The Tri-Valley SolidWorks User Group Sept 10th meeting is one of those inspirational events that (upon reflection) seems bigger than perhaps any of us knew at the moment. We had a productive face to face discussion with SolidWorks developers that really seemed to humanize the often corporate SolidWorks Corp. Many topics were covered in this personable exchange. In the end, I had the impression that these guys understand our needs and seem eager to fulfill our expectations. Was I snowed? Well, maybe, but I doubt it. I will break up the discussion about this meeting in to several articles. Stay tuned.
Tri-Valley SolidWorks UG Meeting – Sept 10
The next quarterly meeting for the Tri-Valley SolidWorks User Group is on Sept 10, 2008 at 6:30pm, held in the Holiday Inn Express (6275 Dublin Blvd., Dublin CA 94568). If any SolidWorks users are within any kind of driving distance at all, I recommend they attend this event! It will start out with Kenneth Barrentine’s presentation on weldments, deconstructing a vacuum cleaner and tube frames.
After that, Kenneth offers us a rare treat in the form of a SolidWorks Developer Round Table (hosted by Richard Doyle), where users will be face to face with SolidWorks developers. Topics to be addressed include discussion about surfacing and free-form consumer product modelling, geometric editing, SolidWorks functionality that is nice but just not good enough, and areas where SolidWorks seems to be of lower quality and reliability. I’m sure they will be open to other discussions as well, time allowing. This is your time (as the user) to rant at them to let them know what bugs you the most about SolidWorks. Of course, I’m also sure they will respond well to any raves you might have about SolidWorks as well.
This is one of those events you’ll not want to miss. Even if you don’t have any rants or raves, you’ll get a chance to rub elbows with SolidWorks developers and Richard Doyle. My thanks goes to Kenneth Barrentine, who selflessly puts these User Group meetings together.
It Has Begun (SW Community)
SolidWorks has started their effort to provide users with access to the SolidWorks online community via the SolidWorks website. It is under the heading Communities.  This new area is apart of the revamping of the SolidWorks website in to a more organized set up.  When you open the Communities area, you’ll see a slick yet simple 3D rotation menu that allows you to go to six separate SolidWorks related communities.Â
The first area is to the Engineers & Designers community. Here, you will find links to the SolidWorks Discussion Forum, the friendly and familar SWUGN, SolidWorks User Blogs (such as yours truly), and the always useful SolidWorks Express Newsletter.
The second area is a connection to Manufacturers & Suppliers, were you’ll find links to SupplierSource.com (a valuable resource in its own right), 3D ContentCentral, and the listing of SolidWorks Partners.
The third area takes you to information about the Certified SolidWorks Professional program, including basic information about the CSWP tests and how to get certified.
The fourth area is for Educators and Students, with links to vital websites that support each. This area has an extensive number of links, so even if you are not currently going to school or teaching, I would encourage a looksee.
The fifth area on the list is to SolidWorks itself, called “Connect with SolidWorks“, which has links to Enhancement Requests, Early-visibility Program, and Beta Testing.Â
The final community area is Events, which has information about SolidWorks World, User Group meeting dates, Industry and online events such as SolidWorks regular teleconferences and on-demand webinars.
This new Communities area seems like a good and modest first step in attempting to bring together all of the diverse SolidWorks resources that are available online. The list of links is comprehensive and fairly well organized (for the most part). If this area gets enough notice, it may open the door to more people discovering our SolidWorks online community.Â
SolidWorks online community efforts are on par
Our SolidWorks online community currently seems to be based largely on individual contributor efforts. Discussions regarding SolidWorks are scattered all over the internet in a multitude of forums, a growing number of blogs (though that number does seem to be stabilizing this year), and online resource sites. In the past, these websites were far and few between. Nowadays, they are fairly well interlinked. It is this interlinking that really has started creating the sense of community. A lot of the interlinking of websites comes from the 2006-2007 explosion of SolidWorks related blogs, and through the efforts of SolidWorks (namely Richard Doyle) to provide new resources to its user base. In a way, Richard has been pulling double duty, by being the man behind the curtain for both the user group community and the online community. These are intertwined, but they are different.
