Comments on: SMACK! CATIA-SolidWorks Translator. Your Move Dassault.

By: NKK Partners with Dassault and IBM for Shipbuilding PLM : CATIA Design | Manufacturing | PLM Solutions | CAD | CAM | Software | CDC | CNC Design Consultants

Tue, 22 Dec 2009 04:02:16 +0000

[...] SMACK! CATIA-SolidWorks Translator. Your Move Dassault. (solidsmack.com) [...]

By: smk436

smk436 — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 22:41:45 +0000

By: Math World | CATIA to SolidWorks Translator. Your Move Dassault. >> SolidSmack.com

Fri, 04 Sep 2009 01:17:58 +0000

[...] Josh 2009-09-02 01:31:20 Read the rest here: CATIA to SolidWorks Translator. Your Move Dassault. >> SolidSmack.com [...]

By: Josh M

Josh M — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 04:21:46 +0000

I've never had much luck with 3Dxml, except for viewing. I don't see it pushed that much except through 3Dvia and still it seems Collada is a better known format. Oh, and don't forget Google's O3D. They're all XML-based and with Khronos behind Collada and working with Mozzila to bring open 3D into the browser… it's gonna be interesting to see what happens.

There are two thoughts behind the three XML technologies though, 3Dxml for tech/design/engineering stuff, O3D/Collada (or unnamed 3d web format) for the online gaming/entertainment. anyway, maybe a bit off topic, but interesting.

By: al dean

al dean — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 22:01:34 +0000

One thing that's equally as irritating is that there's a file format that could shift data between SolidWorks and Catia (Catia already reads SolidWorks parts and assemblies, natively but without feature retention) and that's 3dxml.

There's a format that DS claims to be open, but there's some serious restrictions in what can be done. At it's best, 3Dxml will output very clean surface data in a very compact file format. and yes. SolidWorks can output 3dxml files, BUT at the lowest level. Assembly structure is retained but using a pretty standard tesellated polymesh (essentially the CGR geometry).

If you look at what Catia can output, you can get good clean geometry out using the higher level, surface based version. Why can't SolidWorks do that? Madness. Political Madness.

There are multiple options here and none of them (or at least, the very basic low-level options) are being used.

Will things change? I doubt it, until it's in the interests of Dassault to make the change. Matt's comment about it being a problem with his "software supplier" isn't going to cut it. Simply because higher powers are at work here..

Sad. But true. Because that's how these businesses are run. Users requirements are not always at the top of the list. And the odd thing with Dassault, in comparison with many other CAD vendors, is that you can't even buy into the company as a shareholder and try to force change that way. Why? Because they're family owned and that gives the company the ability to things that don't make sense from a user perspective.

By: Deelip

Deelip — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 17:39:12 +0000

Chris Williams: "What I think woud be a better feature and something I am surprised is not pushed more is the ability to have Catia data in SW as background data"

That is precisely what the CATIA Graphics format (CGR) does. A CGR file contains the lightweight representation of the solid model (basically a mesh) and can be placed in a SolidWorks part or assembly to be used as reference. For example, if a CATIA user has designed an engine and a SolidWorks user needs design a foundation for it, the CATIA user can send a CGR file which the SolidWorks user would use as a reference to model his foundation.

SolidWorks can already read CGR files and write them as well.

By: Chris Williams

Chris Williams — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 15:47:02 +0000

Matt I have done this. As well as working with Catia data I have also built translators for it. As josh points out below, in many cases the work around is better than the real feature based data… What I think woud be a better feature and something I am surprised is not pushed more is the ability to have Catia data in SW as background data and vice versa, as this would better support the use case for data sharing across systems… Don't forget that everything they do or do not do with the product is intentional.

By: Josh M

Josh M — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 13:55:10 +0000

More often than not (at least in my case) the data is needed for reference, so no, full feature data isn't needed. yep, the problem has been around a while, but it's still dang annoying, even with the work around. but that brings up another thought. Say SolidWorks makes a translator, but people still prefer the workaround because a file comes in smaller or something. Ha!

By: Matt Lombard

Matt Lombard — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 13:47:15 +0000

To this point there have been two people who think the lack of a SW-Catia translator is not a problem.

And they are both sales/marketing people.

That says that it's a problem.

I'll be willing to bet that you've never used Catia data in any format. It sounds like you are completely unfamiliar with the "experience" of moving data from Catia to SolidWorks.

People get around it, but it's extra work. And don't forget that OUR software supplier is doing this to us INTENTIONALLY. When something is such a blatant screw job, you bet it's easy to criticize.

By: vuuch

vuuch — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 13:15:23 +0000

I think some of the reaction is just like shooting fish in a barrel… it si just to easy. Is this lack of “save_as” or lack of “translation” really a problem? For me I don't really see this as a real issue. The reason I say this is the fact that this problem has been around for so long, people have figured out how to work with it as well design project management is done around interfaces which is typically where you deploy different CAD systems. Certain when you are build a new wahtever that fits in a plane it would be nice to have the plane geometry to work around, but does it really need to be fully featured information in SW if you are not going to change it?

By: Josh M

Josh M — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 12:49:54 +0000

Brings up an interesting market position Spatial has. They could get more revenue from a bunch of cad companies/translator services licensing the software to go after Dassault's own brands, than 'giving' it to SolidWorks. Whatcha think of that? If Soldworks and Catia can share each others files, does that impact your business?

By: Josh M

Josh M — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 12:44:34 +0000

Of course man! That's a good way of looking at it Chris. I've kinda wondered if, come release day, there will an extra option in the Save As… box. Either for CATIA or for a previous version of SolidWorks.

There were actually a lot of good topics in that interview to pounce on. 'No direct editing modeling' – even though they have a new 'direct editing' tab in solidworks 2010; Keyboard and mouse being replaced; rewriting software to be OS independent – all great topics to just go nuts over. The SW-CATIA one just shot to the top right away.

By: vuuch

vuuch — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 12:00:15 +0000

I read his comment very differently! I read this as a very well placed piece of marketing… Just look at the stir this simple comment has made, look at how much has been written about this. Won't everyone be so surprised if this comes out in 2010? Won't everyone have to then be so pleasantly surprised and positive with DS when they are typically so negative with DS?

My bet it Jeff has pulled the wool over everyone's eyes and has done a great bit of social marketing…

By: Deelip Menezes

Deelip Menezes — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 03:21:27 +0000

Josh: "other CAD companies that can translate CATIA data are actually laughing"

Oh yeah. They are laughing all right. Check out this comment on my blog: http://www.deelip.com/?p=464&cpage=1#comment-1186

Note: Kubotek's products use 3D InterOp from Spatial to read/write CATIA files.

By: Bruce Buck

Bruce Buck — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 03:13:48 +0000

The last company I worked for, our parent company was in Germany, and used Catia. My boss had me look into the matter, and I ran into the same roadblock/runaround. No direct translator. Craziness.