Generating 3D-Layout (Inventor) from a 2D-Layout (AutoCAD)

[Anonymous]

Version:1.0 StartHTML:000000221 EndHTML:000004078 StartFragment:000001942 EndFragment:000004046 StartSelection:000001942 EndSelection:000004042 SourceURL:https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/forums/postpage/board-id/39

Hi,

I'm using the Factory Design Utilities 2016 and am trying to create a workflow from Autocad to Inventor (I know, the other way around would make much more sense, don't get me started...). Basically, what I want to accomplish is this: A factory layout, made in Autocad and consisting of different dynamical blocks should automatically generate a 3D-layout in Inventor. The Inventor layout should consist of models that are "configured" according to how the dynamical blocks are configured. For example, let's say a block representing a box can have a lid or no lid. In Inventor there's also a model that can have a lid or no lid (this is accomplished using parameters and iLogic) and ideally it should adapt when synced.

I've learned that FDU 2016 doesn't support associating Inventor model files to Autocad blocks (only STEP, IGES, JT, NX, SOLIDWORKS, PRO/e and CATIA models, but no Inventor models, because supporting YOUR OWN PRODUCT would make too much sense I guess.). Since STEP and/or IGES are non dynamic and we use Inventor an update to 2018 seems inevitable.

I've also heard (but I'm not 100% sure of this) that in FDU 2018, when you associate an Inventor model to a block, you loose the parameter functionality.

As a workaround I was thinking of using the parameter link in Inventor and using parameter values from an excel-file that is generated by AutoCAD. So, a block is configured in AutoCAD, the parameters and their values are somehow exported to an excel file, which is then read by Inventor to automatically configure the model in the layout.

Would this be feasable and how would I go about it?

I've already looked into the "Extract Data"-function in AutoCAD, but it seems it only exports attributes, and no parameters.

Any feedback is welcome!

Cheers

[olegd.prod]

Hello,
A couple of points/answers:
1. The general pattern is that parameterized assets are published from Inventor
2. The thinking is that if you have an Inventor model, you'd publish it as an asset from Inventor (this is why publishing from ACAD doesn't support Inventor files)
3. We do not support assets with dynamic ACAD blocks. We tried, but could not create clean workflows between parameterized Inventor models and dynamic blocks. I am not saying that you can't make something work for your case, but we could not make a general-use product we would be comfortable releasing to the wild
4. If you implement your "workaround", you'll effectively have to rebuild FDU's Sync functionality yourself - extract parameters from AutoCAD, and then supply them to FDU in Inventor. We released a public API in our 2018.1 release<>, so you might be able to put something together, but this is not a use case we were thinking about when we built the API, and doing this will effectively prevent you from ever using FDU's native Sync, since it would mess up your data/blocks/etc ...

Bottom line: we don't have a solution that includes ACAD dynamic blocks 😞

Oleg

[Anonymous]

Hi Oleg,

First of all, thank you for the quick answer.

I was afraid that would be your answer, as I've been hammering largely the same points to my employer. I've been researching the API and Visual Basic today, but as I'm not a programmer, I feel this is way over my head, especially if this could undermine the native synchronization functionality.

Now the hardest part will be to convince my employer to let go of the idea...

edit:

I've just upgraded to Inventor 2018, because, as it turns out, we've been paying for the FDU 2018 licence all along. Apparently we still work with Inventor 2016 because moving to 2018 is too big of a hassle. Go figure...

Anyway, I tried associating an Inventor model (.ipt, single body with different features) to an ACAD block. It did just that, but apparently, when you sync it automatically turns the .ipt into a shrinkwrapped composite version of itself, losing all parameters, translucency etc. Why does it need to do that? If I could just attach the .ipt "as is" and it turned out "as is" in the 3D-layout that would be a big first step. I don't get why a simplified version is necessary. If you have landing surface and an insertion point, isn't that all Inventor needs to know to bring in the model? What am I missing?

Greetings.

[olegd.prod]

Sorry, I am not sure I understand your workflow...
Can you record a video? https://knowledge.autodesk.com/community/screencast

Oleg

[Anonymous]

Hi Oleg,

I managed to convince my employer the workflow wasn't feasible.