SolidWorks is now giving more attention to the online community. One of the earliest attempts was the revamping of 3D ContentCentral, with (in my opinion) marginal success. A new and recent endeavor (this year) attempted to take advantage of “organic marketing” (or whatever it is currently called).  This was the whole Smart Button affair. This new push was even alluded to at SolidWorks World 2008. Of course, like most planned organic marketing campaigns, this project didn’t seem to go very far.Â
Now, SolidWorks is researching how best to proceed. I’ve seen some enthusiastic inquiry by SolidWorks staff. Some of my suggestions and ideas have been previously mentioned on SolidWorks Legion to aid their effort. Perhaps I should be working for SolidWorks? :) Though some of my comments have warnings or cynical, I am grateful to SolidWorks Corp for supporting the natural organic growth that is going on. Maybe they can tap into it more effectively eventually.
That all said, there is one place where SolidWorks appears to have some level of success in the online community. This is in their forums. There aren’t thousands of people logged on at one time (and if there was, I imagine it would be chaos), but there is a large number of active users. Discussions include the frequent how-to question and answers. There are the occasional rants and raves. Requests for software improvement are frequent. And, included are tips and tricks. Though the forums are moderated, it is not done so with a heavy hand.
Perhaps the forums can be used as an example for SolidWorks on how they can tap into the online community more effectively. Simply, provide a useful and engaging resource that will compel individuals to participate (or at least frequently lurk). This seems fundamental, but it is something that escapes so many corporations. So far, SolidWorks is running par for the course. With some luck, maybe they can strike on an idea for the online community that takes off.
Is it a Bolt or a Screw? (Nut jobs welcome)
The term bolt in plain English has many definitions as applied to the Engineering Principle. It can be the movable rod that slides into a socket to fasten a door. It is the portion of a lock that moves from and back to the case. It can be fastening rods, pins or screws, usually threaded to receive a nut.1 Other mechanical items also carry this name, but the examples here are likely the most common. The common factor between each of these definitions is that there is an object (often rod-like) that is inserted into something else, often for the purpose of some sort of fastening. Given this broad definition, the question might be asked, when is a bolt called a screw? Not so fast!
Much like bolt, screw has many definitions in plain English. As applied to the Engineering Principle, a screw can be a fastener with a tapered shank and helical thread. It is also a threaded cylindrical rod that engages a threaded hole, and used to fasten in some fashion.2 (Of course, there’s the famous Archimedes’ screw, which fastens nothing, but sure moves a lot of water uphill.) From the plain English definitions, one might say that ultimately all screws are bolts except for one strange caveat. Bolt, as a fastening rod, is made to receive a nut. From the definition for screw, it appears that screws are made to be driven into a threaded hole. But doesn’t a nut usually have a threaded hole? So where is the distinction?
As strange as it may seem, the distinction may simply be where the threaded fastener is torqued. It might be said a screw is normally torqued via its head, and a bolt is normally torqued via the applied nut. In this case, the decision whether to call the threaded fastener a bolt or a screw is based on how the fastener will normally be applied. This is the logical conclusion if one takes the plain English definitions at face value, and willfully ignores the fact that a having a nut does not magically turn a screw into a bolt, and not having a nut does not magically turn a bolt into a screw.
So, this leads into researching the topic further, having to go back to traditional applications within the Engineering Principle for these terms. The following is oft quoted:
Bolts are defined as headed fasteners having external threads that meet an exacting, uniform bolt thread specification (such as M, MJ, UN, UNR, and UNJ) such that they can accept a nontapered nut. Screws are defined as headed, externally-threaded fasteners that do not meet the above definition of bolts.
