Drawing Revisions and PDMWorks (Part 1: Letter Revision Identifiers)

Whether using actual drawings or relying on the model, and whether using a highly controlled documentation system or nearly completely uncontrolled, one will find revisions are necessary.   It is important to use them consistently.  It is important to make sure each time another person sees a drawing or model, they understand which revision is in front of them.  It is important not to reuse revisions. If there is a working copy that is incomplete, preliminary or draft, then stating such directly on the document is very important.

Also important is avoiding interpretation confusion.  If using letters to represent revision iterations, avoid using letters that resemble numbers or that can have alternative meanings.  ASME Y14.35M-1997 states that I, O, Q, S, X and Z should not be used as revision letters.  In fact, other ASME engineering drawing standards also forbid the use of these letters for other purposes as well.  The reason is that I, O, Q, S, and Z all can be misinterpreted as numbers 1, 0, 5 and 2.  When X is used, it looks like a field that requires further input.

These rules where written before the Information Age (wiki) and our reliance on computer databases, back when documentation relied on handwriting.  However, these rules are just as important in our current age as they have ever been before.  Many different types of computer fonts exist.  What looks like a 1 in one font will look like an I in another.  Even with my 20/20 vision, I will confuse S’s with 5’s in small sizes in certain common fonts.  Also, transcription errors still enter the picture, as a human who does not have direct access to the electronic database is usually involved at some point.

PDMWorks (soon to be renamed to SolidWorks Workgroup PDM by SolidWorks Corp) automatically assigns revisions to documents when they are checked-in.  There are options for the PDMWorks Administrator to use dumb ranges, or to establish a list of revision identifiers from which to pull.  Unfortunately, when using letters, PDMWorks does not automatically disregard the taboo letters.  So, I’ve made an Excel file with a list of allowed revision letters.  It can be copy-and-pasted directly into PDMWorks VaultAdmin’s Revision Scheme Listing fields.  It is available here: Allowed Revision List.

Part 2 of this article series will address using PDMWorks ability to automatically revise drawings upon check-in.

United SolidWorks of Contributors

Future SW Online Community 

With two recent surveys (1) (2) regarding the future of the online SolidWorks community as conceived by the SolidWorks Corp, it is becoming apparent that some plan is in the works for a new vision of this online community.  How is that vision shaping up for far?  SolidWorks’ Matthew West’s recent words seem to point to having “a  central repository on solidworks.com” where tips, tricks, hacks, tutorials, instructions, etc can be collected.  To me, this suggests an educational focus.  Mr. West continues, “I think it would be great for casual users and people who aren’t into the whole blog thing to have one place where they could find information generated by other users, and maybe even sign up for your RSS feeds.” 

Are SW Users Ready?

One problem right now, as I see it, is that there are hundreds of thousands of SolidWorks users, but only a small fraction of these seek out further SolidWorks information online.   For example, the SolidWorks Forum recently hit 50,000 users.  This was a celebrated number, but is a small fraction of the total number of SolidWorks users.  Even further fractioned is the number of those who actually actively browse the forums frequently.  And of those, how many actually participate in forum discussions?

No one should expect everyone to be online every week looking around through SolidWorks resources.  However, I think these numbers indicate that many people may not even know these resources exist; or that they have not realized the depth and value of such resources yet.  

Support from SW Corp

If SolidWorks Corp puts a concerted effort into promoting its new online community, it may have a higher level of success.  However, they already have one case study that demonstrated the difficulty of this task: 3D ContentCentral.  Even with a link built right into the SolidWorks software, I suspect the user contributed area of this site gets very little activity when compared to the total number of users.  This may be due in part to how the site is organized.  It is definitely better than before, but still lacks the intuitiveness required for content managers that house a large quantity of items.  But, this may not be the point.

