Launch demo signup... https://www.onshape.com/en/resource-cen ... to-onshape
SolidTranslate
SolidTranslate
Onshape and Cadsharp are introducing an add on translator that brings over the Solidworks feature tree.
Launch demo signup... https://www.onshape.com/en/resource-cen ... to-onshape
Launch demo signup... https://www.onshape.com/en/resource-cen ... to-onshape
-
AlexLachance
- Posts: 1966
- Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2021 8:14 am
- Location: Quebec
- x 2118
- x 1836
Re: SolidTranslate
We're attending a little OnShape presentation this friday that includes a segment about this, kind of eager to see how powerful it is. This might be a game changer, it might actually force SolidWorks to adress their issues because a better program found a way to translate files in their integrity from their buggy program to the better one.
I'd like to see how it handles external references. The picture shows a nice feature tree reproduced/translated in OnShape but it seems like a very basic feature without too much complexity in it.
Wonder if it can also "grab" the file properties and sorta translate them to OnShape.
Edit: this leaves me wondering a lot. For instance, would a SolidWorks macro work in OnShape...? If so, this is amazing.
I'd like to see how it handles external references. The picture shows a nice feature tree reproduced/translated in OnShape but it seems like a very basic feature without too much complexity in it.
Wonder if it can also "grab" the file properties and sorta translate them to OnShape.
Edit: this leaves me wondering a lot. For instance, would a SolidWorks macro work in OnShape...? If so, this is amazing.
-
Frederick_Law
- Posts: 1812
- Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2021 1:09 pm
- Location: Toronto
- x 1525
- x 1366
Re: SolidTranslate
Highly doubt it.AlexLachance wrote: ↑Wed Feb 14, 2024 10:43 am Edit: this leaves me wondering a lot. For instance, would a SolidWorks macro work in OnShape...? If so, this is amazing.
Don't think Onshape API will be same as SW.
File translate is always possible.
Just need to go to the source model and build a list of what happened.
Start with sketchs: points, lines, arcs, circles, constrains, dimensions.
Next features: which sketch, region, direction, dimension.
Read the list in new system and rebuild.
Problem is how to translate when they don't have same feature.
How to convert from one feature to another.
Re: SolidTranslate
SW API has been always really open, so you can read the geometry, features, dimensions, custom properties etc. from the file and write it to what ever you want...nothing special there. If everything is going to be supported, it will be a huge work to maintain...and like Frederick mentioned, what if the features are really different. Still...interesting stuff.
-
AlexLachance
- Posts: 1966
- Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2021 8:14 am
- Location: Quebec
- x 2118
- x 1836
Re: SolidTranslate
I had the presentation, it was very interesting. It does translate external references. It does not translate macros.
If you're a one man team, and you're tired of being bullied by SolidWorks or whichever program you use, I suggest giving a deep look at OnShape. They have a beautiful product with very open programmers, they work with a lot of OpenSource such as GitHub and they have a lot of addons that can be used for one to transition from one program to OnShape.
If I was a one man team, I'd test it out real quick and if it does what I require I'd jump the boat instantly. Their price tag is also fairly cheaper then others, but that's most likely due to their smaller share of the market.
If you're a one man team, and you're tired of being bullied by SolidWorks or whichever program you use, I suggest giving a deep look at OnShape. They have a beautiful product with very open programmers, they work with a lot of OpenSource such as GitHub and they have a lot of addons that can be used for one to transition from one program to OnShape.
If I was a one man team, I'd test it out real quick and if it does what I require I'd jump the boat instantly. Their price tag is also fairly cheaper then others, but that's most likely due to their smaller share of the market.
Re: SolidTranslate
For me, jumping from SW to Onshape is something that I would really like to do. But...most of my customers are using SW and I live in a small country, so there is not that many Onshape users so far. This kind of translator could be the answer or at least it could help a lot. I would like to see the same to the other direction as well (export from Onshape to SW).
As a "one man team" it would be hard to pay subscriptions for 2 quite expensive softwares too...damn, during worst covid time, when I had 2 unprofitable years it was impossible to pay even for one. And going back to SW subscription has been made so terrible (expensive) that I don't want to do that in principle. So I use older version as long as I can and having hopes that Dassault has guts to do the same they did with Catia R5...new version, no backward compatibility. I see that it would be the only way to bring SW alive again and made me to pay for it again...now it just not evolving anymore, they just add cloud stuff over it.