The idea now is to make a factory layout in Inventor 2018 and then sync with ACAD to produce a 2D layout. However, as you know, using the full models of the machines and conveyors etc isn't workable in FDU. That's why I have been creating low-weight versions of our machines and publishing those as assets. When you sync them they produce a static 2D view in ACAD. However, engineering needs those ACAD drawings to be configurable, because there's still a lot of tweeking to be done at that stage. Now, dynamic, configurable ACAD blocks for all our machines and conveyors already exist. So now we want to attach those to the 3D assets, so when you sync, the 2D layout is made up of those dynamic blocks instead of the automatically generated static ones. Luckily, this is a feature in FDU 2018.

But there is still a problem. When I go to asset builder > import as sketch and select the dwg i need, it comes into the builder no problem, but its orientation and position is way off. Which is normal. When I want to rotate or move the sketch, Inventor gets stuck after I draw the selection rectangle over the sketch. It eventually resolves after several minutes but then keeps getting stuck whenever I input any other command. So this isn't workable. I thought maybe the calculations required are just to heavy for my workstation to handle, but it seems that is not the case. I monitored my CPU, GPU and RAM usage during it all and there seems to be no bottleneck there.

I run an Intel Xeon E5 1650 v2 3.0Ghz, with an Nvidia Quadro K4000 and 16 GB RAM. Non of them ever come close to their maximum capabilities.

I tried including a screencast of what I'm trying to do, with the diagnostic windows showing as well, but the Insert Screencast window is acting funny, even though the screencast was successfully published. See screenshot.

Anyway, the screencast url it provided me is

http://autode.sk/2j1EFKc

Greetings,

Cesar

[olegd.prod]

Hi Cesar,
First of all - love your in-video "instant messaging" 😉

I don't think we've seen the DWG underlay/sketch behavior you are showing, so that may be a defect in Inventor. If you send me the DWG via a private message, I can get it to Inventor QA.

You said "dynamic, configurable ACAD blocks for all our machines and conveyors already exist. So now we want to attach those to the 3D assets, so when you sync, the 2D layout is made up of those dynamic blocks instead of the automatically generated static ones. Luckily, this is a feature in FDU 2018."
I want to be sure we are thinking along the same lines here: Factory doesn't support dynamic blocks in any way, shape, or form. We do not test with them, etc, etc. So I don't think you'll be able to use the workflow that you described to achieve the results you are trying to achieve...

Yes, we certainly know that using full-weight models of assets might we too heavy for Inventor (in a huge layout with lots of asset instances). Many customers address this by dividing their layouts into sublayouts, and using Navisworks as the final "review" environment.

You mentioned that you "have been creating low-weight versions of our machines and publishing those as assets". If these low-weight versions are parametrized, you will be able to change the parameters in both Inventor and AutoCAD via the Factory Properties panel, and we'll generate the appropriate parameter-driven representation when you sync to the other CAD.

HTH

Oleg

[Anonymous]

Hi Oleg,

The hang ups when selecting the drawing imported as sketch seem to be specific for that .dwg-file, as I tried it with a simple rectangle and that gave no problems at all. I'll send you the .dwg that gives troubles in a PM.

So I don't think you'll be able to use the workflow that you described to achieve the results you are trying to achieve

It certainly seems to be the case. I'm going to need a new angle on this whole thing I'm afraid. Could you maybe point me to examples of functionig workflows that you feel use the FDU functionality really well. It doesn't need to be doing what I described (as it seems that is impossible anyway), just a very good example of the use of FDU in general. You never know, it may give me some new insights/ideas.

If these low-weight versions are parametrized, you will be able to change the parameters in both Inventor and AutoCAD via the Factory Properties panel, and we'll generate the appropriate parameter-driven representation when you sync to the other CAD.

They are indeed parametrized, the parameters turn certain options on or off, change the size of parts etc. That way is the first thing I tried several weeks ago, but I have the only workstation that runs FDU, so I can't share my layouts with the rest of the company. Also the models used in FDU are way to simplified for the automatically generated .dwg's to be useable by engineering, so that's no good either.

Greetings,

Cesar

[#8]

So I don't think you'll be able to use the workflow that you described to achieve the results you are trying to achieve

[#9]

If these low-weight versions are parametrized, you will be able to change the parameters in both Inventor and AutoCAD via the Factory Properties panel, and we'll generate the appropriate parameter-driven representation when you sync to the other CAD.

[olegd.prod]

Hi Cesar,
I'll pass your DWG to the Inventor QA team to see if they can reproduce.