Types of SW Users

So what’s really going on?  It almost seems that it is the experienced (power) users who come online seeking out resources.  These are people who may have a consulting business or they are their company’s SW guru (or future guru).   These are the people for who it is important to expand their skill set.  Should SolidWorks Corp online efforts focus on the average user, or should they focus on the power user?  I think they can support both.  They may have to do this with separate efforts.

A central repository of user provided content would best serve the power user.   SolidWorks Corp should invest in this.  It can be wiki-like.  Or, perhaps it can be more like an aggregator, similar to SolidMentor.  It would have to be organized, maybe like CADdigest.  Opposing views should be represented without prejudice.  I’m not talking about commentary (though that is important too).  I’m talking about opposing views in terms of methodology.  For example, some people prefer one particular methodology, while other methodologies that accomplish the same task are also available (and may be better for many scenarios).  If a wiki-environment is employed, debates regarding such will definitely unfold, as they do on Wikipedia.org.  Again, this would be for power uses.  I think the biggest obstacle is determining how to make such a site for the average user.   To do this, information will have to be easy to find.

Ease of Use

How does one set up content driven site that makes finding particular topics easy?  This is question I’ve asked myself about my own blog.  I see people come to this blog and look around.  I see the searches they do.  I am often frustrated at just how many searches are unsuccessful when I know I have articles that covered the searched keywords.  This is because searches are imperfect.  The results are often too exact.

Alphabetical listing by topics wouldn’t work.  For example, How-to articles are often far to complex to make such a system useful, as they often cover topics involving multiple concepts or concepts that cannot be reduced down to a simple noun phrase.  My experience with How-to books (home repair, etc.) is that they are more for casual reading to get ideas rather than actually being a go-to reference (such as encyclopedias).

The online community site would have to be heavily cross-referenced, whether it encyclopediatic (Wikipedia.org, SolidMentor), aggregational (Pulse, SolidMentor), or listy (CADdigest).  Most of the research in setting up such a site should be in the area human systems analyst to find out how people most intuitively use content managers.  If the content is user driven, the content itself be the least of SolidWorks Corp worries.

Depersonalization and Individual Ownership

So, this does bring me to a point recently brought up by Matt Lombard:  Depersonalization.  I look at this with two points in mind.  First, there shouldn’t be an effort to remove personality or individuality.  The singluar voice still has to be heard in order for a united site to work.  Second, how does one set up such a site without stepping all over copyright?  It seems to me that SolidWorks Corp may be forgetting they would have to respect the individual’s copyright over the material they produce. 

Do I want my whole articles published on some other site?  Maybe, as long as I received some benefit from it.  Each person requires something different.  I doubt there is a single method that will fulfill the requirements of any majority of individual contributors.   This cannot be like Wikipedia.org where all content is non-copyrighted.  This is because the content provided by the individual for the Solidworks community is Original Research, unique to that individual.  Wikipedia.org does not allow Original Research at all.  A united SolidWorks community sie would have nothing but copyrighted Original Research.  SolidWorks Corp will have to recognize this and work within the guidelines established by each contributor, just as they expect their user to follow legal requirements in the use of the SolidWorks application.  SolidWorks Corp cannot dictate to us on how the rules will be set for such a site.  They will have to find a consensus upon the contributors, somehow.  This is why I previously stated such a site is a risk to SolidWorks Corp.  How would they handle content if they do not own that content?  Also, how do they prevent bias from interferring with the content that is provided?

Where to Start

Maybe to start, SolidWorks Corp can set up a simple RSS feed page that links to the major SolidWorks blogs.  It should still be easy to use and in a format that can be easily referenced and provided to non-power users.  These qualities will allow a dynamic area that will benefit the power user and also provide value to others.

Other Solutions Needed As Well

Something that may be just as effective for the average user is an effort to work on the improvement of the documentation provided by SolidWorks Corp for its software.  Why must a user come online in order to find a tutorial and how-to guide for basic functions?  The information provided on some of the technical blogs should already be apart of the manual provided by SolidWorks Corp for its SolidWorks software. 