I like to use both, no doubt...it's more compatibility with my clients...(and little bit about money too
)
As a "one man team" it would be hard to pay subscriptions for 2 quite expensive softwares too...damn, during worst covid time, when I had 2 unprofitable years it was impossible to pay even for one. And going back to SW subscription has been made so terrible (expensive) that I don't want to do that in principle. So I use older version as long as I can and having hopes that Dassault has guts to do the same they did with Catia R5...new version, no backward compatibility. I see that it would be the only way to bring SW alive again and made me to pay for it again...now it just not evolving anymore, they just add cloud stuff over it.
I like to use both, no doubt...it's more compatibility with my clients...(and little bit about money too
)Re: SolidTranslate
Interesting seeing all this, as Onshape appear to be gunning for the SolidWorks users again (ref Joe Dunn’s posts on LinkedIn basically stirring it).
Here’s the thing though. All this file translation at feature level means nothing. I speak as a person and business owner who has swapped CAD systems several times. Moving 3D data between systems is easy these days. It is accurate and in most cases you do not WANT feature level content moving between businesses or even in house. We often built parts then save out a parasolid file to continue to use that part in other assemblies. The “dumb solid” is quicker, it won’t break should someone do something stupid with a reference or an edit.
But you know what the real issue for companies is when moving platforms? And I mean your typical SME here, not your global giants. The issue is drawings. Drawings are the currency in most businesses. They are used in 10x more places than 3D data. QA, marketing, costing, sales etc.
so when you have over 20,000 drawing files linked to 3D data (like we have and some of my customers have) you are sticking to the system you are on.
Now if Onshape or any other vendor could say, open any Solidworks drawing file and it will open, with all relations intact, all dimensions linked, all tables linked, all visual styles and configurations working, then I’ll take notice.
This is even more relevant if you do any work in the AEC supply chain. Drawings are king. They are not going away any time soon. Certainly not in my lifetime.
But lets assume you could do all this. Why change to another platform like Onshape if you are on an active maintenance plan with SolidWorks?
For us to change would double our annual software costs. My team would need retraining. It would take 4-6 months before we were at the same level of competency. We would use a toolset then that is less functional than the one we knew and paid less to stay on. Then should something change we have no access to native data. PTC as a business policy raise annual subscription costs year on year with Creo (we were subscribed to it for several years). With Creo it was a 5-8% increase year on year. No idea if Onshape does that but lets be real here, they will, PTC paid way over the odds for them so they need a ROI.
This is the reality of platform swapping. Like I say I’ve done it in my business several times, and it gets harder each time.
This is not a knock to Onshape btw. I know several of the team and it’s kind of an in joke when I meet them at shows. I like the product. I like the team. I’ve pushed many many people to Onshape over the years (far more in the last 5 years than I push to SolidWorks). There is a lot to like about it, but the ability to read feature tree’s isn’t one of them in my view.
Like any sensible business owner I look to the future, to try to see what is coming. Solidworks as a business is a total mess. They are relying solely on the legacy data to sustain their sales. I do not know a single person here who is using 3D Experience browser apps. I do know several using desktop SolidWorks linked to the cloud, but these were all companies that switched due to PTC costs. I recently was pulled in by an old customer who switched from Creo to help them transition. They had not even heard of the 3DX apps! And that sales was direct from Dassault! This is the reality on the ground.
Running CAD is like spread betting. Put all your eggs in one basket and it might be great, but if your horse trips on the final jump you lose. So we use mutliple systems and we keep abreast of the market.
Right now I’ve no plans to switch. What will change that equation would be if SolidWorks decide to play silly buggers with pricing and or development.
Finally, if you are really serious about changing platforms, do it from a position of strength. Not because you have to. Look at the total costs of switching over 3 years. Consider factors for retraining, employee loss because they don’t like the new system (key factor this, always always get the team to agree on the switch as I’ve seen so many top down switches leading to tight teams breaking apart and even moving to competitors or startups). And always keep one license of the old system for at least 3 years so you can access legacy drawings!
Treat changing as a scorched earth policy and you can do what you want. It’s no coincidence that new CAD systems always show their product with StartUps or standalone divisions in corporate entities.
