Cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

NX 12.0.2 New Minimal Loading of Assemblies

Siemens Legend Siemens Legend
Siemens Legend

 Please find below a movie with voice overthat highlights the new "Minimal Loading" option in NX 12.0.2 that enables the largest assemblies to be loaded faster than ever before but also enables the design engineer to directly intercat with the geometry during the load. This movie compares the new "Minimal Loading" against the traditional "Partial Loading" option by having 2 managed NX sessions opening the same assembly concurently from the same TC database. Note that "Minimal Loading" is only currently available in managed mode.  

 

(view in My Videos)

Comments
Dreamer
Dreamer

Hello,

 

I'm not able to select the new Minimal Load Option.

 

I'm in managed mode (TC 10) with NX 12.0.2.

 

 

Is there a special setting necessary?

 

Thanks

 

Frank

Gears Esteemed Contributor Gears Esteemed Contributor
Gears Esteemed Contributor

You need Tc 11.3 or higher to get the new option.

Dreamer
Dreamer

Very impressive demonstration!!!

Just what the users kept ask since years and years!

 

Unfortunately I just read teh small but crucial sentence: "currently only available in managed mode"

 

Are there any plans to make it available in the (nearer) future in native mode as well?

Or to make it somehow available to customers that use third party PLMs via connectors?

Maybe the PLMXML-Format is a general format that might give Non-TC-Customers a least a chance to participate from this Minimal Loading technology somehow.

 

As I understood roughly from the video that the Assembly structure information resident in PLM seems to be the key feature by which NX is enabled to speed up the loading performance.

Best regards

 

Phenom
Phenom

This is only a Siemens speculation, to oblige to use Teamcenter. Starting NX12, Siemens has revised the header file part.

BOM light present in Teamcenter 11.4 and above, it is not the real key.

 

Siemens Legend Siemens Legend
Siemens Legend

Hi All,

There has been work done in both TC and the NX part file to allow for this fast loading. As you have found out it is only currently available in managed mode with Teamcenter. There is a study to see how we might get this to work in native but no timescale for this.

 

Regards

 

 

Paul

Phenom
Phenom

Hi NX Siemens team,

where is the problem to speed up assembly loading?

There are CADs that use the same kernel (SolidWorks and Solid Edge) and they are faster on assembly load. 

SolidWorks (6 years ago)

Inventor

Solid Edge

Creo Parametric

Siemens Legend Siemens Legend
Siemens Legend
I would be interested in seeing the metrics re our competitors, plus I have heard NX opens assemblies that SW just cannot handle.
One key benefit in NX 12.0.2 Minimal loading is the interaction during the actual load that the designer has with the geometry.

Paul

Sent from my iPhone
-----------------
Siemens Industry Software Limited is a limited company registered in England and Wales.
Registered number: 3476850.
Registered office: Faraday House, Sir William Siemens Square, Frimley, Surrey, GU16 8QD.
Phenom
Phenom

Hi @Paul_Bevan,

in the real life is the opposite. It's clear that in the forum of NX, employees write that NX is better.

SpeedPak in drawing and DLR in SolidWorks are better respect to NX on load and create drawings on very large assembly. And remember that SolidWorks has done 6 yeras ago, you, july 2018. Again, smart lightweight is born on NX7.

Smart lightweight in SolidWoks 13 years ago.

Sheet metal in NX was copied from Solid Edge and actually is not best in class respect midrange CAD.

It's clear that the NX focus is on aerospace and ship design. All other types of company category have not listened.

Siemens Legend Siemens Legend
Siemens Legend

@cubalibre00 one other point I forgot to mention is that we are seeing new customers switching from SolidWorks to NX, with Large Assembly improvements a key driver, and this prior to NX 12. It seems that not everyone shares the same view as you and actually the grass is greener over in NX land.

Phenom
Phenom

Hi @Paul_Bevan,

the reasons which one company decide to switch from SolidWorks to NX can be different, but not for Large Assembly improvements. Give me a big assembly for a competition test and I will share with you the result.

NX also lack in selective open another useful loading option present into SolidWorks.

Do not underestimate the SolidWorks development team. Big does not mean better. There are many small industrial companies that make better products than noble companies.
Let's say that NX covers almost all of them
design necessities, but not always equal or superior to other CAD systems.