Discussion to Continue

So, that’s my thoughts about this at this moment.  I welcome other ideas, points and counterpoints.   If ideas come up that have merit, I will likely adjust my own input about this matter.  I’ve set this article as second in a series of article that will likely continue, called “Future SW Community”.  Let see where this discussion leads.

P.S.

One additional point on a sidenote:  We need printed manuals!  At the very least, I feel there needs to be printed CAD Administrators manual that allows CAD Administrators and power users to have access to detailed information in offline settings for study and research.

SolidWorks Resources Availability

There was a time when online SolidWorks resources were far and few between.  When I started using SolidWorks back in 1998, I found nothing.  As time progressed, sporadic sites popped up and vanished.  This or that VAR would occasionally put up a page with macros or examples of models.  Many of these sites were never updated or were simply taken down later.  After a time, I stopped looking online for SolidWorks resources.

Then in 2005, I started looking again.  To my surprize, I found several useful sites.  Most of the sites were still limited to one or two pages of content, but they provided real resources.  Some had a page or two of macros, some How-to articles, career info, etc, such as Matt Lombard’s old site and Lenny’s site. A couple of sites where commercial in nature, selling macros, add-ins or educational services, such as Bitwright or SWTools .  Of course, some promote the individual’s consulting business while providing free content, such as Roland’s site Esox Republic and also Joseph Jones’ site NHCAD.  The most ambitious site was likely Mike J. Wilson’s Web Site, which used to have tons of models and the infamous SolidWorks based debunking video which proved the 9/11 Pentagon attack was by an airliner and not a missile (still available on YouTube here).

However, the one thing I missed was a comprehensive site with tons of files, FAQ’s and other SolidWorks items in one place.   My particular interest was macros.  I remember back in the AutoCAD days when I could go searching out LISP routines, blocks and customized menus in databases (even before the days of the modern internet).  CADalyst provided invaluable resources, some of which is still available in various forms such as books and their home website.  Nothing similar existed for SolidWorks. 

To answer this need, I created the independent site Lorono’s SolidWorks Resources.  My intent was to create a site for new, intermediate and experienced users looking to expand their knowledge and SolidWorks skills in a way that I wished was available when I started using SolidWorks.  It includes over 100 files, mostly focused on macros, data content, utilities.  It has tons of weblinks in a collection so big, I’ve not been able to find any others like it.  In this collection are links to SolidWorks related forums, resource links (such as the above sites), tutorials, online inquiries, general engineering and SolidWorks blogs.  

This brings me to the next point.  SolidWorks related blogs have exploded in the past year and a half.  I’ve been a participant in the online blogging community since 2001 and maintained my personal blog since the beginning of 2002.  However, I never thought about blogging on SolidWorks until Matt Lombard started up his blog in early 2007 mid-2006.  Then Lenny started up a great blog site in July of 2007.  These are not the earliest SolidWorks related blogs, but they are the first ones I noticed.  Mike Puckett’s blog goes back to Feb 2007.  Devon Sowell’s Blog goes back to June 2006.  He now has another blog as well which is specifically geared for PDMWorks and other similar software.   SolidWorks User Group Network (SWUGN) now lists 16 major SW blogs, and more are out there.  I attribute a lot of this growth directly and indirectly to the SWUGN and its leadership.  The blog has proven to be a very valuable tool. 

Another valuable tool is the new incarnation of 3D ContentCentral (3DCC), available as a link from within SolidWorks software.  When I first saw the new site, I started thinking that I would no longer need my own resources site.  However, they serve different purposes and have little overlap.  Many types of downloads on Lorono’s SolidWorks Resources are not available on 3DCC, and visa verse.  SolidWorks has done what it needs to do to keep 3DCC relevant and useful.  3DCC maintains its focus on 3D models from manufacturers and users.  There’s a new request line in which users can put in requests for models.  Another user can fulfill the request by uploading that model.  

