| Author |
Message |
PMitchener@carrollhealthc
Guest
|
 Posted:
Tue Nov 15, 2005 5:10 pm Post subject:
Supressed - Unsupressed - Resolved |
|
|
How come mates are "suppressed" or "unsupressed"
while components are "suppressed" or "resolved"?
Why does Solidworks persist in inconsistant use of nomanclature?
I suppose I could see the difference in application of the terms but it
seems contradictory or confusing.
Just a thought.
paul
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Brian
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 15, 2005 5:10 pm Post subject:
Re: Supressed - Unsupressed - Resolved |
|
|
Supressed/Lightweight/Resolved/Unsupressed are really not the same. In
context of an assembly a component can be:
Supressed- it, and all its children mates,in-context references, ect.
completely discounted from the assembly
Unsupressed but lightweight-above items visible and updated based upon the
latest time the component was in a resolved state. Used when dealing with a
larger assembly to reduce overhead, but may not be 100% accurate as
lightweight sub-assemblies/parts may have changed since their last resolved
state.
Unsupressed and resolved-the most accurate condition of an assembly. The
component/sub-assembly and associated references are updated to its actual
current state.
Its really a speed issue. Working on a 5000 piece assembly in a fully
resolved state will be much slower, but much more accurate than working on
the same assembly in lightweight mode. Thankfully, you can selectively
resolve only those parts/subs necessary to ensure accuracy in the area of
the assembly that you are currently working. There is no lightweight state
of a mate, its either there... or not.
--
Brian Hokanson
Starting Line Products
<PMitchener@carrollhealthcare.com> wrote in message
news:Xns970F5BCB36E73PMitchenercarrollhea@216.196.97.131...
| Quote: | How come mates are "suppressed" or "unsupressed"
while components are "suppressed" or "resolved"?
Why does Solidworks persist in inconsistant use of nomanclature?
I suppose I could see the difference in application of the terms but it
seems contradictory or confusing.
Just a thought.
paul
|
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PMitchener@carrollhealthc
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 15, 2005 9:10 pm Post subject:
Re: Supressed - Unsupressed - Resolved |
|
|
"Brian" <brianh.castrate.all.spammers@slp.cc> wrote in
news:1132067680_13301@spool6-east.superfeed.net:
| Quote: | Supressed/Lightweight/Resolved/Unsupressed are really not the
same. In
context of an assembly a component can be:
Supressed- it, and all its children mates,in-context references, ect.
completely discounted from the assembly
Unsupressed but lightweight-above items visible and updated based upon
the latest time the component was in a resolved state. Used when
dealing with a larger assembly to reduce overhead, but may not be 100%
accurate as lightweight sub-assemblies/parts may have changed since
their last resolved state.
Unsupressed and resolved-the most accurate condition of an assembly.
The component/sub-assembly and associated references are updated to
its actual current state.
Its really a speed issue. Working on a 5000 piece assembly in a
fully
resolved state will be much slower, but much more accurate than
working on the same assembly in lightweight mode. Thankfully, you can
selectively resolve only those parts/subs necessary to ensure accuracy
in the area of the assembly that you are currently working. There is
no lightweight state of a mate, its either there... or not.
|
It does make sense actually. And I do see the functionality of the various
states of components and mates.
And I suppose the nomenclature is what it is. After all "un-resolved" is a
poor substitute for "suppressed"
cheers
pm
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SteveT
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 15, 2005 9:10 pm Post subject:
Re: Supressed - Unsupressed - Resolved |
|
|
I agree totally! they need to change the names.
Steve T.
<PMitchener@carrollhealthcare.com> wrote in message
news:Xns970F8197F56FFPMitchenercarrollhea@216.196.97.131...
| Quote: | "Brian" <brianh.castrate.all.spammers@slp.cc> wrote in
news:1132067680_13301@spool6-east.superfeed.net:
Supressed/Lightweight/Resolved/Unsupressed are really not the
same. In
context of an assembly a component can be:
Supressed- it, and all its children mates,in-context references, ect.
completely discounted from the assembly
Unsupressed but lightweight-above items visible and updated based upon
the latest time the component was in a resolved state. Used when
dealing with a larger assembly to reduce overhead, but may not be 100%
accurate as lightweight sub-assemblies/parts may have changed since
their last resolved state.
Unsupressed and resolved-the most accurate condition of an assembly.
The component/sub-assembly and associated references are updated to
its actual current state.
Its really a speed issue. Working on a 5000 piece assembly in a
fully
resolved state will be much slower, but much more accurate than
working on the same assembly in lightweight mode. Thankfully, you can
selectively resolve only those parts/subs necessary to ensure accuracy
in the area of the assembly that you are currently working. There is
no lightweight state of a mate, its either there... or not.
It does make sense actually. And I do see the functionality of the various
states of components and mates.
And I suppose the nomenclature is what it is. After all "un-resolved" is a
poor substitute for "suppressed"
cheers
pm |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in