 

Siemens Legend Siemens Legend
Siemens Legend

@cubalibre00 yes for large assembly improvements, so your view is not shared by these company's. I am surprised that you are actually are a member of this community with your very jaded view of NX or maybe some of your comments are tongue in cheek.

Phenom
Phenom

@Paul_Bevan,

I do not embrace a religious faith, a politician or a CAD. I'm a designer who uses a CAD tool and I'm critical if there is to be.

Siemens Legend Siemens Legend
Siemens Legend

@cubalibre00 you carry on its a free world :-)

Siemens Phenom Siemens Phenom
Siemens Phenom

@cubalibre00

In one of your posts you stated "Sheet metal in NX was copied from Solid Edge and actually is not best in class respect midrange CAD"

 

Can you support your statement with evidence?

I have been working with Siemens on NX Sheet Metal for nearly 7 years and always looking to improve and enhance the application.  Let me respond:

  • "...copied from Solid Edge...".
    No, the base code is common between the two applications and we spend time each release to maintain that commonality however, NX Sheet Metal has a wealth of features above and beyond Solid Edge capability.
  • "...is not best in class respect midrange CAD...".
    On a direct comparison with competitors I find this hard to substantiate.  True, there are some specific features that NX does not do as well as the competiion in all cases and may be dependent on Industry requirement.  However, on general comparison, our current understanding and feedback is quite the opposite.  I would be interested in your justification for the comments and welcome any ERs you care to raise.

I am always working to make NX Sheet Metal the best it can be and value any constructive feedback.  I'll link to this post over in the Sheet Metal group and invite others to contribute.

 

Dave

Phenom
Phenom

Hi @Dave_Walker,

  • Starting with NX4, Siemens PLM has added a new environment called 'Sheet Metal', the interactive counterpart of Sheet Metal (Forming and Flattening), where the source code comes from Solid Edge. Starting NX4 you have implemented the new environment to permit a complete replacement of the old 'sheet metal' capability and follow the Solid Edge functionality.
  • There are two type of operations that permit to deform a sheet metal parts, Stamping or Bending in the air. For Bending, Solid Edge and SolidWorks have in general more options/commands, for examples, Gauge table for thickness, material and flat-pattern calculation, direct modelling, relief options on a flange, etc.

 

I admit that you are doing a good job for sheet metal environment.

For ER, we will switch to the NX in January 2019. This will be the new start point for add again ER.

 

Dreamer
Dreamer

Hello Participants

 

Interesting how a simple questions (Availability of Minimal Loading for Native Mode) triggers such a discussion and finally ends at sheet metal ERs :-)

@Paul_Bevan

Thank you for the perspective that there are at least studies going on to make it available in Native Mode, even with no timeframe yet. So there is hope it might be implemented sooner or later.

@cubalibre00

Thank you for expressing in written form my long-lasting suspicion, that there are other CADs around that might be faster on loading.

But as I do not know a single one of these by own experience I can only guess or believe this fact.

Yet also this forum seems to be too small/specialized in terms of participants that we might never get a final answer on this topic.

Dreamer
Dreamer

I Agree with OH that a little off topic, but certainly an interesting discussion. My biased view comes from using and interacting with different teams of engineers using Solidworks, Inventor and NX. All models are in respective cad formats and laways when comparing performance we  stumble to the fact that we cannot compare apples and pears. Inventor is a file based cad and so is solidworks. Different thing than Catia and NX when using TC. SW and inventor need file caches external to TC FCC which makes it impossible to even compare.

 

Native loads in native formats are always faster than converted geometry loads. And even saving to say Nx format and loading a non NX originating model does not give you the full truth. Loading 30K part instance model is not possible in Inventor nor solidworks. But if the model was built there, perhaps. Vice versa, Inventor chokes after opening 1000 NX parts.

 

Then to a comparison what is really big. Is it the file size in Mb, sheer part count or complezity of geometry and less parts. I just two weeks ago heard one guy tellig they were testing with big assemblies. This was 3D pdf and the count was 50 parts when I asked (haha).