I will state that I’ve seen this quoted several times, but cannot find an attributable source. That aside, traditionally a bolt meets a particular uniform specification so that it can receive a nontapered standard nut. Screws are everything else (such as tapered screws that form their own thread during initial insertion). This would suggest that the terms bolt and screw are not interchangeable. In fact, one is not a subset of the other. It would also suggest that there is a major misuse of the term screw since almost everything labelled as a screw is really a bolt, according the above definition.
Looking for some formal definition might be of help here. Believe it or not, the U.S. Government has made an attempt at such in a document called What Every Member of the Trade Community Should Know About: Distinguishing Bolts from Screws.3 This document references ASME B18.2.1 1981 and Fastener Standards, 6th Edition as sources. I do not believe either of these standards are current, even though this government document is dated January 2008. The document authoritatively (note the sarcasm) goes on to define bolt and screw as if these standards provide a clear guidance regarding the matter of definitions.
Bolt – A bolt is an externally threaded fastener designed for insertion through the holes in assembled parts, and is normally intended to be tightened or released by torquing a nut.
Screw – A screw is an externally threaded fastener capable of being inserted into holes in assembled parts, of mating with a preformed internal thread or forming its own thread, and of being tightened or released by torquing the head.
You know what, those definitions do not seem all that unreasonable. Of course, the U.S. Government, being what it is, needs a 21 page document to make these two statements. (It makes comments on everything from the Internet to a plead for small businesses to rate agency responsiveness to small business needs.)
However, English is one of those funny languages where definition of words is not by decree, but rather by use. (I say this sarcastically since almost every language, except for a few like French and perhaps German, works in this way. Ironically, to the best of my limited knowledge about them, neither French nor German have separate words for bolt and screw, in this context.) How do many people use these terms? This is not a democracy. The majority has a say in this, but not exclusively. Definitions are added simply by many people using a word in a particular way (majority or not). So, the question points back to each of us. How have you used these terms? Is there a distinction, or are these synonyms?
In practice, when applied to threaded fasteners, my use of these terms may be simply this; a bolt is fastened with the use of a generic wrench; a screw is fastened with the use of some sort of dedicated driver, such as screw driver, hex head driver, Torx Plus driver, or torque driver. Ironically, even these basic definitions also have many exceptions, so even these are not universal. They certainly contradict the traditional definitions. They also do not provide any mechanically significant functional distinction. So, even though they may be commonly used, they do not provide any usefulness when classifying a threaded fastener.
As far as I can tell, there is no consensus on this issue. Whether a person calls a particular threaded fastener by the term bolt or screw seems to be fairly arbitrary these days. It is based more on personal preference, rather than any formal definition.
Drawing Revisions and PDMWorks (Part 2: Automatic Revisions)
With PDMWorks, it is possible to automatically revise a drawing’s title block and revision block upon check in. Three things are necessary to use this functionality. First, the drawing template will need to employ a SolidWorks Revision Table. If someone is not familiar with how to set up revision tables, please see my previous article: Settings Up and Using SolidWorks Revision Tables faster. Second, the drawing template’s title block will need an annotation note that is linked to the custom property “Revision”. If someone is not familiar with how to link annotation notes to custom properties, please see my previous articles about this subject:Introduction to SolidWorks Custom Properties. Third activate the revision automation feature within the PDMWork’s VaultAdmin tool. Of course, this will require Vault Administrator access to the VaultAdmin. The setting is found under the Revision Table tab in the General section, called “Enable Revision Table”.
Once these three items are set up, drawings will automatically revise upon check in, with updated revision and title blocks. Control over what appears in the added revision row is within the check-in screen itself when the drawing is checked in. Further controls can be set up to limit or automate the value for revisions so that no mistakes can be made regarding the revision level of the check-in. Within the VaultAdmin, there is even the ability to control the number of revisions visible on a drawing. Utilizing this set up can save substantial time and eliminate potential check-in revision identification errors.