Some colors in derived part are broken

[WHolzwarth]

See pictures. The first one is the main assembly.

The next one is the derived part. Some colors came through, other ones didn't. I found no reason for that behavior

And the last one is a derived part of a sub-assy from the above main assy. All colors in this minor set are ok.

What's going on here?

Walter

[HermJan.Otterman]

Hello Walter,

can you attach a (small) example?

[WHolzwarth]

Hi Herm Jan,

it seems to happen only with bigger files. But I'll try to make a fileset.

Walter

[HermJan.Otterman]

What option did you use while deriving?

try the second one (ore even the third one)

with the first option, if parts touch each other some times the colors from one of the parts will be used for the other part 

[WHolzwarth]

Here's an extract (2016 files). EOP in Chassis grue fix - Colortest AK.ipt needs to be pulled down again.

Derived part was created as multibody (3rd option)

[WHolzwarth]

Hmm. After another it seems to be like that:

- If no or only a single sub-assy is in the IAM to be derived, colors come in well

- If two or more sub-assys exist, colors risk to be broken.

[HermJan.Otterman · Accepted solution]

Hello Walter

I tested some things, and used some different colors, created material with colors, also in the designdata.

what I ended up with was one part (angle 32140 yellow) to be green (color I gave it, in the back and grey in the front.

so the same part, but in different assemblies.

so I stripped the main assembly until it only had two sub assies: etape 1108 and etape 1081, adn than it was oke, but much less components as you already sad.

So I did this with Inventor 2016.2.2

I also tried editing the color of one 6632, but the other one did also change..??

when you use the third option you get a multibody part, and you can look at the bodies and below that the part. this last one has the color, but with the same part in a diferent location it has not the color so this is inconsequent behaviour. I also looked at the design views but can't find it, so I geus this must be a Bug, something for Autodesk.

I also tested it in 2017.2.1 and there it work fine...!!! so maybe that's the solution?

[WHolzwarth]

Ok, Herm Jan. That's it. My latest build of 2017 showed no more color differences with my bigger test file.

Same can be seen in the derived part of the complete crane, all colors are ok.

Now it's time for riding the next horse ..

Thanks

Walter

[HermJan.Otterman]

great that is works, I hope you can manage with 2017..?

[WHolzwarth]

Unfortunately not. This color issue is gone now in 2017, but the Studio zoom failure with video record is still present. Only the small red window is recorded.

Studio timeline run is looking good, but recording is garbage.

I've found no solution.

[HermJan.Otterman]

does this help?

setting the camera different?

http://autode.sk/2enX0vI

problem with me is that it is crashing al the time....

NICE crane by the way !!

[WHolzwarth]

---

HermJan.Otterman schrieb:

does this help?

setting the camera different?

http://autode.sk/2enX0vI

problem with me is that it is crashing al the time.... 

---

I don't think, that it's solved. Look here:

http://forums.autodesk.com/t5/inventor-forum/inventor-2016-studio-camera-work/td-p/5606815

Yes, crashing is another issue. In most cases I needed a re-start of Inventor for avoiding this.

Thanks for liking the crane, but it's not me. The LEGO team did an excellent work with this design.

[HermJan.Otterman]

that's a problem then...

maybe you could use showcase or even 3D-max?

[WHolzwarth]

It's not only a camera movement, but wheels, doors, engine and the whole gear train is moving, too.

I've spent several days with getting this running in Studio timeline. I won't make more attempts with another software.

[HermJan.Otterman]

I can feel your pain....

than the last option is to get the Inventor 2018 Alpha version... ?

you can test and give feedback on this issue to Autodesk if it is still not working.

[WHolzwarth]

I know about this. Guess what ..

[HermJan.Otterman]

it is solved...!!!?????

or not..?

[WHolzwarth]

Let's discuss it further on another place.