drill bit size listed in addition to specification for the tap and drill.  I gather it would look something like this:

2X .438 DIA .25 DEEP WITH 7/16 Q DRILL
.438 UNC-2B .375 DEEP

Of course the basic flaw with adding the drill size is that this is a specification of process, which is generally disallowed by ASME Y14.5M-1994.  It is equivalent to having the note “FORM THIS PART WITH LATHE MODEL XYB”  or even, “JUMP UP AND DOWN THREE TIMES AND SPIN IN A CIRCLE BEFORE USING THE MILL TO CUT THIS HOLE”.  Hyperbole aside, this practice is not appropriate.

On the other end, one might find a hole callout that simply states the thread size, such as “TAPPED HOLE”  This is a bad case of under-specification.  I haven’t seen this method often on formal drawings, but it is very common on preliminary sketches.  There just isn’t enough information.

What is just-enough-information for a threaded hole callout?  Well, this answer is easy.  Thread size, threads per inch, thread series designation (sometimes considered optional), thread class, thread depth, and sometimes drill depth or end condition.  The “nominal” drill diameter isn’t actually needed.  There’s several flaws with including the drill diameter.  First, the actual drill diameter is not based on the callout, but rather the thread itself.  It is over-specification.  Second, drill diameter is stated as a dimension, so it is not nominal.  Because of this, the standard drawing tolerance must be applied to that dimension.  Again, this is over-specification because the thread has its own tolerance for its final size.  Simply by stating the thread class, its tolerance is called out.  Third, because of these other points, specifying the drill diameter is actually a specification of process.  Given all that, I always callout a threaded hole as so:

2X 8-32 UNC-2B DEPTH .165

In the rare event that drill hole depth or end condition is necessary to call out, then simply state that specification in the callout, or show it dimensionally on the drawing view itself.  How this relates to SolidWorks and the calloutformat.txt file will be discussed in Part 2 of this article.