As far as examples that use FDU functionality well: we have many customers that use FDU to edit their layouts in AutoCAD and Inventor (as they see fit). There is no single "right" way to do this. Some customers break their very large layouts into smaller sections (sublayouts), create a single parent layout, and interact with the parent mostly vis Navisworks (review). Others simplify their assets enough to lighten the load in Inventor, but still be useful in 2D, etc.

"but I have the only workstation that runs FDU, so I can't share my layouts with the rest of the company"
Well, the way to solve that is to buy more FDU ;-))

Oleg

[Anonymous]

Thanks Oleg,

We decided to cut engineering loose for now and only use the FDU functionality for quick layouting work in ACAD which is then synched to Inventor using very simplified assets. The 3D layouts will only be used by the sales team to visualize possible production lines to potential customers.

"Well, the way to solve that is to buy more FDU ;-))"

Yeah, that's not happening. Mister bossman is NOT happy with Autodesk right now, as the local Autodesk retailer sold the FDU to him implying the first workflow I described would be possible with a little prep work. That would have meant we would have more output (a full 3D layout) for the same amount of work (as the 2D layouts engineering uses have to made anyway, for detailing etc). But now, we have to make an entirely new 2D layout using other blocks then the ones engineering uses. I can try and streamline the process as much as possible as to try and create not too much extra work for the layout people, but it's far from ideal. This is in no way an attack aimed at the people at AD forums by the way, you have been a big help, I'm just venting :-).

Greetings,

Cesar

[XuesongBai]

Hi Cesar,

Could you please help share a dynamic block with me for the closed look? As Oleg mentioned, there is the FACTORY API available in FDU 2018.1.

Maybe there is another way to "Map" dynamic block to Inventor asset.

My email address is Xuesong.Bai@autodesk.com

Thanks,

-Xuesong

[olegd.prod]

Earlier you said "... using the full models of the machines and conveyors etc isn't workable in FDU".

I am curious(and should've asked earlier): what does "not workable" mean here? Inventor capacity problems? If so, how "large" are your assets/layouts ? I know that "large" is a relative term, so maybe you can share info like the number of assets in a layout, average size of an asset (Inventor file size), etc..
And what specific problems are you running into?

Thanks,

Oleg

[Anonymous]

Hi Oleg,

Yes, exactly, Inventor crawls to halt when I use our full models in FDU. I make full production line layouts so they get very heavy very quickly. Also, the layouts I make are intended for our customers and if I start distributing full Inventor models of our machines I predict a very steep decline in sales in the forseeable future. I know it's possible to shrinkwrap the entire layout as a final step so the intellectual propery would be somewhat protected, but then the problem of the heavy models still persists. But I've worked around that problem by using simplified assets.

As for specific problems, the major one is now that Inventor keeps crashing, seemingly randomly, when working in FDU, ever since I migrated to Inventor 2018. Xuesong suggested updating to 2018.2, but I can't do that for now, as I'm not authorized, and the person who is, is sick atm.

Greetings,

Cesar

[olegd.prod]

Yup, we've heard concerns about IP from other customers as well.
Can you share any metrics about your layout/asset sizes/counts?

[Anonymous]

Hi Oleg,

Our full models have a part count of several thousand .ipt's. Layouts generally consist of four or more of these machines, connected by conveyor systems and a buttload of peripherals. Anytime  a customer asks for a detailed quotation, a layout has to be made, which is basically everyday or several times a day. So the models have to be very lightweight so I can basically Legobrick these layouts together very quickly.

When I make new assets from scratch, such as conveyor belts (we don't make these ourselves, and even though the manufacturer shares his STEP models with us, STEP is also way too memory heavy to use in FDU once you need a bunch of them in one layout) I model the entire thing withing one .ipt. No assemblies, parts etc. Just building feature after feature until the whole asset is shaped. It's basically the same method you guys used for building the system assets, as far as I can tell. Any intelligence needed for the assets is done with a combination of parameters and iLogic.

When I have to derive assets from our existing machines I use a way more involved method. But the end result is also one .ipt per asset. This seems to do the trick for now. A big downside to this method is that when these layout are synched to ACAD they aren't usable by engineering because of their severely simplified nature.

Greetings,

Cesar

[olegd.prod]

Thanks for the explanation. Your approach makes sense, especially when dealing with buttload of stuff 🙂