I think the SolidWorks online community is finally providing the breathe needed to support its supposed 600000 users.  I have noticed that a slim percentage of those individuals are online finding what is available.  It seems the next step would be for SolidWorks to promote its online community aggressively to make the average user aware that free, comprehensive resources are available.  They started doing this at SolidWorks World 2008 by upping the profile of SWUGN.  More has to be done to get the word out.

I’m just a blogger who is blogging about blogging. 🙂 I’m doing what I can to help the effort.  I know others are giving demonstrations at user groups about what is available.  Hopefully everyone can get the word out, even if it is just to person in the next cube over.  I suspect that more people being aware of what’s out there will result in even more resources becoming available online.

Drawing Template with Two Different Sheet Formats (Part 2)

UPDATE for SolidWorks 2014: The following protocol is no longer necessary to achieve a different sheet format for addition sheets on a drawing.  Please see 2014 What’s New in SolidWorks – Sheet Formats for current information.

—-

Here is the [no-longer-necessary] protocol to set up a Drawing Template so that it can use two completely different Sheet Formats without requiring any additional action by the user when they start a new drawing.

This protocol tricks SolidWorks into having a Drawing Template use one Sheet Format for sheet 1, but also to have a different Sheet Format as the default for any added sheets.  It does this by swapping around the names of the Sheet Format files.

This allows a CAD Administrator to set up their Drawing Templates to be ASME compliant by automatically calling up the simplified title block when additional sheets are added to a drawing.

Instructions

In Windows Explorer:

1. Save a backup copy of the current sheet 1 and multi-sheet Sheet Format files.  Also, save a backup copy of your Drawing Template.

2. Rename multi-sheet file, such as adding an underscore in front of its name.  For example, if your multi-sheet file is named “C-SIZE-SECOND.slddrt”, rename it to “_C-SIZE-SECOND.slddrt”.

3. Rename sheet 1 file so that is has the original name of the multi-sheet file.  For example, if your sheet 1 file is “C-SIZE.slddrt”, rename it to “C-SIZE-SECOND.slddrt”.

In SolidWorks:

4. Start SolidWorks.

5. Open your Drawing Template.

6. Load your renamed sheet 1 Sheet Format.  In the example above, this would be “C-SIZE-SECOND.slddrt”.  The result should be a drawing that shows your sheet 1.

7. Save your Drawing Template.

8. Close SolidWorks

In Windows Explorer:

9. Rename sheet 1 to its original name.  In the example above, rename the “C-SIZE-SECOND.slddrt” file back to “C-SIZE.slddrt”.

10. Rename your original multi-sheet file to its original name.  In the example above, rename “_C-SIZE-SECOND.slddrt” to “C-SIZE-SECOND.slddrt”.

In SolidWorks:

11. Start SolidWorks.

12. Test results by starting a new drawing using the same Drawing Template.  Sheet 1 should appear on sheet 1.

13. Create sheet 2.  The multi-sheet format should appear on sheet 2.

For best results, uncheck “Show sheet format dialog on add new sheet” in Tools pulldown>Options…>System Options tab>Drawings.

The limitation of this method is when the administrator wishes to change sheet 1 of the Drawing Template, they will have to replicate these steps each time.  That doesn’t happen often and well worth the savings in time produced by implementing this method within the Drawing Template.

Additional keywords: 2 title blocks drawing

Drawing Template with Two Different Sheet Formats (Part 1)

A long sought after function in SolidWorks that has gone pretty much ignored is allowing users to set up Drawing Templates with two different Sheet Formats (one for Sheet 1 of X and one for all other X of X sheets).   [In the past, m]ost of us just had to  directly pick and load the separate X of X sheet when we add a sheet to a drawing.

Some half solutions do did exist to get around the limitation.  I have seen one hack that involves using the X of X sheet Sheet Format as the default sheet format with sheet 1 of the Template itself simply having addition entities around the Sheet Format entities to form the complete sheet 1 of X “format”.   Another way is was to have two sheets already present in the Drawing Template, each one with its own Sheet Format; then delete sheet 2 when it is not used.  No more half steps!