 

So useless discussion if there is no metrics and if the data is talked only in terms of changig cad package every year. Migration and modeling technique and richness of models and accuracy of the features is another. What is fast is always a mystery. Like pulling a rock from a botton of  lake. immediately the water fills the hole. Exactly like CAD. Something nice to improve performance comes along and immediately we find a way to max out the benefit.

 

I really like NX minimal load. I saw some promising results when I got a chance to test it. But also some work still neeeded. Lets wait for Siemens to finalize it and then put it to good use.

 

What comes to features and who was there fist with good stuff, Basic things should work and there should be no "death by a thousand papercuts" phenomena even when different modules and features in modules are compared.

What I mean is that software is working fine. There can be too many click, no automation, need to use code to simplify workflows or to remove manual work and so on. Users see thse as a papercut and while one does not kill you several will weaken motivation.

 

Software is a user experience. It is as good as all modules combined. Sometimes this is not understood when listening to all kinds of suboptimization discussions on software projects. That leads to customer frustration and interesting dialog like this.

 

-NH 

Gears Phenom Gears Phenom
Gears Phenom

Well...I hate to get back on topic, but...  when the "Use Lightweight Representations" option was introduced, we gave it a try, and within 2 days I had enough complaints to turn it back off.  In our industry, people wanted answers now, and the wait for "real" geometry to load vs. the facet geometry was killing us.  Users would rather wait a bit up front, than pay the penalty thruout the day.  SO, is "minimal loading" real geometry?  or facet representations?  reading the help, I think its "faceted".

Siemens Legend Siemens Legend
Siemens Legend
Did you try Smart Lightweight which loaded what you needed as and when. This minimal load is similar. You can do things like measure, sectioning etc directly on the minimal loaded geometry. When you then want to add features or edit features it loads what if needs to the work part to do that. So if all you want to do is edit/create in one part it only fully loads that on part.

Sent from my iPhone
-----------------
Siemens Industry Software Limited is a limited company registered in England and Wales.
Registered number: 3476850.
Registered office: Faraday House, Sir William Siemens Square, Frimley, Surrey, GU16 8QD.
Gears Phenom Gears Phenom
Gears Phenom

Paul,

 

Yes, it was "smart lightweight".  Our Siemens technical rep was onsite, and suggested it, and the sales pitch sounded great, but like I said, within a day or two, the complaints from users had me changing it back.  I'd give more details, but that was a couple years ago, and I don't recall exactly. 

Siemens Theorist Siemens Theorist
Siemens Theorist

 Is there a way to turn off Minimally Load, so the users won't even see the option? Because it is causing issues in the current workflow.

 

 

Siemens Legend Siemens Legend
Siemens Legend

The minimal load should be defaulted from the load options file, which you can set by the UGII_LOAD_OPTIONS variable.

 I.e When NX starts, it reads the systemvariable which tells NX to read a specific load_options file which then possible sets the load option to "Partial load" or "Load fully" or ...
 For our users we have a common default load options file. They can then in the session select other options but on each start they will get the common defaults.
  The Teamcenter workflows and dispatcher applications ( for PDF's etc) use different load options-files.

 

Regards,

 Tomas

Siemens Legend Siemens Legend
Siemens Legend

Hi @smithmar 99.9% not able to switch it off but i will confirm this.  I am interested in how its causing workflow issues however in case its something we need to address.

 

Regards

 

Paul 

Siemens Theorist Siemens Theorist
Siemens Theorist

Hi Paul,

 

  Switch off or hide it. The reason being, on certain platforms with certain graphics cards it will cause NX to freeze. There is no warning and no error message. So this particular customer wants to not have their users the ability to use it. This only happens in minimal load. IR 9268322 was created.

 

Thanks,

 

Mark

Siemens Theorist Siemens Theorist
Siemens Theorist

 Tomas,

 

   Do you have a specific variable to hide the minimally load? Since this is only available in TC11.3 and later and NX 12.0.2. The best case is just to hide it.

 

Thanks,

 

Mark

Siemens Legend Siemens Legend
Siemens Legend

No, to my knowledge, there is no such variable .  

what i tried to describe is how you can make it impossible to set minimal load as the default.
 If then somebody tries to use minimal load , and it halts, He/ She will not try again. :-)

Contributors