Parasolid to Inventor

[jrapert]

I was just wondering if IV will be able (sometime in the future) to import direct parasolid files like similar level packages (SW or CADKEY). IGES, STEP or SAT are fine but nearly always creates translation problems (untrimmed surfaces, faces missing etc). Other designers using software's with direct parasolid converters have much less translation problems. As a die designer I'm getting imported solid/surface models sometimes in parasolid format. I wish I could import straight into IV without running around and get converted into IGES or STEP. I guess there're more tool/die designers out there with similar wish.

[jrapert]

I was just wondering if IV will be able (sometime in the future) to import direct parasolid files like similar level packages (SW or CADKEY). IGES, STEP or SAT are fine but nearly always creates translation problems (untrimmed surfaces, faces missing etc). Other designers using software's with direct parasolid converters have much less translation problems. As a die designer I'm getting imported solid/surface models sometimes in parasolid format. I wish I could import straight into IV without running around and get converted into IGES or STEP. I guess there're more tool/die designers out there with similar wish.

[Anonymous]

It would be convenient. You can pretty well bank on it not being as robust as STEP imports, though, unless the problem is with the source system not being able to write out a good STEP (occasionally happens). Try StepTools.com if you don't have a way to import Parasolid. Believe they have a free Parasolid <> STEP on-line service. Wonder if ACIS has an interop module available? Oops, forget that. 8~)

[Anonymous]

It would be convenient. You can pretty well bank on it not being as robust as STEP imports, though, unless the problem is with the source system not being able to write out a good STEP (occasionally happens). Try StepTools.com if you don't have a way to import Parasolid. Believe they have a free Parasolid <> STEP on-line service. Wonder if ACIS has an interop module available? Oops, forget that. 8~)

[Anonymous]

I'm sure that UGS would be happy to provide AutoDesk with the tools necessary to import Parasolid Files. Heck, maybe Inventor should just use the Parasolid Kernel, and then you wouldn't need to worry about Parasolid translation! Ken "Jeff Howard" wrote in message news:41dcd482_1@newsprd01... > It would be convenient. You can pretty well bank on it not being as > robust > as STEP imports, though, unless the problem is with the source system not > being able to write out a good STEP (occasionally happens). Try > StepTools.com if you don't have a way to import Parasolid. Believe they > have a free Parasolid <> STEP on-line service. Wonder if ACIS has an > interop module available? Oops, forget that. 8~) >

[Anonymous]

I'm sure that UGS would be happy to provide AutoDesk with the tools necessary to import Parasolid Files. Heck, maybe Inventor should just use the Parasolid Kernel, and then you wouldn't need to worry about Parasolid translation! Ken "Jeff Howard" wrote in message news:41dcd482_1@newsprd01... > It would be convenient. You can pretty well bank on it not being as > robust > as STEP imports, though, unless the problem is with the source system not > being able to write out a good STEP (occasionally happens). Try > StepTools.com if you don't have a way to import Parasolid. Believe they > have a free Parasolid <> STEP on-line service. Wonder if ACIS has an > interop module available? Oops, forget that. 8~) >

[Anonymous]

I thought by bringing kernel development in-house, Autodesk was going to correct these types of issues? # : < ) "PellaKen" wrote in message news:41dd5d4b$1_2@newsprd01... > I'm sure that UGS would be happy to provide AutoDesk with the tools > necessary to import Parasolid Files. Heck, maybe Inventor should just use > the Parasolid Kernel, and then you wouldn't need to worry about Parasolid > translation! > > Ken > "Jeff Howard" wrote in message > news:41dcd482_1@newsprd01... > > It would be convenient. You can pretty well bank on it not being as > > robust > > as STEP imports, though, unless the problem is with the source system not > > being able to write out a good STEP (occasionally happens). Try > > StepTools.com if you don't have a way to import Parasolid. Believe they > > have a free Parasolid <> STEP on-line service. Wonder if ACIS has an > > interop module available? Oops, forget that. 8~) > > > >

[Anonymous]

I thought by bringing kernel development in-house, Autodesk was going to correct these types of issues? # : < ) "PellaKen" wrote in message news:41dd5d4b$1_2@newsprd01... > I'm sure that UGS would be happy to provide AutoDesk with the tools > necessary to import Parasolid Files. Heck, maybe Inventor should just use > the Parasolid Kernel, and then you wouldn't need to worry about Parasolid > translation! > > Ken > "Jeff Howard" wrote in message > news:41dcd482_1@newsprd01... > > It would be convenient. You can pretty well bank on it not being as > > robust > > as STEP imports, though, unless the problem is with the source system not > > being able to write out a good STEP (occasionally happens). Try > > StepTools.com if you don't have a way to import Parasolid. Believe they > > have a free Parasolid <> STEP on-line service. Wonder if ACIS has an > > interop module available? Oops, forget that. 8~) > > > >