There is a way to have two completely different Sheet Formats embedded into a Drawing Template without having additional sheets already present.  I am currently working on writing up the protocol. I will post the steps on Thursday 7/17/08 (Instructions are now available here).  The protocol is not complex as far as I can tell.  I just wish to thoroughly experiment and test it before posting.  Stay tuned.  And, if you know of other ways do to this, then please post your methods (or links to them) here so everyone can compare notes.  Who knows, maybe someone else has already published something about this  I just know I’ve not seen anything in any other online resources, which is why I’m fairly excited about making this method available.

UPDATE for SolidWorks 2014

SolidWorks 2014 now has a second sheet setting in Document Properties. Fancy workarounds are no longer necessary.  Please see  2014 What’s New in SolidWorks – Sheet Formats.

SolidWorks 2009 is slated to introduce Slots functionality

At SolidWorks World 2008 (SWW8) we saw confirmation of a rumor.  SolidWorks 2009 would have the capability to add slot holes to parts.  This is a long sought after function that some would say has been missing along.  As demonstrated, the slot hole was not a special feature.  It was a sketch tool! Some may not initially like this, preferring slot holes to be their own discrete type of feature.  Others may prefer creating slots with a special sketch tool.

The SWW8 demonstration showed the presenter starting a sketch, picking the slot tool.  This allowed him to draw just a construction line with two LMB clicks.  The slot form automatically formed as though it was a capped offset from the initial construction line.  One more click set the sketch entities for the slot.  It appeared to be easy and painless.  I presume dimensioning of the slot within the sketch would be similar to current methods for similar sets of entities in the current version of SolidWorks.

The advantage to the slot function as a sketch tool is that user can actually create either an extrude or cut-extrude with the same tool.  So, not only are slot holes supported, but so is their opposite and positive counterpart.  As long as SolidWorks allows the user to dimension the slot hole on the drawing with the Hold Callout function, I do not have any major issues with this.  A mild criticism is that this method is a kin to how holes were made in the earliest SolidWorks versions, long before Hole Wizard, and presumably even before those “legacy holes”.  Perhaps this is just the first volley in a long series of improvements as we work our way to a Slot Wizard?  Maybe not.

However, some users might be expecting slot holes to be a feature of their own.  I cannot fully imagine how SolidWorks might accomplish this.  Maybe special one-off sketches are required, with sizes regulated with a Property Manager, similar to Hole Wizard holes.  Thinking of this, I can imagine that it would be nice to have some feature level control over slots so that they can be automatically sized when associated with a particular fastener within an assembly.

As far as dimensioning for slot holes on drawings, I did participate in early questionnaires regarding how this should be done.  I dutifully pulled my advice from ASME Y14.5M-1994, with special attention to Fig 1-35(b).  I also stated that I preferred centermarks to be at the center of slot by default (again referencing Fig 1-35(b)).  This will allow the quickest and simplest scheme to specify a slot hole.  This brings to mind a question.  If Hole Callout does callout slot holes this way, what will it do for extruded shapes that use a slot sketch?  There is no standard for this in ASME as far as I can tell, other than just directly dimensioning the feature.

There is one major point of concern.  How does this function translate into model assemblies?  Does SolidWorks 2009 quickly identify the slot hole center when smartmating a fastener at that location?  Right now, I always groan when I have to mate a screw to a slot because so much has to be done directly by me.  Update: something as simple as a temporary axis at the center of slot hole will be enough to address this issue, I believe.

One minor question of mine is how would slot sketch entities be handled within a sketch?  I think it would be best if they are recognized collectively as a slot, but can also be “exploded” into individual entities when other shapes based on the initial slot are desired.

I am looking forward to regularly using the new Slot functionality.  It promises to be a great timesaver that is well overdue.