Enough wittering from me
Here’s the thing though. All this file translation at feature level means nothing. I speak as a person and business owner who has swapped CAD systems several times. Moving 3D data between systems is easy these days. It is accurate and in most cases you do not WANT feature level content moving between businesses or even in house. We often built parts then save out a parasolid file to continue to use that part in other assemblies. The “dumb solid” is quicker, it won’t break should someone do something stupid with a reference or an edit.
But you know what the real issue for companies is when moving platforms? And I mean your typical SME here, not your global giants. The issue is drawings. Drawings are the currency in most businesses. They are used in 10x more places than 3D data. QA, marketing, costing, sales etc.
so when you have over 20,000 drawing files linked to 3D data (like we have and some of my customers have) you are sticking to the system you are on.
Now if Onshape or any other vendor could say, open any Solidworks drawing file and it will open, with all relations intact, all dimensions linked, all tables linked, all visual styles and configurations working, then I’ll take notice.
This is even more relevant if you do any work in the AEC supply chain. Drawings are king. They are not going away any time soon. Certainly not in my lifetime.
But lets assume you could do all this. Why change to another platform like Onshape if you are on an active maintenance plan with SolidWorks?
For us to change would double our annual software costs. My team would need retraining. It would take 4-6 months before we were at the same level of competency. We would use a toolset then that is less functional than the one we knew and paid less to stay on. Then should something change we have no access to native data. PTC as a business policy raise annual subscription costs year on year with Creo (we were subscribed to it for several years). With Creo it was a 5-8% increase year on year. No idea if Onshape does that but lets be real here, they will, PTC paid way over the odds for them so they need a ROI.
This is the reality of platform swapping. Like I say I’ve done it in my business several times, and it gets harder each time.
This is not a knock to Onshape btw. I know several of the team and it’s kind of an in joke when I meet them at shows. I like the product. I like the team. I’ve pushed many many people to Onshape over the years (far more in the last 5 years than I push to SolidWorks). There is a lot to like about it, but the ability to read feature tree’s isn’t one of them in my view.
Like any sensible business owner I look to the future, to try to see what is coming. Solidworks as a business is a total mess. They are relying solely on the legacy data to sustain their sales. I do not know a single person here who is using 3D Experience browser apps. I do know several using desktop SolidWorks linked to the cloud, but these were all companies that switched due to PTC costs. I recently was pulled in by an old customer who switched from Creo to help them transition. They had not even heard of the 3DX apps! And that sales was direct from Dassault! This is the reality on the ground.
Running CAD is like spread betting. Put all your eggs in one basket and it might be great, but if your horse trips on the final jump you lose. So we use mutliple systems and we keep abreast of the market.
Right now I’ve no plans to switch. What will change that equation would be if SolidWorks decide to play silly buggers with pricing and or development.
Finally, if you are really serious about changing platforms, do it from a position of strength. Not because you have to. Look at the total costs of switching over 3 years. Consider factors for retraining, employee loss because they don’t like the new system (key factor this, always always get the team to agree on the switch as I’ve seen so many top down switches leading to tight teams breaking apart and even moving to competitors or startups). And always keep one license of the old system for at least 3 years so you can access legacy drawings!
Treat changing as a scorched earth policy and you can do what you want. It’s no coincidence that new CAD systems always show their product with StartUps or standalone divisions in corporate entities.
Enough wittering from me
Re: SolidTranslate
Sorry one more thing. The big usp with all the new cloud apps is collaboration. They dream up these crazy scenarios of teams in SMEs dotted all around the globe. I have never seen anything like this. Our in house team is remote. During Covid I kept the office going but had to set up infrastructure to enable remote working and collaboration.
This was the golden opportunity for Dassault to wipe the floor with the competition. All they had to do was say to all active maintenance users “you now have free access to 3DX for collaboration”. But they got greedy.
So companies like mine, who don’t have in house IT support staff, all took out business plans with the big cloud providers-Dropbox, Box, Google, Microsoft, Amazon, etc. we moved our files to the cloud. So we have cloud collaboration but also have full access and control of our files. All these systems include versioning. Should that file get corrupted, should you screw up the history, just restore thd previous version. It works.
The only thing that the CAD vendors offer is the ability to view the 3D data on the cloud. If I want to collaborate with someone we can’t co view a file. But here’s the thing, I don’t want to co share. If I am collaborating with a customer’s team, or a supplier, we share a screen on Teams, Zoom or Google Meet. Everyone uses these tools now. And best of all? They work with ALL apps not just one file type. I look at the CAD demos and think “do these people actually talk to actual users?”