[Anonymous]

>.... Heck, maybe Inventor should just use > the Parasolid Kernel ..... SW switch to ACIS and ADSK to Parasolid.... hmmm. 8~)

[Anonymous]

>.... Heck, maybe Inventor should just use > the Parasolid Kernel ..... SW switch to ACIS and ADSK to Parasolid.... hmmm. 8~)

[Anonymous]

Jeff, How about Autodesk, UGS, PTC, Dassault, etc. add support for feature based XML? Then this issue could be eliminated completely. Users need to demand a non-proprietary method for moving fully intelligent feature based data between dissimilar systems!!! # : < ) "Jeff Howard" wrote in message news:41dd67ea_3@newsprd01... > >.... Heck, maybe Inventor should just use > > the Parasolid Kernel ..... > > SW switch to ACIS and ADSK to Parasolid.... hmmm. 8~)

[Anonymous]

Jeff, How about Autodesk, UGS, PTC, Dassault, etc. add support for feature based XML? Then this issue could be eliminated completely. Users need to demand a non-proprietary method for moving fully intelligent feature based data between dissimilar systems!!! # : < ) "Jeff Howard" wrote in message news:41dd67ea_3@newsprd01... > >.... Heck, maybe Inventor should just use > > the Parasolid Kernel ..... > > SW switch to ACIS and ADSK to Parasolid.... hmmm. 8~)

[Anonymous]

I hear Theorem Solutions has been developing some NEW translation tools that do the feature based stuff, but I fully agree there should be a push to open systems. Originally I thought STEP would do all that, but they seem to have stopped short. "3D User" wrote in message news:41dd6d31_2@newsprd01... > Jeff, > > How about Autodesk, UGS, PTC, Dassault, etc. add support for feature based > XML? Then this issue could be eliminated completely. > > Users need to demand a non-proprietary method for moving fully intelligent > feature based data between dissimilar systems!!! > > # : < ) > > "Jeff Howard" wrote in message > news:41dd67ea_3@newsprd01... >> >.... Heck, maybe Inventor should just use >> > the Parasolid Kernel ..... >> >> SW switch to ACIS and ADSK to Parasolid.... hmmm. 8~) > >

[Anonymous]

I hear Theorem Solutions has been developing some NEW translation tools that do the feature based stuff, but I fully agree there should be a push to open systems. Originally I thought STEP would do all that, but they seem to have stopped short. "3D User" wrote in message news:41dd6d31_2@newsprd01... > Jeff, > > How about Autodesk, UGS, PTC, Dassault, etc. add support for feature based > XML? Then this issue could be eliminated completely. > > Users need to demand a non-proprietary method for moving fully intelligent > feature based data between dissimilar systems!!! > > # : < ) > > "Jeff Howard" wrote in message > news:41dd67ea_3@newsprd01... >> >.... Heck, maybe Inventor should just use >> > the Parasolid Kernel ..... >> >> SW switch to ACIS and ADSK to Parasolid.... hmmm. 8~) > >

[Anonymous]

As long as AutoDesk is willing to pay them the quite hefty licensing fees for it. If anyone could afford it, they should be able to. I checked as a single developer in the past, and the licensing/maintenance costs would have been almost as much per month as I make working fulltime, if not more! "PellaKen" wrote in message news:41dd5d4b$1_2@newsprd01... > I'm sure that UGS would be happy to provide AutoDesk with the tools necessary to import Parasolid Files. Heck, maybe Inventor > should just use the Parasolid Kernel, and then you wouldn't need to worry about Parasolid translation! > > Ken > "Jeff Howard" wrote in message news:41dcd482_1@newsprd01... >> It would be convenient. You can pretty well bank on it not being as robust >> as STEP imports, though, unless the problem is with the source system not >> being able to write out a good STEP (occasionally happens). Try >> StepTools.com if you don't have a way to import Parasolid. Believe they >> have a free Parasolid <> STEP on-line service. Wonder if ACIS has an >> interop module available? Oops, forget that. 8~) >> > >

[Anonymous]

As long as AutoDesk is willing to pay them the quite hefty licensing fees for it. If anyone could afford it, they should be able to. I checked as a single developer in the past, and the licensing/maintenance costs would have been almost as much per month as I make working fulltime, if not more! "PellaKen" wrote in message news:41dd5d4b$1_2@newsprd01... > I'm sure that UGS would be happy to provide AutoDesk with the tools necessary to import Parasolid Files. Heck, maybe Inventor > should just use the Parasolid Kernel, and then you wouldn't need to worry about Parasolid translation! > > Ken > "Jeff Howard" wrote in message news:41dcd482_1@newsprd01... >> It would be convenient. You can pretty well bank on it not being as robust >> as STEP imports, though, unless the problem is with the source system not >> being able to write out a good STEP (occasionally happens). Try >> StepTools.com if you don't have a way to import Parasolid. Believe they >> have a free Parasolid <> STEP on-line service. Wonder if ACIS has an >> interop module available? Oops, forget that. 8~) >> > >

