Solidworks 2010 sldprt conversion

[dolphin1]

does anyone know if you can use solidworks 2010 and do a save as back to a sldprt 2009 file.

[Mr. M]

No you cannot, you could save as a parasolid and open it in '09 but not as a .sldprt file

[Guest]

as stated, not as an .sldprt file

[ERIC14779]

This has always been a pet peeve of mine with SolidWorks...

 

you can load a prior version file but can not save to an earlier version...

[Mr. M]

quote:

---

you can load a prior version file but can not save to an earlier version...

---

Its not any different than Mastercam toolpaths

[Dave.L]

quote:

---

This has always been a pet peeve of mine with SolidWorks...

 

you can load a prior version file but can not save to an earlier version...

---

Must systems cannot go backwards and for good reason. In many cases the old version does not have features that are part of the new version so the system would not know what to do.

[Jason B.]

quote:

---

Its not any different than Mastercam toolpaths

---

While this is true, we aren't talking about toolpaths. )(I don't think) We are talking about geometry, which Mastercam can do. Why can't others?

[Dave.L]

quote:

---

While this is true, we aren't talking about toolpaths. )(I don't think) We are talking about geometry, which Mastercam can do. Why can't others?

---

The mathematical requirements to define geometry have been established for a million years, a line is defined by 2 points in space, etc. However, the algorithms to define Solids are software specific and if they don’ exist in the prior release the system does not have the brains to understand the new files.

 

I would guess that MC is not making any geomtry changes from release to release, or if they do, you probably won't be able to go backward in MC as well.

 

Make sense?

[Jason B.]

quote:

---

However, the algorithms to define Solids are software specific and if they don’ exist in the prior release the system does not have the brains to understand the new files.

---

The way I understand it... (And I aint no expert, believe me)

 

Most software companies have there algorithms set and proprietary to there software. This does not change with new releases. (Unless they are rebuilding there architecture which happens from time to time)

So once a solid is designed, it is just that, a solid. But if you want to read it into an older version of software (or other software) you must "convert" it into a universal language that can be read between multiple software platforms. (ie, iges, step, parasolid, etc.)

Mastercam allows you to save it to an older format which is just another way of utilizing this method but only with a file type that is proprietary to Mastercam. I think the other design software packages should take a lesson from this and do the same. (maybe some do?)

[Dave.L]

Maybe I am missing something here Jason. As other's mentioned, in SW you can save the file as a format you mentioned and then open it in an older version, however, you are going to get a dumb Solid.

 

PS, it also my be there way of getting users to upgrade to the lastest version

[dolphin1]

wow thanks for the replys guys,really helped.

[ERIC14779]

Yes but you can save to older versions of Parasolids... So why not the native .sldprt

 

If you have some new "geometry" then flash a warning and state that you have features that are not supported in prior release. and ask what you want to do ???

[Jason B.]

quote:

---

Maybe I am missing something here Jason. As other's mentioned, in SW you can save the file as a format you mentioned and then open it in an older version, however, you are going to get a dumb Solid

---

No You didn't miss anything. I apologize for confusing you. My point was merely to agree with the others who want to be able to just save geometry to an older version of there software. I know Mastercam does this with there geometry but not there toolpaths.

 

And yes, it will be a "dumb" solid but for all those of us who deal in non parametrics wouldn't mind.

[Dave.L]

Hi Jason, don't get me wrong, I am not trying to argue here. I am assuming the only reason a person would want to save SW 2010 file to open it in 2009 would be that someone sent them a latter file than they can open. I would also assume that a dumb solid would not do that person any good unless they are using for something other than design in SW.

 

Just trying to understand the intent here.

 

Have a good night!!

[MotorCityMinion]

You can EASILY replicate that dumb solid in SW by creating offset surfaces at zero distance, or creating geo off the dumb solid and making a new solid. I fix or rework (Design) crappy CAD data like this often in SW. Saved my butt a few times.

[Jason B.]

Dave,

 

quote:

---

Hi Jason, don't get me wrong, I am not trying to argue here.

---

No problem. Not taking it that way.

 

quote:

---

I am assuming the only reason a person would want to save SW 2010 file to open it in 2009 would be that someone sent them a latter file than they can open.

---

What I was thinking was.....

 

Say you've been working on a project for about a week or so. (Big design) Then a new release of software comes out that you really want to start working with. So you open your file in the new software and start working on it. But you eventually find out that certain features aren't working as they should or have found certain bug(s) that are prohibiting your progress. With the ability to save back a version you would just save your file, exit, open the older version and get back to work. If you have a week or so into the design, you would more than likely have many levels with geometry on them and would have to export all that geometry and reimport to be able to use it, rather than just "save as" and be done if you didn't have this option.

Now, there are ways around this altogether and that is to save another file "just in case" you need to go back but this raises all kinds of concerns when having two files of something where there should only be one, plus the fact that most of my files are absolutely huge to begin with so having multiple ones is most undesirable. Plus the fact that if you had done anything since starting to work in the newer version, that would all be for not if you just went back to the original "just in case" file.

 

quote:

---

I would also assume that a dumb solid would not do that person any good unless they are using for something other than design in SW.

---

My software is non-parametric (Thank goodness) so I don't worry about history trees or anything like that.

 

So you can see where this kind of functionality (save as old version)would be really appealing.

 

Now if Mastercam could only allow the toolpaths to go backwards (At least the ones that could go backwards) I would be in business. I am forced to remain at Version X3 even though I have X4 here at my disposal since one of my bigger customers has X3 and did not choose the maintanence and so therefore cannot upgrade. I program parts for them but then they take that file and will sometimes make changes to it and therefore need the ability to have the operations at there disposal.

[Dave.L]

Jason, I finally got your point - thanks.

[Jason B.]

No sweat. Have a great day.