Just yesterday I was on a collaborative design review with 4 people, in different places, via Teams. We shared SolidWorks, Acrobat, live sketching on a Cintiq in Sketchbook, Visualiser to view sample parts, and used A shared Word file to agree notes and actions. That is everyday now. Covid forced collaboration onto everyone and as is always the case, humans are resourceful. We use what tools we have access to and we creat a toolset that we rely on.
All these CAD only collaboration tools totally miss the point. All they are good for are demos.
This was the golden opportunity for Dassault to wipe the floor with the competition. All they had to do was say to all active maintenance users “you now have free access to 3DX for collaboration”. But they got greedy.
So companies like mine, who don’t have in house IT support staff, all took out business plans with the big cloud providers-Dropbox, Box, Google, Microsoft, Amazon, etc. we moved our files to the cloud. So we have cloud collaboration but also have full access and control of our files. All these systems include versioning. Should that file get corrupted, should you screw up the history, just restore thd previous version. It works.
The only thing that the CAD vendors offer is the ability to view the 3D data on the cloud. If I want to collaborate with someone we can’t co view a file. But here’s the thing, I don’t want to co share. If I am collaborating with a customer’s team, or a supplier, we share a screen on Teams, Zoom or Google Meet. Everyone uses these tools now. And best of all? They work with ALL apps not just one file type. I look at the CAD demos and think “do these people actually talk to actual users?”
Just yesterday I was on a collaborative design review with 4 people, in different places, via Teams. We shared SolidWorks, Acrobat, live sketching on a Cintiq in Sketchbook, Visualiser to view sample parts, and used A shared Word file to agree notes and actions. That is everyday now. Covid forced collaboration onto everyone and as is always the case, humans are resourceful. We use what tools we have access to and we creat a toolset that we rely on.
All these CAD only collaboration tools totally miss the point. All they are good for are demos.
Re: SolidTranslate
@KQuigley would you say Solid Edge data migration tools would be more of a migration since it migrates 3D and 2D data. It keeps the 2D and 3D association. The 3D data does not bring over a tree but in the video below it shows using direct editing to modify the model and updating the drawings. Solid Edge has an Inventor, SolidWorks, Creo, Creo Elements.
https://solidedge.siemens.com/en/resour ... migration/
https://solidedge.siemens.com/en/resour ... migration/
Re: SolidTranslate
That certainly looks impressive in a demo, but whether or not it works for all cases is open to question. Next time I try SolidEdge I’ll give it a go.
-
jcapriotti
- Posts: 1791
- Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2021 6:39 pm
- Location: The south
- x 1129
- x 1937
Re: SolidTranslate
When we need to all remotely view something we screenshare with Teams. Integrate 3dx with that somehow with the online markup/viewing and they may be on to something.
Jason
Re: SolidTranslate
Today was the 'big launch'...
My Takeaways:
It's Free
Only works on Prismatic Parts
Only Works on these features (but more coming if we let them know which ones)
And a video showing how to do it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5aHk_wuWbso
Thoughtfully, they did include some options in the translation tool...
Abort Unsupported
Stop at unsupported
f*** it, try anyway (Ignore unsupported)
and you can batch process part files...
Also, Onshape already had a similar importation scheme to Solid Edge (and SE's does work very well) where you can pull in a finished part and then edit it directly, I haven't played with it too much but it seemed ok.
I definitely got the impression that this tool is meant to help users & execs who think they want / need this functionality, but really if it is a production part that requires 'confidence' you are going to model it again anyway.
My Takeaways:
It's Free
Only works on Prismatic Parts
Only Works on these features (but more coming if we let them know which ones)
And a video showing how to do it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5aHk_wuWbso
Thoughtfully, they did include some options in the translation tool...
Abort Unsupported
Stop at unsupported
f*** it, try anyway (Ignore unsupported)
and you can batch process part files...
Also, Onshape already had a similar importation scheme to Solid Edge (and SE's does work very well) where you can pull in a finished part and then edit it directly, I haven't played with it too much but it seemed ok.
I definitely got the impression that this tool is meant to help users & execs who think they want / need this functionality, but really if it is a production part that requires 'confidence' you are going to model it again anyway.