[Anonymous]

Bob, Theorem is not alone in this effort. A BIG problem is the cost for these feature based translation tools. They seem to be in the $50K+ range. Why can't the CAD developers win customers by having the best interface, feature set, and distribution / support model? Are they so fearful that they need to hold the data hostage? "Bob S." wrote in message news:41dd6f0a$1_1@newsprd01... > I hear Theorem Solutions has been developing some NEW translation tools > that do the feature based stuff, but I fully agree there should be a push to > open systems. Originally I thought STEP would do all that, but they seem > to have stopped short. > > "3D User" wrote in message news:41dd6d31_2@newsprd01... > > Jeff, > > > > How about Autodesk, UGS, PTC, Dassault, etc. add support for feature based > > XML? Then this issue could be eliminated completely. > > > > Users need to demand a non-proprietary method for moving fully intelligent > > feature based data between dissimilar systems!!! > > > > # : < ) > > > > "Jeff Howard" wrote in message > > news:41dd67ea_3@newsprd01... > >> >.... Heck, maybe Inventor should just use > >> > the Parasolid Kernel ..... > >> > >> SW switch to ACIS and ADSK to Parasolid.... hmmm. 8~) > > > > > >

[Anonymous]

Bob, Theorem is not alone in this effort. A BIG problem is the cost for these feature based translation tools. They seem to be in the $50K+ range. Why can't the CAD developers win customers by having the best interface, feature set, and distribution / support model? Are they so fearful that they need to hold the data hostage? "Bob S." wrote in message news:41dd6f0a$1_1@newsprd01... > I hear Theorem Solutions has been developing some NEW translation tools > that do the feature based stuff, but I fully agree there should be a push to > open systems. Originally I thought STEP would do all that, but they seem > to have stopped short. > > "3D User" wrote in message news:41dd6d31_2@newsprd01... > > Jeff, > > > > How about Autodesk, UGS, PTC, Dassault, etc. add support for feature based > > XML? Then this issue could be eliminated completely. > > > > Users need to demand a non-proprietary method for moving fully intelligent > > feature based data between dissimilar systems!!! > > > > # : < ) > > > > "Jeff Howard" wrote in message > > news:41dd67ea_3@newsprd01... > >> >.... Heck, maybe Inventor should just use > >> > the Parasolid Kernel ..... > >> > >> SW switch to ACIS and ADSK to Parasolid.... hmmm. 8~) > > > > > >

[Anonymous]

Feature translation is available; for some systems and for a pretty penny. Proficiency comes to mind at around 20 to 30K US, pretty impressive capabilities, or so I've heard. Personally I don't expect the Grail to be found in my lifetime considering none of major parametric developers even offer version rollback for their own products (at least to my knowledge). Full featured, reliable geometry translations and a tool set to make repairing / modifying / reconstructing surfaces feasible is probably about the best that can be hoped for once you get beyond combinations of primitive shapes. Who know, though.... "Bob S." wrote in message news:41dd6f0a$1_1@newsprd01... > I hear Theorem Solutions has been developing some NEW translation tools > that do the feature based stuff, but I fully agree there should be a push to > open systems. Originally I thought STEP would do all that, but they seem > to have stopped short.

[Anonymous]

Feature translation is available; for some systems and for a pretty penny. Proficiency comes to mind at around 20 to 30K US, pretty impressive capabilities, or so I've heard. Personally I don't expect the Grail to be found in my lifetime considering none of major parametric developers even offer version rollback for their own products (at least to my knowledge). Full featured, reliable geometry translations and a tool set to make repairing / modifying / reconstructing surfaces feasible is probably about the best that can be hoped for once you get beyond combinations of primitive shapes. Who know, though.... "Bob S." wrote in message news:41dd6f0a$1_1@newsprd01... > I hear Theorem Solutions has been developing some NEW translation tools > that do the feature based stuff, but I fully agree there should be a push to > open systems. Originally I thought STEP would do all that, but they seem > to have stopped short.

[jrapert]

Thanks guys for all your input. Seems to be pretty complex issue. I still would like to hear some feedback from Autodesk regarding this subject.
Julian

[jrapert]

Thanks guys for all your input. Seems to be pretty complex issue. I still would like to hear some feedback from Autodesk regarding this subject.
Julian