Continue to Site

Welcome to MCAD Central

Join our MCAD Central community forums, the largest resource for MCAD (Mechanical Computer-Aided Design) professionals, including files, forums, jobs, articles, calendar, and more.

Parasolids

tommypurple2

New member
Does anyone have good luck with these?


I have one of my customers using UG. He only has the Parasolid option for exporting. When I bring his models into Pro Engineer every corner of the model is off location by just enough to cause a problem. Now a step model would be great. I might even take a igs file over this...


Is this the way Parasolids are in Pro E?
 
It's been years, but I seem to remember a program, I want to say ProDesktop but I'm not sure thats it. I remember nicknaming it Pro/E Lite. But it would read in Pro/E models and then you could export them as a parasolid. I believe that PTC incorporated that into the Wildfire series. Another thing that came to mind was part accuracy to be able to read some of the files.


Not sure if this helps or not, it was a long time ago.
 
parasolids are usually better than step files. The problem is with UG export. Every file that I have ever received from UG has been a "junk" model.
 
I have been importing and exporting parasolid models for the last two years and haven't had a problem with them. The imports were fromvendors using SolidWorks so I'm not sure about the UG stuff. I have also exported parasolids and gotten good comments as to how they work on the receiving end. Again, this isusing WF 3.0 and interacting with SolidWorks people which has been very successful.


Ron
 
Funny.. I brought this model into Pro E WF3.0 and it is junk. Every corner of the 70mb file needs to be fixed. Once i fix one area it opens three new areas that need work aligning the vertexs. It is a complete nightmare..


Now a couple of people I work opened the same file. One using Powermill and it came in great for him and the other using Pro Cast it also came in prefect again. I am thinking the parasolid import quality on Pro E is not up to par....


I finally ended up getting the original designer to save the file as a Pro Engineer neutral file format from Solidworks instead of Parasolid. Looks much better.
 
Krow72 said"The problem is with UG export"


UG owns the parasolid kernal and Parasolid format (X_T) is UG's definition. For modeling packages that use the Parasolid engine, X_T is their native language. If Pro-e can't open an X_T file from UG, might it be that Pro-e has it wrong?


The fact is, Pro-e does not handle X_T or X_B very well and is prone to translating these formats with errors. On the other hand,the Parasolid file formatis very good for passing data between most modeling software.Parasolid won't translate line data, but you can save 3-d model data very accurately with a minimum offile size. When dealing with very large files, the Parasolid format is probably the most efficient foramt to use. A model saved in IGES or STEP and then compressed is about the same size as the model saved in Parasolid.
 
metoo


Pro-e can read parasolid from all other softwares fine and almost always comes in solid. In my experience with UG files they always need a lot of repair. Thanks for the insite, I did not know that UG owns the kernal and Parasolid format.





One other thing that you need to be aware of with Parasolid. The last few that I have received have come in with units in meters!!! Always check the units on all imported data.





Krow72
Edited by: krow72
 
Krow72,


Metoo is correct, UG does own the "parasolid kernel", they purchesed it in the late 80's early 90's from some french firm. When they changed from ugI to ugII thru ug18, Now on nx4 or 5, they lease it to Solidworks for their software platform.


In the past, and currently, ProE has had a problem reading ANYONE elses files. Simple test, Export afile from ProE, then Import it, You may find that it will have some errors.


Anyways, In all my years of translating, (since early 80's), I've found that when importing into UG, xb or xt / parasolid is the type to utilize, importing into ProE, Step 203 is the type to utilize. Step 203 is also good for Autocad as well.


So, my advise is if your customer can export Step 203, you will be able to read this well in ProE. If you have a seat of Solidworks, you can utilize it to do the translation between your two softwares.


Good Luck,
smiley32.gif
 
I have had good succes with opening the Parasolid in Solidworks. (surely everyone should have Solidworks as a second software). After opening in Solidworks, save as


STEP file. I think Pro-E prefers STEP over Parasolid
 
3-d modeling software generally break down between Parasolid based (X_T) orACIS based (SAT). These two 3-d engines dominate the market. Pro-euses neither, which leaves users no native file format (ie, SAT or X_T) to save to when translating. As stated above, Pro-e does not translate other formats well, but you should be able to rely on the two industry standards; IGES and STEP.


IGES has been the industry standard in the USfor translating 3-d data since 1982. I think the world is on version 5.3.Step (multiple formats in use at same time) is the ISO standard(s), and popular in Europe. BothSTEP and IGESare by definition neutral formats for 3-d file translation.Although, the STEP formats carry more data, which means larger file sizes.
 

Sponsor

Articles From 3DCAD World

Back
Top