ug - proe

[selvakalidass]

Hai Friends,


i have drawn a model in ug part file as .prt format. Now i want to convert that model into proe file .prt format.


If i go to unigraphics prt file in proe,at the time of open the system tells some files are missing.


so pls, help me.


thank you,

 

[Moroso]

Is this an assembly or part, the only time parts are missing are with assemblies or referenced parts


Did you output the file as a step, parasolid or iges


Don't think that the .prt file from Unigraphics is the same for ProE

 

[jeff4136]

Help -
Global Search -
Data Exchange - Search term "unigraphics"

Not having a UG installation; that's all I know.

 

[kimale]

Guys,


related to the same topic:


I need to translate some filesas step from UG to Pro/E.As I know,there are some


fundamental differences in surface algorithms between two systems,so the question is how accurate surfaces translating using step?I know that iges is prefferable,but requirement is to use step ... So,any tips,ideas?

 

[jeff4136]

http://www.prostep.org/en/standards/bp/cadkombi/

might prove to be helpful.

Why do you "know that iges is prefferable"?

 

[kimale]

Thanks! I justthought that iges better handles surfaces then step ...


May be I am wrong ...

 

[jeff4136]

> I just thought that iges better
> handles surfaces then step

Ok. All I can say re that is that I've never seen any evidence to indicate it (at least nothing inherent in the protocol with regard to model geometry). Different vendors implementations can vary and I was wondering if UGS had problems with theirs.

Cheers...

 

[ankarl]

Thanks! I justthought that iges better handles surfaces then step ...


May be I am wrong ...

Have you ever heard that a camel is a horse processed thru IGES....

 

[CJ]

What about using parasolid ?

 

[jrobi]

step is muck preffered format over iges for more complex geometry.

 

[Moroso]

If you have a license of UG you can use (i think it's) ATB to import it into Pro/E.


Step is much more preferable to iges for export/import data.

 

[rcamp]

STEP is way better that IGES. I think it is more accurate because IGES files always have gaps at surface edges and therefore never come in as solids. This is rarely a problem with STEP. I have tried this repeatedly with the same model and STEP always comes in cleaner.


Speaking of parasolid...I can't read a UG NX2 generated parasolid (x_t) file into ProWF2, nor can I read a ProWF2 generated Parasolid into UG NX2!


Regards

 

[Macdaddy]

hello,


well here is my 2 cents take it for what it is worth. I receive files from my customers in iges, step andparasolid I would prefer parasolid or step to iges any day. if you export a file from ug it will come in relatively nice in step, and parasolid. I equate that iges translation is the 70's version of tranlsation, and step is the 20th centry version.





good luck


Terry

 

[sybot_1]

I very much agree with you jrobi. I have translated a lot of complex parts fom .prt to .stp without any problem. Also i faced no problem in converting the .stp files to .jt (Vis-Mockup). So i guess the best bet is .stp rather than .igs. Good luck guys

 

[rasesh]

the answer to your problem depends on the license u are currently
having.if you are having a licensed version of proe FAP then you need
to check whether you have configured the connection for UG part while
installing pro/Engineer itself.there is a direct interface for pro and
ug translation and vice-versa

 

[rcamp]

the answer to your problem depends on the license u are currently having.if you are having a licensed version of proe FAP then you need to check whether you have configured the connection for UG part while installing pro/Engineer itself.there is a direct interface for pro and ug translation and vice-versa

Really? Tell me more. I have a licensed version. All I have to do is install the option?